Perspectieven voor interventies in de bijstand

Abstract

Samenvatting Welke handelings- en interventiestrategieën van gemeenten dragen bij aan perspectief op werk en een verbetering van het welbevinden en vertrouwen van mensen in de bijstand? Zes gemeenten – Groningen, Utrecht, Tilburg, Wageningen, Deventer en Nijmegen – hebben de afgelopen jaren (van 1 oktober 2017 tot 31 december 2019) unieke randomised controlled trials uitgevoerd in de bijstand. De volgende (combinatie van) interventies zijn onderzocht: ontheffing van re-integratieverplichtingen, intensivering van begeleiding en vrijlating van bijverdiensten. Er is zowel gekeken naar uitstroom naar werk als naar baanzoekintensiteit, welbevinden, zelfredzaamheid en sociaal vertrouwen. De uitstroom naar werk is bij alle interventies niet lager dan de huidige aanpak, terwijl de uitstroom naar deeltijdwerk in sommige gemeenten hoger is. Vooral intensivering op maat en vrijlating kan uitstroom naar werk (minimaal in deeltijd) vergroten. Voor wat betreft de effecten op baanzoekintensiteit, zelfredzaamheid, welbevinden en vertrouwen, is het beeld diffuus. We vinden kleine en soms ook positieve effecten, vooral voor zelfredzaamheid en vertrouwen, maar het beeld is niet eenduidig. De kleine aantallen deelnemers in de experimenten maken het lastig statistisch significante effecten te vinden.

A Struggle for Framing and Interpretation: The Impact of the ‘Basic Income Experiments’ on Social Policy Reform in the Netherlands

“…Local evaluations of the experiments in the six municipalities were executed by municipal researchers affiliated to different universities 18 and were brought together in one overview publication. In addition to the outflow to work, they examined the impact of the intervention on secondary outcomes, such as wellbeing, health, participation, and self-management (Edzes et al, 2021; Sanders et al, 2020; see next section). Two national institutes – assigned to their task by the Ministry of Social Affairs - added the two extra layers: a ‘process evaluation’ (De Graaf and Van Gastel, 2020) and an overall evaluation of the experiments focused on the outflow to work (De Boer et al, 2020).…”

“…Municipalities instead framed the experiments in a much broader perspective. They were also interested in the impact of the treatment on different social outcomes in line with the theoretical arguments of the trust approach (Edzes et al, 2021; Sanders et al, 2020). They decided to also evaluate the impact of the treatment on health, wellbeing, participation, and self-management, and were interested in the quality of the government service as well (Edzes et al, 2021; Sanders et al, 2020).…”

“…The national Government chose to refer strictly to the conditions formulated in the law (De Boer et al, 2020), talking about exemptions and intensifications. The municipalities instead referred clearly to their overall aim of providing trust in line with the policy theory, using such terms as ‘self-management’, ‘extra guidance’, and ‘work pays off’ (Edzes et al, 2021; Sanders et al, 2020). It is important to note that the experimental conditions were still in accordance with the law and fell in the space provided by the national Government; however, in executing the treatments, the municipalities also tried to stay close to their original aims (Betkó, 2018).…”

“…Recent publications (Edzes et al, 2021; Muffels, 2021; Muffels and Gielens, 2019; Sanders et al, 2020) have evaluated the outcomes of the experiments in terms of reintegration in to work, job search behaviour, participation, health, wellbeing, and self-management. Others have analysed the discourse in which the experiments were proposed (Groot et al, 2019).…”

Participation Income

“…A study by Edzes et al (2021) investigated a combination of interventions for that purpose: exemption from reintegration obligations, intensification of counselling and earnings release of extra earnings. They found small, and sometimes positive effects, especially for self-reliance and confidence, but the picture was not clear-cut.…”