A European Project on Occupational Services for Persons with Disabilities

1. A European Project on Occupational Services for Persons with Disabilities

2. General Information • The Interest Group on Occupational Services (IGOS) is attached to the Standing Committee on Employment of the European Association of Service Providers for Persons with Disabilities (EASPD). • The IGOS Partnership Project- "Quality Work Settings for All" is a European Mobility Project under the Leonardo Da Vinci Life Long Learning Program (LLP). • Within the IGOS Partnership a broad number of European countries share and exchange both expertise and examples of best practise in the field of Occupational Services for persons with disabilities.

3. Partner Organisations • Coordinator: BAG:WfbM (Germany) • Partners: • EASPD (Belgium/Flanders) • ICR (Greece) • Jugend am Werk (Austria) • Scuola Viva (Italy) • Unapei (France) • Vários (Portugal) • Advisor: COPE Foundation (Ireland)

4. Project Partnership

5. General Information Aim: • The development of shared common frameworks and tools to enhance the future of persons with disabilities (PWD). Why? • To improve competitiveness and skills of PWD, and to increase their knowledge and competencies for transition and entry to the labour market. Purpose: • The project outcomes form part of a general report and set of recommendations.

6. Project Structure • Section 1: Collection of Data, Statistics and Definitions on Subject Matter from all Partner Countries • Section 2:Contrast and Compare the Different Models of Practice in Each Partner Country • Section 3:List, Contrast and Compare Different Forms of Transition/Integration to Work Programmes for Persons with Disabilities • Section 4:Strategies for Dissemination/Lobbying Activities • Section 5:Results & Recommendations

7. Results of Work Plan 1 1.1. Historical Overviewof Services • Earlier systems of services for persons with disabilities (PWD) were delivered in institutions based on care and welfare and run on a charitable voluntary basis • Formally developed systems were developed post World War 2 based on health and occupational activities with funding from governments • Formal governmental responsibility for services was instrumental in introducing vocational education training (VET), sheltered workshop activities and rehabilitation practices

8. Results of Work Plan 1 1.1. Historical Overviewof Services • Rights and equality legislation were fundamental in promoting the full integration of PWD as equal citizens with equal rights to access work and employment. • Whilst there are many differences between systems and services in all partner countries, the evolution of the EU is an influencing factor in promoting best practice throughout membership countries.

9. Results of Work Plan 1 1.2. National Definition ofShelteredOccupational Services Common Aspects: • Organisation ofworkingopportunitiesfor PWD currently not abletoworkundertheconditionsofordinaryemploymentsettings • Legislationtosecurestateco-financedrehabilitationstructures Different Aspects: • Societal behaviour, culture, tradition and history in the project partner countries • State level responsibility for legislation (national, regional, local) • Employee status versus rehabilitation status

10. Results of Work Plan 1 1.3. National DefinitionsofDisability • Similarities among project partner countries: focus on impairments, complexity in defining the term “disability” (general definition: disturbance in person´s lifetime), medical definition (average/typical ) • Differences among project partner countries: “duration” of the impairment, degree of participation restrictions • Definitions of disability are broad and leave room for interpretation

11. Results of Work Plan 1 1.4. National ClassificationofDisability • Persons with disabilities (physical, mental, sensory, intellectual) are differently defined in the partner countries. • “Sheltered workshop” does not have the same meaning in the partner countries. Other definitions are “occupational services” or “cooperatives”. • It is difficult to classify numbers of PWD.

12. Results of Work Plan 1 1.5. Describe/Outline the Legal Framework Under Which These Services Operate • Complicatedlegalframework • Lack of transparency • Basic legal framework concerning support for persons with a disability on national level in all partner countries except Belgium/Flanders (only on a regional level). • Some countries do have a specific disability concept at national level

13. Results of Work Plan 1 1.5. Describe/Outline the Legal Framework Under Which These Services Operate • Certain Laws, Decrees or Acts in each partner country lay down the conditions for accrediting services (Ireland – the “Service-Plan” is also an annual agreement between the Minister for Health & Children and the Health Service Executive) • Different Laws, Decrees or Acts in all partner countries are linked to services for persons with disabilities (e.g. social security, anti-discrimination, etc)

14. Results of Work Plan 1 1.6. Describe/Outline the Financing System/s, Which Allows/Supports These Services to Operate Public Funding: • = Key component of financingsystems → occupational services are an essential component to social welfaremodels • Source: central budget or local / regionalauthorities • Annual figures for public funding are not available in all partner countries

15. Results of Work Plan 1 1.6. Describe/Outline the Financing System/s, Which Allows/Supports These Services to Operate Other SourcesofFunding: • fundsoriginatingfrom the legal obligation for companies to respect a quota of workerswithdisabilities in somepartner countries • commercial revenue resultingfrom the activities of adaptedwork setting in somepartner countries • Others: European Social Funds (ESF), lotteries, pension funds, etc

16. Results of Work Plan 2 2.1. Status of Service Providers • Service Provision in Partner countries is delivered either by private or public sectors or a combination of both • The status of these organisations is generally ‘not for profit’. ‘For profit’ based organisations also provide services but to a much lesser degree • Service providers can generally be categorised as being local/regional authorities, specialist companies, parent associations, societies and/or voluntary organisations

17. Results of Work Plan 2 2.1. Status of Service Providers • Sheltered Workshops are a common feature of service provision in all partner countries • Specialist, private, not for profit type organisations are predominant in the provision of ‘sheltered workshops’ • Sheltered Workshops are differently termed in partner countries

18. Results of Work Plan 2 2.2. Status of Service Provision • Nearly all the services delivered in workshops and/or institutions comparable to workshops are person-centred; • One exception is Greece were services are mostly described to be program-centred; • In Ireland the current status of service provision is a combination of both service - led and user centred models; • The person centred approaches are generally intended to develop, enhance or recover the skills, abilities and earning capacity of persons with a disability.

19. Results of Work Plan 2 2.2. Status of Service Provision • Individual progress is registered on a regular basis in the person – centred help plan; • The quality of the services delivered is monitored • The character of the services is mostly laid down on a national, regional and/or local basis.

20. Results of Work Plan 2 2.3. Service DeliveryDescriptor • Similarities among project partners: • Centred or community based • Supported employment schemes • Outsourcing systems in regular companies: • France: secondment • Flanders: enclaves: team placement -> within framework of workshop • Germany: outsourcing and traineeship • Austria: team placement, traineeship and secondment

21. Results of Work Plan 2 2.4. Status of Service User • Sheltered work may have different legal status from country to country. • The status of those at work may range from “service user/client” to actual “employee” with full worker rights and entitlements. • Sheltered work is commonly focused on on-going supports in terms of personal, social and work/professional competence skills.

22. Results of Work Plan 2 2.5. Program Descriptor: (Range of Programs Offered/Available) • Great similaritiesexistamong the programmes in the partner countries (technical, interpersonal, social and cultural, vocational training, work and employment, paramedical and therapeutic) • Additional programmes are offeredspecializing in services for elderly people, people withhigh-dependencyneeds or self-advocacy • Twelve clearly defined personal support services offered in Ireland, (e.g. “Health and Wellbeing”, “Influencing Service Policy and Practice”, “Inclusion in One’s Local Community” or “”Making Choices and Plans”)

23. Results of Work Plan 2 2.6. Remuneration/BenefitDescriptor Sheltered Work • Main situation: payment + disabilityallowance - exception: minimum wage obligation applies in Flanders Open Labour Market Work • Application of labour lawrules = payment of a wage → remuneration set in the employmentcontract. → in mostpartner countries, thereis an obligation to respect a minimum wage (legal obligation / collective agreement. • + disabilityallowanceunder certain conditions.

24. Results of Work Plan 2 2.7. Formal Licensing of Service Provision • In all partner countries there are certain standards that have to be achieved by service providers for persons with disabilities • The agencies responsible are at national, regional and/or local level • There are different monitoring systems • Quality standards and assurance – obligatory or optional

25. Results of Work Plan 3 3.1. Range of Transition to Work/Employment Programs Available Main features: • Policies and programmes in all partner countries → vocational training + support services → in somepartner countries, financialincentives for employers are provided • Broad range of vocational training and qualification (mainstream or specialised, vocationaleducation, apprenticeship, ...) • Supportedemployment services → integrated support services rangingfromneedsassessment to follow-up in employment

26. Results of Work Plan 3 3.1. Range of Transition to Work/Employment Programs Available Transition FromShelteredOccupational Service Settings to the General Labour Market: • ShelteredOccupationalWork programmes are available in all partner countries…but these programmes are not compulsory in all partner countries • These programmes containvocational training, qualification and support services

27. Results of Work Plan 3 3.2. DescribetheAgenciesResponsible • Austria: Austrian Federal Welfare Office (Bundessozialamt), Federal Employment Office (Arbeitsmarktservice), Federal states (Länder) • Belgium: Regional Employment Services (VDAB) • France: National agency, AGEFIPH, Central government and regional health agencies • Germany: Employment Agency (AgenturfürArbeit), Integration Office, Regional Ministries for Social Affairs (Länder) • Greece: Ministry of Education, Ministry of Employment and Social Affairs, Ministry of Health and Social Solidarity • Ireland: National Training and Employment Authority (FAS), Health Service Executive (HSE) • Italy: National Interdepartmental Observatory • Portugal: Training and Employment Institute

28. Results of Work Plan 3 3.3. Describe the Workplace Support Conditions/Criteria • Austria – Reasonable accommodation / Accessible workplaces / Special tools / Job Coaching / Personal assistance. • Belgium – Subsidy to employers / One-off reimbursement of expenses made to adapt the work station/environment / Extra vocational training • France – Reasonable accommodation requirement. Beyond, no other support conditions or criteria • Germany – Specialist Integration Services: Aid and Assists the transition to working life / Advises and assists employers • Ireland – National Training and Employment Authority: Specialist equipment and adapted programme / Coaching in the work place / Vocational training for unemployed. • Italy – There aren’t such support conditions • Portugal – There aren’t such support conditions

29. Results of Work Plan 3 3.4. Transition to Work – EmploymentOutcomes and3.5. Evaluation of National Services/Annual Statistics • Statistics/data are not available in all partner countries. • In all partner countries data is not reliable and in some partner countries data is outdated.

30. Recommendations Currentlytheprojectpartnershipisworking on a listofrecommendations. These recommendations will bepublishedatthe end oftheprojectpartnership (July 31, 2011).

31. Contact Formoreinformationpleasevisit www.igosproject.eu