copy the linklink copied!Annex A. Country case studies

Short description

A series of reforms have expanded active labour market policies (ALMPs) in the past decades. ALMPs in Austria have a strong focus on skill development and the acquisition of qualifications. Approximately two-thirds of funding and three-quarters of new participants in ALMP take part in training-related measures (Bösch et al., 2013[1]).

Aims and objectives

The overall aims of Austrian labour market policy are to reach full employment and to support the functioning of the labour market. The goals of the specific education and training measures described here are to support job placement or to prevent job-loss (AMS, 2019[2]).

Instruments

Career and training orientation measures; initial or further vocational qualification measures; basic qualification measures for non-job specific skills such as literacy or IT courses; training measures for adults with social or health problems, active job search measures and work trials. In reality, most specific measures include a mix of these instruments. ALMPs frequently cover the direct and indirect cost of courses, subsistence and other related costs.

Implementation period

Initially conceived 1968/69, continuous reform since then.

Target group(s)

Unemployed individuals, employed individuals

Number of participants (annual)

Minimum: 120 500 (2002)

Maximum: 219 000 (2014)

Key stakeholders

The Austrian Ministry of Labour defines the broad goals of labour market policy yearly. The 2019 version, for example, sets out specific target groups for intervention and highlights the importance to address the challenges of digitalisation and the increased need of health and care staff (BMASGK, 2019[3]). The Austrian PES (Arbeitsmarktservice, AMS) is then responsible for implementing labour market policy. The organisation is highly decentralised and divided in one federal, nine federal state and 98 regional divisions. The national AMS board decides which ALMPs will be implemented and how. It defines countrywide guidelines, which are to ensure standardised implementation (Bock-Schappelwein et al., 2014[4]). The national organisation also sets targets for the federal state organisations, which themselves set targets for regional organisations. Social partners are involved in decision-making and controlling at all levels.

Delivery

Individuals can access ALMP training measures after consultation with their job counsellors at the AMS.

The measures itself are implemented by external education providers on behalf of the regional AMS. The process of purchasing such measures from private providers are regulated in the federal act on public tenders (Nationalrat, 2019[5]). Rules for the procurement of such measures have changed over the period under observation.

Annual funding

Minimum: EUR 160 Mio (2002); Maximum EUR 510 Mio. (2016) (Nagl et al., 2018[6]; Bösch et al., 2013[1])

Estimated funding per participant

Minimum: EUR 1 400 (2002); Maximum: EUR 2 600 (2015, 2016) (Nagl et al., 2018[6]; Bösch et al., 2013[1])

Funding source

Tax funding, social insurance funding, ESF funding

Reception

n/a

Effectiveness

The vast majority of ALMPs have been evaluated repeatedly (Nagl et al., 2018[6]; Bösch et al., 2013[1]) . In sum, the impact of the measures at the micro-level is small, but positive effects exist for some groups in some measures. Most evaluations point to lock-in effects of the measures (i.e. initial negative employment effect due to participants spending less time and effort on job search), at least for some target groups. This may be due to data limitations. Work is underway that will provide more detailed assessments of measures and effects on different target groups. The effect on the macro-level is negligible. The impact of education and training measures and the subsidies to course costs have no measurable impact on indicators of success at a regional level. High participation rates in active job search and orientation measures have a negative effect on ‘matches’, i.e. transitions into non-supported employment, in the following quarter (Aumayr et al., 2009[7]).

Success factors

- Continuous renewal and further development of the programmes;

- Extensive evaluation of measures and use of results for decision-making;

- Use of ALMPs as an instrument to manage structural change;

- Decentralised delivery and local adaptation of programmes;

- Clear regulatory and legal basis.

Enabling factors

- Strong commitment of AMS to qualification measures in the context of ALMPs.

- Availability of accompanying financial support measures that enable individuals to take-up training, such as unpaid educational leave, a stipend for skilled workers, a stipend to take-up higher education amongst others

Short description

In 2012, Austria introduced a coordinated programme to enable adults to obtain basic competences and basic educational qualifications free of charge. It is based on cooperation between the federation (Bund) and the federal states (Bundesländer). At the time of writing, the measure is in its third programming period and has engaged approximately 50 000 individuals between 2012 and 2017, equivalent to 1% of the Austrian working age population aged 20-64.

Aims and objectives

The initiative aims to enable as many people as possible to: a) gain basic skills and/or b) obtain a lower secondary degree (Pflichtschule), with the view to empower individuals to take part in social, cultural, technological and economic development. On an institutional level, it aims to improve the ability of the federation and the federal states to streamline the offer across the country, including having uniform levels of financial support and scope of services, independent of an individual’s place of habitation (Länder-Bund-ExpertInnengruppe and „Initiative Erwachsenenbildung“, 2011[8]).

Instruments

Learning opportunities that are free of charge and regulated by law following a common quality framework. There are two programme strands: i) Basic skill courses conveying at least three of the following competences (German, mathematics, digital skills, language/English, learning skills) and encompass 100 to 400 teaching hours; ii) Second-chance education courses to obtain the lower secondary certificate (Hauptschulabschluss), which encompass 1 160 teaching hours.

Implementation period

From 2012, ongoing

Target group(s)

Broad target group, generally including adults who would benefit from participation, namely those with low basic skills and qualifications. The second-chance education strand also aims to engage young adults looking to obtain or improve their lower secondary qualification. (Steuerungsgruppe Initiative Erwachsenenbildung, 2019[9]).

Number of participants (annual)

7 000 (2012-2014 programming period) – 10 400 (2015-2017 programming period).

There is strong demand for the measure, which is not met.

Key stakeholders

A wide group of stakeholders was involved in the development of the initiative: the federation, federal states, social partners, public employment services, academics and representatives of education providers. Implementation of the initiative is overseen by a steering group encompassing nine representatives from the federal states and four representatives of the federation. Social partners have an advisory role (Länder-Bund-ExpertInnengruppe and „Initiative Erwachsenenbildung“, 2011[8]) The initiative also has an administrative head office, which liaises with the education providers, ensures quality and monitors the initiative.

Delivery

Accredited education providers implement the courses. Accreditation takes place by an accreditation group involving six independent education experts, which evaluate the applications of education providers against a set of criteria. Following accreditation, education providers can respond to calls for proposals by the federation and federal states.

Total funding committed

2012-2014 funding period: EUR 55 Mio.; 2015-2017: EUR 76 Mio; 2018-2021: EUR 112 Mio. (Nationalrat Österreich, 2011[10]; Nationalrat Österreich, 2015[11]; Nationalrat Österreich, 2017[12])

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 2 400 (2012-2014); EUR 2 600 (2015-2017)

Funding source

Tax funding, ESF funding

Reception

According to the evaluation of the first programming period, 83% of participants were satisfied with the training offer. 93% stated that their expectations had been fulfilled and that they had reached their goals (Stoppacher and Edler, 2014[13]). Interviewed stakeholders experienced the measure as a ‘jump forward’ and see the initiative as an improvement of the existing offer, albeit many criticise the low coverage of the measure compared to the actual need of the population.

Effectiveness

Evaluations of the two first programming periods show that the measure has exceeded its quantitative targets (Stoppacher and Edler, 2014[13]; Steiner et al., 2017[14]). The 2017 evaluation finds that: i) Drop-out rates are around 22% for both programme strands; ii) transitions to further education or employment is difficult for older individuals and asylum seekers and easier for employed people (based on qualitative evidence) (Steiner et al., 2017[14]).

Success factors

- Cooperation between the federation and federal states in development and implementation;

- Early involvement of all stakeholders in the design of measure;

- Use of thorough needs assessment before designing the measure;

- Highly developed quality standards and quality assurance mechanisms;

- Individualised learning plans, built-in support and counselling services.

Enabling factors

Since the refugee crisis in 2015/2016, the programme has increasingly attracted individuals with a migrant background and asylum seekers. High take-up of the measure may have been more difficult to achieve otherwise, as large parts of the native Austrian population would have to be activated. This group is more difficult to identify and often faces additional attitudinal barriers to participation.

Short description

Paid full-time education leave has existed in Austria since 1998. In the 2000s, the measured was systematically reformed, making it easier to access and increasing the level of benefits paid during the leave period. From 2013, Austria also made available the Bildungsteilzeit, which now provides the opportunity to take part-time educational leave.

Aims and objectives

The measure aims to increase participation in adult learning by giving people paid time-off from work to pursue job-related education and training.

Instruments

The measure replaces foregone earnings during training periods for eligible individuals. Any job-related training (e.g. foreign languages or vocational courses), as well as the pursuit of school or university education is eligible for funding. In the case of full-time paid leave individuals are compensated at the level of the unemployment benefit (55% of net income, minimum EUR 14.53 per day) for a period of two to twelve months. In the case of part-time paid leave, individuals are compensated at EUR 0.82 for every hour of the number of reduced working hours, up to a maximum of EUR 492 for between four and 24 months of part-time training. On average, individuals take-up funding for approximately 230 days (Nagl et al., 2018[6]).

Implementation period

From 1998, ongoing

Target group(s)

All adults in need of upskilling and reskilling. Adults must be eligible for unemployment benefit.

Analysis finds that women, people with Austrian citizenship, younger and higher educated people are more likely to take-up the measure (Bock-Schappelwein, Famira-Mühlberger and Huemer, 2017[15]).

Number of participants (annual)

Full-time leave: 1 500 (2002)-14 000 (2016) *refers to new entrants

Part-time leave: 4 000 *refers to new entrants (Nagl et al., 2018[6]; Bösch et al., 2013[1])

Key stakeholders

The Austrian Ministry of Labour defines the broad goals of labour market policy yearly. The Austrian PES (Arbeitsmarktservice, AMS) is then responsible for implementing passive and active labour market policy, including the paid educational leave policy. The organisation is highly decentralised and organised in one federal, nine federal state and 98 regional organisations. Social partners are involved in decision-making and controlling at all levels.

Delivery

The measure is implemented via the AMS (public employment services). Individuals apply for the measure directly to the AMS, either online or in person. The application includes a request form, as well as the written agreement between employee and employer on taking part in the measure (AMS, 2019[16]). Once the application is accepted, the financial support is paid directly to the individual.

Annual funding

Full-time leave: EUR 6 Mio. (2002) – 165 Mio. (2016)

Part-time leave: EUR 13.5 Mio (2013) – EUR 20 Mio (2016) (Nagl et al., 2018[6]; Bösch et al., 2013[1])

Estimated funding per participant

Full-time leave: EUR 4 000 (2002)- 12 000 (2016)

Part-time leave: EUR 3 500 (2014) – 5 500 (2016) (Nagl et al., 2018[6]; Bösch et al., 2013[1])

Funding source

Social insurance funding

Reception

An evaluation from 2011 suggests that approximately 90% of participants were satisfied or very satisfied with the results following participation. Around 60% stated that they would participate in the measure again, while 20-30% stated that they would not participate in the measure again (Lassnigg et al., 2011[17]).

Effectiveness

An evaluation of measure from 2011 found that the measure does not lead to any important economic effects on employment and wages of participants. This is in contrast to the subjective experience of participants, who feel that their personal circumstances have improved. The measure was used by many companies as a means to keep people ‘in employment’ during the crisis of 2009 often in combination with short-term working (Lassnigg et al., 2011[17]). There is no updated evaluation, which would reflect the changes to generosity of and access to the measure since then.

Success factors

- Continuous adaptation of the measure to changing circumstances and responsiveness to research evidence;

- Gained popularity during the economic crisis, but managed to stabilise take-up at high levels

Enabling factors

-The measure is frequently used to take-up upskilling opportunities specific to the Austrian system, such as Master Craftsmen Qualifications (Meisterpruefung

-The right to take-up training and the wage replacement benefit go hand in hand.

- As employer agreement is needed, employers’ positive attitudes towards training facilitate success

Short description

Over the past decades, Estonia has rapidly expanded the training offer available in the context of ALMPs. Founded in 2002, the Estonian Unemployment Insurance Fund (EUIF) was initially responsible for passive labour market policy only and assumed responsibility for ALMPs in 2009. Since then, the provision of training-related ALMPs has been continuously improved, modernised and expanded, including in the context of the 2015 Work Ability Reform (Leetmaa, 2015[21]).

Aims and objectives

The aim of the measure is to improve the skills of people whose skills and qualifications do not meet the demand of the labour market. For employed people, it aims to prevent unemployment and acts as a transition support in changing jobs or help them to stay employed.

Instruments

EUIF offers a wide variety of training-related active labour market services for different target groups, including employment measures, disability employment measures and, since 2017, unemployment prevention measures. This includes amongst others labour market training for the employed and unemployed; work practice; job clubs to gain job application skills; support for obtaining specific qualifications; training grants for individuals and employers.

Implementation period

From 2002, ongoing

Target group(s)

Training measures are available both for the unemployed and – since 2017 – for the employed.

To be eligible for training, those in employment must meet certain criteria, such as the inability to continue their current position due to health issues; being above 50 years of age; low income; lacking professional or vocational education and/ or having insufficient language skills for further occupational development.

Number of participants (annual)

Minimum: 7 000 (2008); Maximum: 55 000 (2012) *includes individuals in the following measures: labour market training, job search training, work practice, job club, training for employed, support for obtaining qualifications, degree study allowance, training grant.

Key stakeholders

The EUIF is a public-private entity, governed by a tripartite Supervisory Board including representatives of the government, employers (Estonian Employers’ Confederation) and employees (The Confederation of Estonian Trade Unions, the Estonian Employees’ Unions’ Federation). Stakeholders interviewed emphasised that the EUIF runs working group to develop different measures, which include individual employers.

Delivery

All training is delivered by providers who hold a schooling licence from the Ministry of Education and Science, who deliver trainings according to specified guidelines and who participate in monthly reporting to the EUIF. The majority of providers are private, with vocational training institutions only playing a small role (Leetmaa, 2015[21]). All training delivered has to provide in-demand skills according to OSKA, or provide ICT or Estonian language skills.

Training is purchased by the EUIF in two ways: i) On the open market via a procurement process. Training providers are paid directly by the EUIF; ii) Individuals use training vouchers to pay for training organised by certified training institutions. There are some limitations on the use of the vouchers, namely training duration (2 years for the unemployed, 3 years for the employed) and the maximum amount covered (EUR 2 500).

Annual funding

EUR 3 million (2003, 2004) - 16 million (2016) *data provided by EUIF, includes individuals in the following measures: labour market training, job search training, work practice, job club, training for employed, support for obtaining qualifications, degree study allowance, training grant for employers and other grants.

Estimated funding per participant

Minimum: EUR 320 (2004)

Maximum: EUR 760 (2009)

Funding source

Social insurance funding, ESF funding

Reception

Data on participant feedback is only available for the services of the EUIF overall, not for training activities separately. In 2016, for example, EUIF achieved 82 on their satisfaction index of job seekers, against a target of 80, and 96 on their satisfaction index of employed people, against a target of 85 (Eesti Töötukassa, 2017[22]).

Effectiveness

Evaluation evidence is available for selected training-focused ALMPs:

- Labour market training: A 2011 evaluation using quasi-experimental methods (propensity-score matching) found that people who had participated in labour market training 2009 and 2010 experienced a positive effect on employment outcomes and wages. Some groups saw greater returns from training, including women, older participants and those that had been unemployed for shorter periods (Lauringson et al., 2011[23]).

- Work practice: A 2010 evaluation found that there was a lack of monitoring information to assess if the measure had an impact. Qualitative information pointed to the fact that where the practice was high quality and individuals were often able to find a job following participation. However, it highlighted shortcomings including lack of clarity on aims and objectives; under-regulated supervision and the lack of certification of acquired skills (Jürgenson, Kirss and Nurmela, 2010[24]).

Success factors

- Strong links between active and passive labour market policies;

- Continuous diversification of measures and expansion to new target groups;

- SAA- informed training offer, cooperation with employers;

- Evidence-based policy making, learning from other countries experiences;

- Use of ESF funding to trial measures, which were later transferred into main budget.

Enabling factors

Estonia is a small country, which allows its PES to be more agile than the PES of larger countries. The fact that Estonia’s PES and unemployment insurance system is quite new overall, also allows the PES to react to the needs of the labour market in a more agile way than in other countries with greater institutional path dependencies.

Short description

In 2014, Estonia launched its Lifelong Learning strategy, a comprehensive strategy to set priorities and guide funding decisions. It sets strategic priorities for the development of adult education, such as increasing adult learning participation and raising adult qualification levels. The strategy is implemented through nine different programmes, one of the related to adult education development.

Aims and objectives

The goal of the strategy is to provide all people in Estonia with tailored learning opportunities throughout their lives, to enable them to self-actualise in society, work and family life (Ministry of Education and Research, 2014[25]).

According to stakeholders interviewed, there is some tension around the issue if the strategy aims to solely increase participation in learning or the competitiveness of the labour force at the same time.

Instruments

The strategy sets out quantitative targets, strategic goals and measures, by which it aims to achieve this increase in participation. The strategy is being implemented through nine programmes. The adult learning programme aims to: i) help adults return to formal education; ii) strengthen on-the job training and retraining; and iii) improve the labour market relevance of training.

Implementation period

2014-2020

Target group(s)

Target group of the strategy are all stakeholders in the policy realm, which must take guidance from the strategy. Indirectly, the strategy affects all people in Estonia.

Number of participants (annual)

Not relevant

Key stakeholders

The strategy was developed by the Ministry of Education and Research, the Estonian Cooperation Assembly (a network of non-governmental organisations) and the Estonian Education Forum (network of education interest groups, educational organisations, social partners, political parties). The strategy also mentions that the task force responsible for the development of the strategy included experts from the field of education, but who was involved specifically remains unspecified (Ministry of Education and Research, 2014[25]).

Delivery

The strategy is implemented through nine sector specific programmes that set their own quantitative targets and actions.

Annual funding

n.a.

Estimated funding per participant

n.a.

Funding source

Tax funding, social insurance funding, ESF funding

Reception

There is limited information on the reception of the strategy to date. Stakeholders interviewed were generally satisfied with the strategy and its implementation.

Effectiveness

A mid-term evaluation was completed by the consultancies Centar and Praxis in 2019 (Centar and Praxis, 2019[26]). One of the key findings is that effectiveness of the overall strategy could be improved if there was greater alignment between: i) the strategy and its implementation plans, as well as; ii) between measures funded by different funding sources, namely the state budget and ESF-funded measures. It was also noted that more sophisticated performance indicators were needed to monitor the success of the reform.

Success factors

- The strategy sets quantitative targets and specifies implementation programmes;

- Certain elements of the strategy are highly valued by the interviewed stakeholders, e.g. the skill anticipation system OSKA, and second-chance education opportunities.

Enabling factors

- Strong stakeholder cooperation and political buy-in.

Short description

Following a pilot in 2008/2009, the Ministry of Education has been funding state-commissioned training courses for adults since 2009. The short-term vocational courses are free of charge for individuals and aim to target those who typically do not take part in adult education. Since 2015, the programme has had an explicit focus on groups with low learning participation, including the low-skilled, older adults and migrants.

Aims and objectives

In 2009-2014, the programme had the dual objective of increasing participation in adult learning and raising the labour market competitiveness of the adult population across Estonia. Interviewed stakeholders now describe the objective as being supporting adults in gaining new skills or updating the skills, with the view to decrease the risk of them losing their job due to a lack of skills.

Instruments

The offered training courses are short vocational or general training courses aimed at improving key competences, delivered by vocational or applied higher education institutions. Training time comprises an average of 50 academic hours, yet ranges from 20 to 100 academic hours depending on the training programme. 50% of the training time can be provided as independent study. Given the short-term nature of these trainings, they are not complete retraining courses, but rather give individuals the opportunity to develop specific job-relevant skills or competences. The labour market relevance of the courses is ensured through the yearly (formally biannually) priority setting by the Ministry of Education under consultation of labour market and SAA information.

Implementation period

From 2009, ongoing

Target group(s)

The target group of the programme has changed over time (Leetma et al., 2015[27]). At inception the programme targeted employed adults and from 2010 also the unemployed. From 2011, the programme started to shift its focus to adults with low or outdated skills, who may be at risk of skill obsolescence and job-loss. In the 2015-2023 funding period, the operational programme specifies that the provision focuses on people without professional education, individuals with low or outdated skills and those who need specific skills to increase their value-added at work (Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia, 2014[28]).

Number of participants (annual)

8 000 (2007-2014) *based on numbers provided by the Ministry of Education and Research

Key stakeholders

The Ministry of Finance, as the ESF Managing Authority, and the Ministry of Education and Science were involved in the design of the measure. The Ministry of Education and its partners, namely the Estonian Unemployment Insurance Fund and the Ministry of Economics and Communication set priority areas for funding yearly. Priorities are informed by labour market developments, OSKA information and the performance of training courses in the previous funding period.

Innove is the implementing agency of the ESF, which processes project applications, monitors progress and fulfils an overall administrative role.

Delivery

Courses are delivered by vocational and applied higher education institutions. Currently a trial is ongoing, which involves higher education institutions in the delivery. Between 2009 and 2014, the Ministry of Education ordered state-commissioned study places twice a year, which was subsequently changed to once per year. Schools are asked to prepare applications in line with identified priority areas. A panel of experts with subject knowledge and teaching experience evaluates the proposals.

Total funding

EUR 4 Mio. (2007-2009); EUR 8 Mio (2009-2014); EUR 20 Mio. (2015-2023)

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 160 (2007-2009); EUR 240 (2009-2014)

Funding source

Tax funding, ESF funding

Reception

Since 2010, regular feedback surveys of participants show that they are generally satisfied with the courses. According to an evaluation from 2015, participants emphasise the positive impact course participation had on their general knowledge, skills and networks, however to a lesser extent on work-related skills and opportunities. Participants were generally critical of the short duration of the courses (Leetma et al., 2015[27]).

Effectiveness

Looking at the objective of increasing competitiveness in the labour market, an 2015 evaluation showed that participants in the 2009-2014 funding periods experienced positive employment outcomes and wage returns compared to a matched comparison group (Leetma et al., 2015[27]). It should be noted that results were sensitive to different estimation methods. Results were best for those who attended between 40 and 59 hours of training. Longer courses seemed to have a negative relationship with future earnings. Effects were also larger for participants, who were in employment, those with low education levels, younger and older age groups (50+).

Success factors

- Introducing a new funding source for non-formal training courses, as well as massively increasing provision of non-formal training courses;

- Identifying priority areas of training provision in line with labour market needs.

Enabling factors

- A strong and well-established national learning culture;

- A strong network of training providers; accompanying activities to further strengthen providers, e.g. train the trainer activities;

- The existence of 30 days study leave/year, which allows individuals to arrange for time to take-part in non-formal learning activities with their employer.

Short description

The programme established learning centres across the country and introduced short courses for disadvantaged adults who typically have very limited learning opportunities.

Aims and objectives

To develop basic skills and competences of disadvantaged adults through a complex and innovative adult education model to improve their employability as well as getting by in everyday life. Additional aims are to create local learning communities and a lifelong learning mind-set for those who had bad experiences with initial education.

Instruments

Learning centres, which are equipped with modern digital devices (digital boards, tablets, smartphones and laptops) and are open flexibly to provide informal learning opportunities to 8-15 adults at a time. Free, short (20-30 hours) courses adapted to how adults learn effectively and to the needs of the target group. Topics cover foreign languages, everyday finances, effective self-management, getting by as a women in the 21^st century, with the possibility to organise additional courses based on local needs. All centres are managed by learning coordinators, who are responsible for the learning activities, to advise individuals and to incorporate local needs. The coordinators also manage relations with other learning centres and the head office of the project. (ProgressConsult, 2014[32])

Implementation period

Preparations started in 2006, a pilot project was run in 2009 and the scaling up of the Network took place between 2012-2015. Activities of the network are ongoing with a new wave of ESF funding received for the 2017-2021 period.

Target group(s)

Disadvantaged adults, whose social or labour-market cohesion is at risk due to their low level of basic skills and key competences and have limited access to adult learning opportunities (unemployed, low qualified, older workers, those at risk of skill obsolescence etc.)

Total number of participants

Minimum 21 000 participants including those engaged in informal learning at the learning centres (2012-2015) and minimum 1000 during the pilot period (ProgressConsult, 2014[32]).

Key stakeholders

The network was initiated by an alliance of 10 Hungarian non-profit civil sector organisations. The concept was co-designed by experts who had insights into the issues and difficulties of the Hungarian context and the international good practices. The pilot phase was funded by EEA and Norway Grants and the implementation was aided by the Norwegian Adult Education Institution (former VOX, currently Skills Norway). The scale-up was funded by the European Social Fund. The governance of the network is run by the founding association, an alliance of 10 non-profit organisations, which a member organisation of the European Basic Skills Network. Locations were selected after consultation with the local government and the organisations that run the centres locally were selected through tenders. (SZÖVET, 2013[33])

Delivery

Individuals can access training by getting in touch with the learning coordinators of the centres. Local learning coordinators advise individuals, manage the centres and organise the learning opportunities (taking into account), which are delivered by external education providers. The coordinators also consult employers and local government and take their needs into account when deciding on learning opportunities. A pilot with 10 centres ran from 2009, after which the programme was scaled up to 52 centres that are distributed across the country including small settlements. Regional coordination hubs and a management information system helps the work of the local coordinators including in identifying competent teachers. Funding since the scale-up is provided by the ESF, which makes operations subject to the funding cycles resulting in issues of continuity (some years the centres did not deliver courses between two funding cycles).

Total funding

EUR 6.5 billion (2012-2015) (ProgressConsult, 2014[32])

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 720 (2012-2015)

Funding source

ESF funding, previously EEA and Norway grants

Reception

The programme was showcased as a best practice both related to EEA and ESF grants (SZÖVET, 2013[33]). Participants are very satisfied with the programme highlighting competence of the teachers, usefulness of the courses and positive atmosphere in the learning groups. 70% of those, who take part in a course return to enrol in another one. In some centres, learning sessions were also organised between two funding cycles due to the proactivity and motivation of the community. The coordinators of the centres consider their work motivating and impactful on the individuals’ lives.

Effectiveness

No evaluation was conducted. The programme involved at least 21 000 adults in learning activities, who traditionally have limited development opportunities. The programme equipped adults with useful knowledge and improve attitudes towards learning, according to stakeholders involved. There is anecdotal evidence of improved employment prospects of individuals after participating in courses provided by the network.

Success factors

- Paying special attention to how adults learn best (methods and content) when designing learning opportunities;

- Addressing all of the complex barriers faced by adults with low skills/qualifications (attitudinal, physical, material);

- Providing positive learning experience;

- Embeddedness in local community, taking into account local needs;

- Strong focus on HR practices to ensure quality of the programme (learning coordinators and teachers);

- Establishing a network of providers to share experiences and good practices (in person and through a knowledge base).

Enabling factors

- Using existing physical infrastructure to create the centres (libraries, community centres);

- Building on knowledge of NGOs that worked with the target group before the programme;

- ESF funds.

Short description

The programme provided free learning opportunities to adults with low levels of qualifications including basic skill courses for public workers over the winter months.

Aims and objectives

The overarching aim was to improve employability of adults with low skills and low or outdated qualifications to improve their employability and enhance participation in life-long learning.

Instruments

The programme provided multiple learning pathways based on the skills and qualifications of the individuals such as developing basic competencies, finishing primary school or acquiring vocational qualifications. From 2013, the programme was adapted to primarily provide free basic skill courses for those in public work (Századvég and E&Y, 2016[34]). Courses followed a modular structure including team-building exercises, literacy and numeracy training as well as sessions on how to learn. Participating in the learning activities was a condition to receive a monthly allowance and in some cases those who finished courses successfully got a one-off payment. Additionally, participants were eligible for transport subsidy between their home and the location of the training (Nemzetgazdasági Minisztérium, 2015[35]).

Implementation period

The programme ran between 2012 and 2015, with a particular focus on public workers from 2013.

Target group(s)

Adults with low skills and low levels of qualifications, with a special focus on those in the public employment programme (i.e. those receiving monthly benefit from the state in exchange for 6-8 hours of work per day mostly carried out in the municipality).

Number of participants (annual)

Minimum: 11 063 (2012) (NFSZ, 2013[36])

Maximum: 101 222 (2014) (NFSZ, 2015[37])

Key stakeholders

The ‘I am learning again programme’ was initiated by the by the government as part of the National Reform Programme that attributed goals to the allocation of ESF funds. Eleven public training centres (Türr István Training and Research Centres) were appointed to implement the programme while cooperating with the PES as it was involved in running the public work programme.

Delivery

Those, who pursued formal learning pathways (secondary school, high school, VET courses) participated in the public formal education system. The basic skill programmes for public workers were delivered by the Türr Centres. The centres had two months to develop the material, recruit teachers and start the basic skill courses. The only requirement when recruiting teachers was to have tertiary qualifications; no dedicated teaching experience was required, nor were the teachers trained on how to educate adults. Learning materials were developed by external consultants hired by the centres. The basic skill training was delivered at 1 455 locations across the country with the work of 7 733 teachers. The classes were held in existing schools (initial or vocational) during 6-8 hours daily for 5 months. After the winters of 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 the programme was discontinued. Funding was provided by the ESF.

Total funding

EUR 144 million (2012-2015) (Nemzetgazdasági Minisztérium, 2015[35])

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 780

Funding source

ESF funding

Reception

Participants expressed frustration because the exercises and the learning materials were not adapted to adults. They considered the literacy and numeracy training particularly childish. Many students expressed that they only participated and continued to turn up to receive the monthly benefits (the condition was a presence in minimum 70% of the courses). The teachers liked the modular structure, which helped them to differentiate within the groups. However, they mentioned that they had very limited time to prepare before the start of the programme and that they did not receive any training or pointers on how to teach adults. They found it difficult to maintain the attention of the participants and motivate them for studying. (Kerülő and Nyilas, 2014[38])

Effectiveness

No evaluation was conducted. The programme managed to involve 188 000 adults with low levels of qualifications, but this did not translate in improvement in their employability (Századvég and E&Y, 2016[30]). What is more there is some evidence that the programme further decreased motivation towards learning among participants (Kerülő and Nyilas, 2014[38]).

Success factors

- The whole country was covered, even the most disadvantaged regions;

- Modular structure of the programme;

- Income support while enrolled in the training, as well as transportation costs were covered.

Enabling factors

- The public work programme provided a convenient way to identify adults with low skills and qualifications;

- ESF funding.

Short description

A law change made it free for adults to obtain two vocational degrees free of charge at public education providers.

Aims and objectives

The goal was to facilitate up-skilling of those who do not yet possess a vocational level degree and to re-skill those who do not find employment with their existing qualifications.

Instruments

Due to the 2015 modification of the 2013 adult education law, the existing public VET schools extended free provision to adults of any age (with a maximum of two free degrees). Additional funds were provided by the central budget to the VET system. No new institutions or systems were established.

Implementation period

The modification of the law took place in 2015. It is still in place.

Target group(s)

All adults who want to learn a (or another) profession, especially those without vocational qualifications or those who have difficulties to find employment with their current qualifications.

Number of participants

20 000 (2016/17) *additional enrolment in adult VET after the adoption of the law. (ITM, 2019[39])

Key stakeholders

The modification was developed and adopted by the government. To fulfil the additional tasks, funds were transferred to the public VET Centres, who are mandated to deliver the courses. Stakeholder consultation prior the law was very limited.

Delivery

In 2015, the government announced the plan to change the adult education law along with multiple VET reforms. The law was adopted and became effective from the subsequent school year. There are 44 training centres across the country, all made up of 6-8 vocational schools. They provide school-based IVET and vocational courses in around 500 professions as described in the National Training Registry (OKJ). (Karácsony, 2015[40])These courses are tailored to adults in a sense that they are outside of working hours (i.e. courses are held 3 times a week over evenings and weekends) and they focus on job-related skills without covering general knowledge subjects.

Annual funding

No dedicated/additional funding in 2016 or 2015. (Parliament of Hungary, 2015[41])

EUR 20 million (2017) *additional funding for VET institutions to cope with increasing number of adults. (Parliament of Hungary, 2016[42])

EUR 40 million (2018) *additional funding for VET institutions to cope with increasing number of adults. (Parliament of Hungary, 2017[43])

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 950 (2017)

EUR 2 000 (2018)

Funding source

Tax funding

Reception

Adults welcome the possibility of obtaining an additional vocational degree for free. The conditions favour public consumption, crowding out demand for private provision, which raised concern of public education companies.

Effectiveness

No evaluation was conducted. Some experts voiced the concern that, as the public VET system is not state of the art, channelling more funds to it might not be effective. There is also some anecdotal evidence of individuals with high educational attainment taking this new opportunity to enrol in free vocational courses for personal reasons (confectionery, photography etc.), rather than low educated individuals gaining vocational qualifications.

Success factors

- Building on a well-known vocational certificate both by adults and employers (OKJ);

- Making education free universally.

Enabling factors

- Possibility to learn VET courses in form of evening classes outside of working hours;

- Extensive public education provision and infrastructure.

Short description

CPIAs were created by law in 2012 by aggregating pre-existing institutions called Centri Territoriali Permanenti (Permanent Territorial Centres). Since 2015, CPIAs provide basic education courses to adults, aimed at achieving a certification or a degree. They are organised as a network of education institutions within a given territorial unit. The reform process, which is still ongoing as of 2019, adopts several aspects of the 2016 European Council’s “Upskilling Pathways” Recommendation.

Aims and objectives

The law instituting the CPIAs (263/2012) states the reform’s objectives: (a) raise the level of education of unskilled people, reduce rates of school dropouts by involving young adults in the adult education system, and support adults’ return to the education system; (b) taylor teaching to adults; (c) valorise the competencies adults already possess; (d) shorten the distance between the supply of courses and the students, by creating a network of teaching institutions; (e) enhance recognition and use of the released education certificates. Overall, the aims seem well linked to the identified needs, in both content and organisation of the teaching activities.

Instruments

The CPIAs offer (a) Italian language courses for foreigners and leading to a certification of language proficiency (A2 level at least); (b) Level 1 courses leading to lower-secondary degree, or to the completion of mandatory schooling; (c) Level 2 courses leading to an upper-secondary degree of VET nature; (d) basic English language and ICT classes.

Ahead of the course provision, a local evaluation commission organises interviews with candidates aiming at recognise their prior formal, non-formal or informal learning. The commission certifies that the candidate is in possession of those competencies (in the form of credits), and the certificate is valid throughout the national territory. After some orientation and guidance, the candidate and CPIA personnel sign an “Individual Learning Agreement”, which describes the student’s forthcoming learning path and coursework.

Implementation period

Established in 2012, operational since 2015.

Target group(s)

There are four main target groups: adults who had taken fewer years of education than mandated by the law; adults who attained a lower-secondary education title but want to continue with an upper secondary cycle; foreign adults who need basic literacy training and Italian language courses; 16 year-olds who cannot keep attending school during the day for a certified reason.

Number of participants (annual)

183 000 (Academic year 2015/16) to 225 000 (2017/18). Source: MLPS and MIUR (2018[51]), which assumes that one “Individual Learning Agreements” corresponds to one enrolled person.

Key stakeholders

CPIAs are under the responsibility of the Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR). The 2012 law mandated the creation of Lifelong Learning Territorial Networks, which are supposed to connect stakeholders involved in lifelong learning. Through a Technical Inter-institutional Committee (Tavolo Tecnico Inter-istituzionale), the MIUR consulted local administrations, social partners, training providers, school administrators and teachers while designing the CPIAs. The consultations’ outcomes seem to be well– albeit not fully – reflected in the current design of the Centres.

Delivery

All training is delivered by the CPIAs, who are emanations of the MIUR and deliver trainings following specified guidelines. The Centres enjoy substantial autonomy in didactics, recognition of students’ learning needs, and fundraising and linkages to local administrations and social partners. Some aspects of organisational autonomy, however, could be strengthened, thus better highlighting the differences between youth schools and CPIAs.

To assist with the deployment of CPIAs, MIUR produce PAIDEIAs (“Action plans for innovation in adult education”), i.e. action plans targeting personnel in CPIAs and providing them with guidance on how CPIAs can set up their didactics and administrative organisation. Capacity building linked to the plans is offered by several central and regional public institutions. PAIDEIA plans can reflect the discussions of PAIDEIA Working Groups, also organised by MIUR and gathering a large set of stakeholders. Lastly, a network of CPIAs called RIDAP (Rete Italiana Istruzione degli Adulti – Italian Network for Adult Education) fosters the sharing of knowledge and best practices across CPIAs.

Annual funding

n.a.

Estimated funding per participant

n.a.

Funding source

Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR)

Reception

Data on participants’ feedback is not available. However, extracts of interviews with teachers and school administrators communicate enthusiasm about CPIAs, despite the Centres’ remaining shortcomings (Benedetti, 2018[52]).

Effectiveness

Preliminary results from the monitoring of CPIAs for 2015/16 and 2016/17 are contained in Benedetti (2018[52]) and INDIRE (2018[53]), but only cover part of the population of CPIAs. If further efforts were input in monitoring, the results are not yet available to the public at the moment of writing.

CPIAs must fill in a form called RAV (“Rapporto di Auto-Valutazione” – self-evaluation report), which was piloted in 2018/19 for CPIAs. INVALSI, the institution in charge of the evaluation of school performance is working with CPIA personnel to develop specific tools for CPIAs, and in particular an ad-hoc RAV and list of performance indicators.

Interviewed experts highlighted that limited autonomy in personnel management and infrastructure management still hamper the quality of the services. This is combined with a need for further training of teachers, whose experience is often limited to youth, and whose responsibilities and competencies have expanded considerably, including recognising prior learning and providing guidance to students.

Success factors

- The recognition of candidate students’ prior learning, including of informal nature.

- The certification of such learning, in the framework of the National Qualification Framework.

- The personalisation of the learning path, with a possible reduction in the coursework. Students’ guidance.

- The enhanced flexibility in the courses scheduling, and the possibility of distance learning (up to 20% of total hours).

- The substantial (albeit incomplete) organisational and didactics autonomy granted to CPIAs.

- The inclusion of CPIAs in a framework of mandatory self-evaluation, one that is becoming specific to CPIAs.

Enabling factors

The content of the programme can be of interest for any country facing problems with: i) low basic skills of adults; ii) high rates of school dropouts; iii) high demand for national language courses, e.g. among migrants. The process of reform presents several aspects of potential interest for other countries: evaluation of competencies at entry into the education system and their certification; personalisation and planning of the education path, with a consequent reduction in coursework for the student; students’ guidance, at least at the beginning of the learning path; involvement of teachers and school administrators in the process of designing the policy and the subsequent capacity-building activities; a number of instruments (plans, working groups) designed by MIUR to assist the activity of CPIAs.

Short description

Established by law in 2000 but operational since 2004, the Funds are associations run by social partners which levy funds from companies and use them to finance the organisation of training activities for the companies themselves or, more rarely, individual workers. By law, firms are levied 0.3% of workers’ payroll, and can decide to channel those resources in one of the Training Funds. The Funds then deploy these resources to support companies’ training activities, usually covering only a share (approx. 60-65%) of the total training cost.

Aims and objectives

The measure forces employers to earmark resources for workforce training. In practice, since the Great Recession, the Funds also supported training for the unemployed and workers in temporary surplus (cassa integrati), an occurrence which has become more and more frequent ever since, despite remaining of small overall magnitude. The use of resources in the Funds to finance apprenticeship contracts is allowed but very rare.

Instruments

Resources are allocated by the Funds to “individual” or “collective accounts”. “Individual accounts” support a learning activity directed to the employees of the companies from which resources are levied. “Collective accounts” can be accessed by companies after presenting a training plan, which abides to the features described by the Fund in a public call. The Fund evaluates the plan submitted by the company, and decides whether to finance the activity. The calls are the main instrument through which the Funds can support training targeted to a specific set of competencies or a specific subset of workers, when applicable. Training can be delivered directly by the involved companies (60% of the cases in 2016). Most training activities are delivered by non-formal training providers and escape quality monitoring.

Implementation period

2004 onwards

Target group(s)

The policy targets all employed individuals in companies subscribing to one of the Training Funds. It does not target any particular sub-population of workers or any precise type of skills, but aims at providing job-relevant skills. 20% of workers trained through the Funds in 2016 received training mandated by law on health and safety provisions (ANPAL, 2018[54]).

Number of participants (annual)

Approx. 1.5 million employees covered by training plans approved in 2016 (ANPAL, 2018[54]).

Key stakeholders

The funds are run by social partners with the authorisation of the Ministry of Labour. The management boards are composed by an equal number of representatives appointed by employers, employers’ and workers’ organisations. All training proposals must be agreed between social partner representatives, albeit this does not always apply in practice. ANPAL is tasked by the Ministry of Labour (MLPS) with verifying the Funds’ compliance with the requirements set by law, and establish strategic directions and priorities for the Funds. It benefits from technical assistance by INAPP (National Institute for the Analysis of Public Policies). Social partners and representatives of the regions were involved in the design of the law instituting the Training Funds. However, the institution conceived to foster discussion among these stakeholders (the National Observatory on Adult Learning) was created in 2003 but was never fully operational. Interaction between Funds, State and Regions can involve the joint programming of grants for learning activities, but is only occasional and not regulated.

Delivery

Firms develop training plans (i.e. training proposals) and apply for funding, which are evaluated by the Training Fund issuing the call for proposals. Firms can choose the Fund they join, effectively creating competition among Funds. In practice, weak implementation of portability rules across Funds and a fuzzy legal framework still limit the effectiveness of this quasi-market. The 2018 ANPAL Guidelines on the operations of the Funds aimed at tackling this issue. Interactions across Training Funds do not have a regulated structure, they remain most often ad-hoc and based on goodwill.

Annual funding

In 2016, the Funds approved training plans for approx. EUR 470 million, complemented by further EUR 236 million in direct companies’ resources (ANPAL, 2018[54]).

Estimated funding per participant

Approx. EUR 300 (2016).

Funding source

Mandatory levy corresponding to 0.3% of companies’ payroll. The 0.3% applies across sectors and regions, which does not reflect the heterogeneity in needs and costs of training across these units.

Reception

No systematic information is collected about users’ satisfaction.

Effectiveness

The measure’s take-up is wide, with a very large number of firms and workers being covered. Still, a large share of the Funds’ resources support health and safety (20% of workers trained in 2016) and administration (13%) training, while much fewer individuals train to face new challenges on the workplace (ANPAL, 2018[54]; INAPP, 2017[55]). The diversion of resources to support other passive or active labour market policies is a source of concern for some stakeholders.

The Funds’ activities are subject to regular monitoring, but monitoring does not extend to the quality of the supported training. There are no homogeneous training quality standards for the Funds, and Funds make their own quality assessments. There is no formal mechanism to select training providers, and in at least 60% of cases (2016) the provider was the applying company itself. The provider is usually accredited by the regional accreditation system, but some Funds also developed their own accreditation system. The training activity can but often does not lead to a certification, and there is no uniform certification mechanism across Funds or Regions. Evaluations of the training’s outcomes for workers or companies are rare and on an ad-hoc basis, depending on the Fund. A systematic approach, possibly using an independent research body, is absent (OECD, 2019[56]).

Success factors

In the institutional and legislative quasi-vacuum that characterised adult learning in Italy before 2004, the Training Funds are a very welcome intervention and produced a very large increase in training participation of the employed. The Funds are decentralised and can therefore be retailed to local needs. The participation of low-qualified workers is strong.

Enabling factors

The policy targets a large population of workers and companies, and allows for individual, company-level, sector- and regional-level training plants, which speaks of the policy’s versatility. Similar levies exist and are successful in different European countries, although the rate is usually higher than 0.3% and the management of the levied resources not necessarily attributed to ad-hoc institutions such as the Funds (OECD, 2019[56]).

Short description

The reform introduced a new job-search and networking training programme for older unemployed adults (55+/50+). The training consisted of 10 group meetings of 4 hours, led by a PES employee. Participation in the training was free of charge, but mandatory for those who were at least 55/50 years old and received unemployment benefits for at least 3 months.

Aims and objectives

The overall aim was to decrease (long-term) unemployment among older individuals, through improving participants’ job-search and networking skills. In order to reach these aims, the objective was that at least 120 000 people would participate in the Network training between 2013-2016 (Dutch Government, n.d.[65]).

Instruments

Training measure

Implementation period

1 July 2013 until 1 October 2016 (i.e., the last participants finished early 2017)

Target group(s)

Unemployed individuals who are at least 55 years old (2013) or 50 years old (2014-2016)

Number of participants (total)

123 021 participants (Dutch Government, n.d.[65])

Key stakeholders

Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, PES, social partners

Delivery

PES (UWV)

Total funding

EUR 37 million (Tweede Kamer, 2014[66])

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 300

Funding source

Tax funding

Reception

Training participants are generally satisfied with the training and the trainer. Moreover, their confidence in their job-search skills increased, as well as their perception of social support in their job-search. However, after participating in the training, participants are more likely to believe that in order to get a job, one must be at the right place at the right time, and that one gets a job thanks to the influence and help of others. Also, job-search motivation did not increase significantly due to the training (Van Hoof and Van den Hee, 2017[67]).

Effectiveness

The objective that at least 120 000 people would participate in the Network training between 2013-2016 was reached. Moreover, results from a randomised field experiment shows that the overall aim was reached as well: The training was effective in increasing job-search skills and the probability to re-enter employment (De Groot and Van der Klaauw, 2017[68]) (Van Hoof and Van den Hee, 2017[67]). However, the effects are small, and to date there is no causal evidence that the introduction of the Network training increased participation in education and training. In addition, despite the fact that the training was mandatory, many people in the target group did not participate (De Groot and Van der Klaauw, 2017[68]).

Success factors

- Clearly defined target group and objectives for the PES offices.

- Full course (40h, 3 months) with the same group may enhance the quality of the training.

- The fact that the randomised experiment were part of the policy design enhanced monitoring throughout the implementation process.

Enabling factors

- Thanks to the randomised experiment that came hand in hand with the policy implementation, the policy implementation was heavily monitored, which allowed for adjustments when necessary.

- The involvement of the PES throughout the policy process may have enhanced successful implementation of the reform.

Short description

The reform introduced a training voucher for older unemployed adults (55+/50+), to cover 100% of costs for training that will increase their employment opportunities, up to a maximum of EUR 750 per training. The revision of the policy in 2014 increased the amount of the voucher to EUR 1 000, and expanded the eligibility of the vouchers for a wider variety of training and to the recognition of prior learning.

Aims and objectives

The overall aim was to decrease (long-term) unemployment among older individuals, by updating or increasing their job-related knowledge and skills through education and training participation. In order to reach this aim, the objective was that at least 16 500 older unemployed workers would use a training voucher between 2013-2016 (Dutch Government, n.d.[65]).

Instruments

Training finance measure

Implementation period

1 July 2013 until 1 October 2016 (i.e., participation in training funded by vouchers until mid-2017)

Target group(s)

Unemployed individuals who are at least 55 years old (2013) or 50 years old (2014-2016)

Number of participants (total)

18 753 users (Dutch Government, n.d.[65])

Key stakeholders

Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, PES, social partners

Delivery

PES (UWV), but the education and training is mainly delivered by private training providers.

Total funding

EUR 16.5 million (Tweede Kamer, 2014[66])

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 880

Funding source

Tax funding

Reception

Policymakers appear to be very satisfied with the vouchers, and they have been gradually expanded since 2016/17. The government and social partners are currently investigating the possibility to make vouchers available to the entire population by introducing an individual learning account (ILA). To date, there is no evaluation available of individuals’ reception of the training vouchers.

Effectiveness

The objective that at least 16 500 people would use a training voucher between 2013-2016 was reached. However, to date there is no causal evidence that the introduction of the vouchers increased participation in education and training.

Success factors

- Clearly defined target group.

- The vouchers are (supposed to) cover 100% of the training costs, which entirely removes the financial barrier to training participation.

Enabling factors

- The existence of a market of private training provision.

Short description

The reform introduced co-funding from the government of up to 50% for social partner initiatives to improve the sectoral or regional labour market. Each sector plan addresses several themes, one of which can be to retrain and upskill adults.

Aims and objectives

The overall aim of the sector plans is improve the sectoral and regional labour markets in the short and medium-term. More specifically, the plans are aimed at helping people find work and to help workers stay employable throughout their working lives.

Instruments

Sector plans include a wide variety of measures, which have to address at least two of the following themes: i) labour market entrance and guidance of youngsters; ii) retaining older workers; iii) labour market entrance of people with a distance to the labour market; iv) mobility and employability; v) education and training; vi) work-to-work transitions of employees at a sectoral and inter-sectoral level; vii) good employer and employee practices (Overheid.nl, 2015[69]).

Types of activities that fall under the ‘education and training’ theme are career checks and advice for employees, retraining and upskilling measures, future-oriented training for older workers, and recognising acquired competences (‘EVC procedures’) (Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, n.d.[70]).

Implementation period

Funding requests could be submitted between April 2013 and the end of 2016. Sector plans were implemented between mid-2013 and end-2017.

Target group(s)

Mainly employed adults, but depending on the sector plan potentially the entire potential labour force as well as students (for apprenticeship measures).

Number of participants (total)

In total 296 145 participants, out of which 155 532 in retraining in upskilling measures (Van der Werff et al., 2019[71]).

Key stakeholders

Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, regional governments, employer organisations, individual employers, trade unions

Delivery

Employer organisations, individual employers/companies, trade unions. Education and training measures are mainly delivered through private training providers.

Total funding

EUR 977 743 739, out of which EUR 195 404 305 for retraining and upskilling measures (Van der Werff et al., 2019[71]).

Estimated funding per participant

EUR 1 256 for retraining and upskilling measures.

Funding source

Tax funding (max. 50% of total funding per sector plan) and social partner contributions (mainly through training levies). In practice, funding of the sector plans consisted for 70% of sectoral (i.e., social partner) contributions (Van der Werff et al., 2019[71])

Reception

Overall positive: 82% of employers was (very) satisfied with the education and training activities of their sector plan, and 80% considered that the benefits of the plans are at least as high as their expectations (Heyma, Van Der Werff and Brekelmans, 2016[72]). However, some stakeholders considered the administrative burden too high, and the work-to-work transitions appeared to be more difficult to implement i.e. needing specific attention in a third round of sector plans. In addition, the decentralised approach and broad scope of the policy made it more difficult to coordinate and monitor the implementation of the sector plans. To date, there is no national evaluation available of individual participants’ / employees’ reception of the sector plans.

Effectiveness

National experts are very satisfied with the extent to which this reform contributed to improving the sectoral and regional labour markets. Moreover, 97% of the planned participants in retraining and upskilling measures were reached (Van der Werff et al., 2019[71]), and the majority of employers who participated in a sectoral plan (60%) indicate that they would not have implemented most of the plan’s activities if their sector plan would not have existed (Heyma, Van Der Werff and Brekelmans, 2016[72]).

Success factors

- Collaboration between social partners was incentivised by requiring a partnership in order to receive government funding.

- The buy-in of social partners was increased and the probability of deadweight loss was decreased by requiring at least 50% co-funding from social partners.

- A decentralised approach allowed for initiatives that were tailored to specific sectoral and regional needs.

Enabling factors

Although the Dutch social partners could benefit from a pre-existing culture of relatively strong social partner collaboration, incentives were put in place to stimulate this collaboration.

Short description

The reform introduced a training voucher of SGD 500 for Singaporeans (i.e. Singapore citizens and permanent residents) aged 25 and above, which can be used to cover (part of the) training costs of one or several courses that are supported by the Government agencies. The voucher does not expire. The vouchers are one of many initiatives falling under SkillsFuture: a comprehensive adult learning initiative launched late 2014. It is possible to benefit from several SkillsFuture measures at the same time for one single training programme.

Aims and objectives

The overall aim of the SkillsFuture movement is to promote a culture and holistic system of lifelong learning through the pursuit of skills mastery, and strengthen the ecosystem of quality education and training in Singapore. More specifically, the training vouchers encourage individuals to take ownership of their skills development and lifelong learning (MySkillsFuture, 2018[79]).

Instruments

Training funding measure

Implementation period

January 2016 until present

Target group(s)

Singapore citizens aged 25 and above (excl. permanent residents (Government of Singapore, 2019[80])).

Number of participants (total)

Around 431 000 users by 2018 (MySkillsFuture, 2019[81])

Key stakeholders

Ministry of Education incl. SkillsFuture Singapore (a statutory board under the Ministry), Ministry of Manpower, Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the Future Economy Council (incl. Ministers, social partners, learning providers, individual employers and research and education institutions)

Delivery

State accredited public and private learning providers

Total funding

SkillsFuture increased government spending on continuing education and training from SGD 600 million per year (2010-2015) to over SGD 1 billion per year (2015-2020) (Government of Singapore, 2018[82]). However, it is not clear how much of this is spent on each individual SkillsFuture initiative.

Funding per participant

SGD 500 per participant one off. Although it is stated that the government will provide periodic top-ups (MySkillsFuture, 2018[79]), it is unclear when this will happen.

Funding source

Government funds (i.e. funds of the Ministry of Education, the Lifelong Learning Endowment Fund, the National Productivity Fund), Skill Development Levy on employers, and the tripartite SkillsFuture Jubilee Fund (financed through donations from employers and unions that are matched by the government).

Reception

People seem to be satisfied with the vast amount of courses for which the training vouchers can be used, and the user-friendliness of the online platform through which the vouchers are spent on courses. It remains unclear how employers received the policy, particularly since they are less involved in the activities.

Effectiveness

It appears that the overall aim of creating a holistic lifelong learning system was reached. Moreover, it seems likely that the wide variety of measures had an effect on education and training participation. However, to date there is no causal evidence that individual measures such as the training vouchers had an impact on education and training participation or ownership of personal skill development.

Success factors

- The amount of the voucher can cover 100% of the costs of several courses: costs of eligible courses start at SGD 10, e.g. for a 3 hour course to learn about the different parts of a computer's operating system and how to use Windows 7.

- By being a comprehensive reform that affects the entire population, the entire SkillsFuture movement, and particularly the training vouchers, have a lot of visibility. This increases the probability that people are aware of their rights, which, in turn, may increase take-up rates.

- The introduction of SkillsFuture included the launch of an online platform where individuals can find detailed information on the content, duration and total costs of over 25 000 courses for which the training vouchers can be used. On this platform, individuals can also see their remaining budget on the training voucher and which other initiatives they may be eligible for when they want to sign up for a specific course. This facilitates informed decision making regarding training participation.

Enabling factors

- SkillsFuture is a comprehensive approach including a wide variety of different adult learning reforms. Therefore, the entire population is reached (including specific harder-to-reach sub-groups). The fact that every individual is eligible for one or more measures makes it more likely that at least one of these measure will increase an individual’s probability to participate in education and training.

- Singapore is a small country with the same ruling government for the past 60 years. This political stability may enhance a long-term perspective regarding government spending on adult learning.

Short description

The reform introduced a subsidy for anyone aged 40 and above, to cover up to 90% of course fees of courses that are supported by the government agencies, or that are subsidised by the Ministry of Education in designated institutions. Existing courses that were already subsidised at 90% or higher continue to be subsidised at those levels. The training subsidy is one of many initiatives falling under SkillsFuture: a comprehensive adult learning initiative launched late 2014. It is possible to benefit from several SkillsFuture measures at the same time for one single training programme.

Aims and objectives

The overall aim of the SkillsFuture movement is to promote a culture and holistic system of lifelong learning through the pursuit of skills mastery, and strengthen the ecosystem of quality education and training in Singapore. Recognising that mid-career individuals may face greater challenges in undertaking training, the government has implemented the training subsidy (40+) to encourage mid-career Singaporeans to upskill and reskill (Government of Singapore, 2019[83])

Instruments

Training funding measure

Implementation period

1 October 2015 until present

Target group(s)

Singapore citizens aged 40 and above.

Number of participants (total)

Around 170 000 recipients by 2018 (MySkillsFuture, 2019[81])

Key stakeholders

Ministry of Education incl. SkillsFuture Singapore (a statutory board under the Ministry), Ministry of Manpower, Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the Future Economy Council (incl. Ministers, social partners, learning providers, individual employers and research and education institutions)

Delivery

State accredited public and private learning providers

Total funding

SkillsFuture Singapore increased government spending on continuing education and training from SGD 600 million per year (2010-2015) to over SGD 1 billion per year (2015-2020) (Government of Singapore, 2018[82]). However, it is not clear how much of this is spent on each SkillsFuture initiative.

Funding per participant

n/a

Funding source

Government funds (i.e. funds of the Ministry of Education, the Lifelong Learning Endowment Fund, the National Productivity Fund), Skill Development Levy on employers, and the tripartite SkillsFuture Jubilee Fund (financed through donations from employers and unions that are matched by the government).

Reception

n/a

Effectiveness

It appears that the overall aim of creating a holistic lifelong learning system was reached. Moreover, it seems likely that the wide variety of measures had any effect on education and training participation. However, to date there is no causal evidence that individual measures such as the training subsidy (40+) had an impact on education and training participation of 40+ year-old Singaporeans.

Success factors

- The combination of the subsidy, the training vouchers (SkillsFuture Credit) and other SkillsFuture measures allows Singaporeans aged 40+ to participate in even the more expensive courses (almost) free-of-charge.

- By being a comprehensive reform that affects the entire population, the entire SkillsFuture movement receives a lot of visibility. This increases the probability that people are aware of their rights, which, in turn, may increase take-up rates.

- The introduction of SkillsFuture included the launch of an online platform where individuals can find detailed information on the content, duration and total costs of over 8 000 state accredited courses and additional eligible courses for which the training subsidy can be used. On this platform, individuals can also see which other initiatives they may be eligible for when they want to sign up for a specific course. This facilitates informed decision making regarding training participation.

Enabling factors

- SkillsFuture is a comprehensive approach including a wide variety of different adult learning reforms. Therefore, the entire population is reached (including specific harder-to-reach sub-groups). The fact that every individual is eligible for one or more measures makes it more likely that at least one of these measure will increase an individual’s probability to participate in education and training.

- Singapore is a small country with the same ruling government for the past 60 years. This political stability may enhance a long-term perspective regarding government spending on adult learning.

Short description

The reform introduced new short, industry-relevant training programmes that focus on emerging skills: i) data analytics; ii) finance; iii) tech-enabled services; iv) digital media; v) cyber security; vi) entrepreneurship; vii) advanced manufacturing; and viii) urban solutions. Courses exist at three different levels (basic, intermediary, advanced). SkillsFuture provides up to 70% course fee subsidy for Singapore Citizens and Singapore Permanent Residents (Government of Singapore, 2019[84]).SkillsFuture Series is one of many initiatives falling under SkillsFuture: a comprehensive adult learning initiative launched late 2014. It is possible to benefit from several SkillsFuture measures at the same time for one single training programme.

Aims and objectives

The overall aim of SkillsFuture is to promote a culture and holistic system of lifelong learning through the pursuit of skills mastery, and strengthen the ecosystem of quality education and training in Singapore. More specifically, the SkillsFuture Series are intended to help Singaporeans stay relevant and prepare for the future (Government of Singapore, 2019[85]).

Instruments

Training measure

Implementation period

2015/16 until present

Target group(s)

All Singaporean citizens or permanent residents. However, respective training providers may impose eligibility criteria on their courses.

Number of participants (total)

Over 30 000 participants by 2018 (MySkillsFuture, 2019[81])

Key stakeholders

Ministry of Education incl. SkillsFuture Singapore (a statutory board under the Ministry), Ministry of Manpower, Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the Future Economy Council (incl. Ministers, social partners, learning providers, individual employers and research and education institutions)

Delivery

State accredited public and private learning providers

Total funding

SkillsFuture Singapore increased government spending for continuing education and training from SGD 600 million per year (2010-2015) to over SGD 1 billion per year (2015-2020) (Government of Singapore, 2018[82]). However, it is not clear how much of this is spent on each SkillsFuture initiative.

Funding per participant

n/a

Funding source

Government funds (i.e. funds of the Ministry of Education, the Lifelong Learning Endowment Fund, the National Productivity Fund), Skill Development Levy on employers, and the tripartite SkillsFuture Jubilee Fund (financed through donations from employers and unions that are matched by the government).

Reception

n/a

Effectiveness

It appears that the overall aim of creating a holistic lifelong learning system was reached. Moreover, it seems likely that the wide variety of measures had any effect on education and training participation. However, to date there is no causal evidence that individual measures such as the SkillsFuture Series had an impact on education and training participation or increased individuals’ future-readiness.

Success factors

- The combination of the subsidy, the training vouchers (SkillsFuture Credit) and other SkillsFuture measures allows Singaporeans aged 40+ to participate in even the more expensive courses free-of-charge.

- By being a comprehensive reform that affects the entire population, the entire SkillsFuture movement receives a lot of visibility. This increases the probability that people are aware of their rights, which, in turn, may increase take-up rates.

- The introduction of SkillsFuture included the launch of an online platform where individuals can find detailed information on the content, duration and total costs all state accredited courses, including the SkillsFuture Series. On this platform, individuals can also see which other initiatives they may be eligible for when they want to sign up for a specific course. This facilitates visibility of the new training programmes and informed decision making regarding training participation.

Enabling factors

- SkillsFuture is a comprehensive approach including a wide variety of different adult learning reforms. Therefore, the entire population is reached (including specific harder-to-reach sub-groups). The fact that every individual is eligible for one or more measures makes it more likely that at least one of these measure will increase an individual’s probability to participate in education and training.

- Singapore is a small country with the same ruling government for the past 60 years. This political stability may enhance a long-term perspective regarding government spending on adult learning.