出版社：Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung
摘要：The pilot programme „PRIMUS“ (“Integrate, encourage, strengthen strengths”) implemented by the Jobcenter Saarbrücken tested a new counselling and support approach for jobseekers eligible for basic security assistance benefits, aged 25 to 48, who had been long-term recipients and were considered hard to place in the labour market due to a number obstacles while not qualifying for case management. Each of the project’s six placement officers was to handle a caseload of 40 household communities. Participation was voluntary, leaving job-seekers the choice to be served at their regular job centre branch as before or to transfer to the programme. A qualitative evaluation of the project was jointly conducted by the Göttingen Institute for Sociological Research (SOFI) and Zoom – Society for prospective Developments e.V. The study involved the close monitoring of casework with 42 project participants, including case documentation, interviews and non-participant observation. Singular observations or inter-views were realized with 11 more participants. In addition, 10 non-participants were also interviewed. This report outlines the evaluation results. The way the project team addressed key problems of professional action in placement counselling are both original and uncommon within the legal framework of jobseekers’ basic assistance and of the public employment services. The project worked on the assumption that intensive individual support would enable participants to enter into a durable, unsubsidized employment that would meet their job expectations. Against the resignation fostered by longer unemployment the team used a systemic counselling approach, providing occasions for clients to experience success and to draw on hitherto untapped resources. While accounting for limitations and constraining circumstances, the project officers sought points of vantage for joint placement strategies. Case workers could rely on the voluntary entry into the programme and on intrinsically motivated participants to obtain their clients’ personal mandate and to pursue shared objectives by way of collaborative strategies. Additional time for client support and professional discretion provided the basis for a specific service profile that combined individual case work with group activities and complemented counselling by forms of practical assistance, (e.g. escorting clients to employers or to government agencies). In the case of families, the placement strategy included all employable household members. Further assistance was offered to clients after they had taken up work. All concerned parties considered the project a success. A quarter of all participants and close to half of the qualitative evaluation sample took up a job. The qualitative evaluation showed how comprehensive, resource-intensive placement-oriented services provided by job centre staff offers effective support to disadvantaged unemployed. While income sanctions were not enforced, clients proved highly committed to joint objectives, and service satisfaction of clients and job satisfaction of staff were equally high.
