Policy formation and policy actors in Dublin

FLOWS WORKING PAPER SERIES NO. 59/2014 Evelyn Mahon, Jemimah Bailey, Caroline O’Nolan and Michelle Goodrick Policy formation and policy actors in Dublin FLOWS: Impact of local welfare systems on female labour force participation and social cohesion 1 FLOWS Working Paper Editor: Per H. Jensen E-mail: perh@dps.aau.dk www.flows-eu.eu Working papers may be ordered from: Inge Merete Ejsing-Duun Fibigerstræde 1 9220 Aalborg Ø E-mail: ime@dps.aau.dk Tlf: (+45) 99 40 82 18 Fax: (+45) 98 15 53 46 Aalborg 2014 ISSN 2246-4840 2 About the FLOWS project: The FLOWS project has been funded under the EU FP7 program, grant Agreement no: 266806. The project started January 1 2011 and ended April 30 2014. The FLOWS project analyses the causes and effects of women’s labour market integration, which is an issue that represents a major challenge for the European Union and its member states, and is supposedly also a precondition for the sustainability of the European social model. The overall aim is to analyse (1) how local welfare systems support women’s labour market participation, as well as (2) the extent to which (and under which conditions) female labour market integration has contributed to the strengthening social cohesion. The project focuses on how public and private welfare services such as care and lifelong learning intended to support women’s labour market integration have been designed; on how women of different classes, qualifications, ethnicities, and geographical locations have grasped and made use of such policies, and on how the increase in women’s labour market integration has affected structures of inequality and social cohesion. The study is based on in-depth analysis of eleven cities, i.e. one city in eleven different countries. The cities/countries are: Brno/Czech Republic, Aalborg/Denmark, Tartu/Estonia, Jyväskylä/Finland, Nantes/France, Hamburg/Germany, Székesfehérvar/Hungary, Dublin/Ireland, Bologna/Italy, Terrassa/Spain, and Leeds/UK. The FLOWS project is composed by 6 academic work packages: WP 1: Degree and structures of women's labour market integration WP 2: Local production systems WP 3: The local welfare system WP 4: Local policy formation/local political actors WP 5: Survey questionnaire WP 6: Women’s decision making WP 7: Social structures: cohesion or cleavages and segregation This working paper series reports work conducted in the seven work packages. 3 4 Part A: General attitudes concerning policy formation in the Dublin. THE SITUATION OF WOMEN AND EMPLOYMENT IN DUBLIN Much of Ireland’s wealth and earning power is concentrated in Dublin, Ireland’s capital city. However, many of Ireland’s most deprived communities are also located in Dublin. The issues associated with women and employment in Dublin are therefore varied and complex. A very high proportion of those employed in Dublin are employed in the service sector (86.1%) and a substantial proportion of these are in the public sector (34.4%) (WRC 2010). The impression linked to ‘women’s employment’ in Dublin is of women working in mainly professional, administrative and retail settings; key categories of female occupations in Dublin include teachers, nurses, lawyers, accountants, shop assistants, clerks, waitresses and cleaners. In reconciling caring responsibilities and employment different groups of women face different issues. One interviewee pointed out that for example the issues for women who are trying to move up the career ladder are very different to those who are trying to access employment in the first place. She commented that: “a lot of the issues around care have a huge impact on access problems. Women are, because of care issues, more likely to be doing part-time work, there’s issues around being in part-time work and trying to negotiate an education and training system and a welfare system that’s very much geared around people wanting full-time work.” According to the interviewees, the main issues for women with childcare responsibilities are the accessibility and affordability of childcare in Dublin (and nationally). With regard to accessibility, there are parts of Dublin which have relatively few community childcare facilities, which tend to be subsidised under government schemes and therefore more affordable for parents with low incomes. It was noted that:“it would still constantly come up as one of the main barriers. It’s changed in that, before it was about basic provision, that’s shifted, that’s a concern in rural areas, but the huge issue is cost, and that influences the decisions people have to make. And the other issue, in terms of supply, is out-of-school care – that’s just not there.” The current economic situation has led to an increase in part-time work across the population, for both men and women, and interviewees expressed the view that this could provide an opportunity: “there’s more of a willingness to look at atypical work as being the norm into the future, and I think there’s huge potential in that for women” said one interviewee. High rates of unemployment have also led to a perception that skills training for women distant from the workforce will not lead to employment. ASSESMENT OF THE POLICY MEASURES IN DUBLIN Policy is driven from the national level; there is very little opportunity for local level policies. The policies are formulated at national level and then implemented at local level. As has been 5 outlined previously (section A of the D4.3 report) women are entitled to maternity leave and parental leave, although there is no statutory paternity leave. There are no legal rights to flexible working arrangements/job-sharing, which generally takes place at the discretion of employers. There is also no legal entitlement to study leave/career break leave. Part-time workers have some protection under the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act, 2001. A variety of local area based training and development initiatives, targeted mainly at disadvantaged women, have been developed to support women’s entry/re-entry to employment. Assistance is also provided via the social welfare system to ease the transition into work. There are a mix of private, state and voluntary providers of childcare, elder care and lifelong learning, and this mix of service provision can vary greatly from area to area within Dublin city. Funding is also mixed, so that for example, private childcare facilities may provide services to welfare recipients through the Childcare Employment and Training Support (CETS) or Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) schemes, alongside services provided to parents paying directly. Similarly, the cost of care for individuals in privately run nursing homes may be financed through a mixture of public and private funds. Another example of the way in which a mix of service providers can work together is the “Equal at Work” project run by the Dublin Employment Pact 1. This project was a Dublin-wide initiative to tackle labour market barriers, with a range of fourteen projects across the public, private and community sectors workplaces. Funded under the EU Equal Initiative and co-funded by the Irish Government, it involved over 60 partner organisations from the public, private and community sectors. These included four local authorities, seven area partnerships, various social partner organisations, seven hospitals and health service agencies, six major employers, twenty community and voluntary sector organisations, various training institutions, representative organizations. The partnership structure of Equal at Work was selected by an EU report as a model of its kind and was presented at a Commission conference in Lisbon. POLICY FORMATION Policy formation at national level is influenced by inter- departmental committees and expert groups which include representatives from the four pillars of the social partnership process. Both local and national interest groups lobby and make representations to government and ministers. Their representations include formal budget submissions which are made public and are sometimes afforded significant media coverage. The city and county development boards work with local authorities, with the aim of establishing a strategy for social, cultural and economic development, and to oversee its implementation. Consultation with local communities is a vital part of the process. However, the resources and responsibilities of the Dublin local authority (and other local authorities in Ireland) are limited. 1 The Dublin Employment Pact (DEP) is a non-profit company funded by the government to tackle employment and development issues in the Dublin region. 6 As far as childcare policy is concerned, the implementation of childcare policy is the responsibility of the Dublin City Childcare Committee. A number of stakeholders sit on the Dublin City Childcare Committee, including representatives from statutory agencies, Dublin City Council, Health Service Executive, Vocational Education Committee, national voluntary childcare organisations, professional childcare bodies such as the Irish Preschool Playgroup Association/National Children’s Nurseries Association, the Barnardos charity, Area Based Partnerships, Unions, Community Forum, Private and Community Childcare Providers and parents. This reflects the social partnership model which is used to develop policy at national level and does provide an opportunity for institutionalised dialogues. The main ambition of those involved in childcare is to protect the childcare places that were created under the Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme and the National Childcare Investment Programme, and to support the community childcare facilities to remain sustainable. There is also a desire to see the continuation (and ideally an expansion to two year) of the preschool year – there has been no long term commitment from government to the scheme. The main problem facing the childcare sector (and all policy sectors) is the impact of budget cuts and the long term prospect of more cuts. Activists in the area of eldercare wish to see greater recognition of the work of carers and the development and implementation of the National Carer’s Strategy. There is also an ambition to see greater resources targeted towards community based services for the elderly and greater funding allocated to the nursing home subvention scheme known as the fair deal. In the area of LLL and training stakeholders principle ambition is to tackle long term unemployment and social exclusion. Part B: Case studies Childcare policy case study Policy measure: The Early Childhood Care and Education (ECCE) scheme was introduced in January 2010, as a national policy. As has already been outlined, childcare policy is driven from a national policy perspective, and implementation is the responsibility of local childcare committees, in this case the Dublin City Childcare Committee. Of the 491 community and private childcare facilities in Dublin, 366 are providing the ECCE scheme (75%) 2. The scheme consists of a universal (non means-tested) free preschool year, in the year before the child starts school. It is provided through community sector and private sector childcare facilities which are contracted by the state to provide services. Children aged between 3 years and 3 months and 4 years and 6 months in the September of the year before they attend school are funded for either 3 hours per day 5 days per week for 183 days per year (the equivalent of 2 Figures come from the Dublin City Childcare Committee database. Nationally it is estimated that 4,300 out of 4,500 services are participating in the scheme, including approximately 150 child-minders caring for five children who are in the ECCE age group are offering the ECCE scheme. 7 the school year) or for 2 hours and 15 minutes, 5 days per week, for 241 days per year (the equivalent of a full year). The scheme is currently the primary policy investment in childcare in Ireland, in terms of both budget (€170million per annum in 2011, and projected budget of €180million in 2012, which is a substantial saving on the previous Early Childhood Supplement payment 3) and the number of children attending (63,000 nationally in 2010-11, representing 95% of the cohort). The key policy objective of the ECCE scheme is that all children have equal access to an appropriate early learning setting at a key developmental stage. A key senior civil servant involved in the introduction of the scheme says that those working in the childcare sector had long held ambitions for a free preschool year. In fact the economic crisis provided an opportunity, in that the government could no longer afford the Early Childhood Supplement, but could soften the blow to parents of taking it away by offering the ECCE scheme, making it a politically attractive option. In addition the move had political implications at a European level, in that it kept Ireland in line with the targets set out by the Barcelona European Council which aimed at providing childcare services for 90% of children aged between three years and school age (European Council 2002:12). The ECCE scheme has also acted as a support for the infrastructure that was developed through the previous investment in capital projects under the Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme and the National Childcare Investment Programme funding schemes, as the economic downturn has seen a reduction in demand for childcare, as parents lost their jobs and were therefore able to provide care themselves. There were fears that some facilities might be forced to close as a result of this reduction in demand. A local childcare facilitator illustrated this point when discussing how many of the childcare providers she deals with have gone from having long waiting lists, to struggling to fill the places they have available. There was some resistance to the capitation level set by the government of €64.50 4 per child per week, as childcare providers felt that they could not provide the service for this amount of money. Parents using just the ECCE hours cannot be charged any additional fees by childcare providers, to supplement the capitation level. However, parents using childcare provider services in addition to the ECCE hours have the €64.50 taken off their total childcare bill. 3 The ECCE policy was brought in by national government at a time when the Early Childhood Supplement scheme was scrapped (end of 2009). The ECS scheme was a universal payment to parents with children under the age of 6, (later reduced to those under 5) was introduced in April 2006, and cost €1.422 billion in the three years it existed. 4 A higher capitation rate of €75 p/w is available to services in which all preschool leaders hold qualifications to degree level (FETAC Level 7) and preschool assistants hold qualifications to diploma level (FETAC Level 5). This higher rate is designed to act as an incentive for further training within the sector. 8 The preschool scheme is administered via the Childcare Committee, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs (DCYA) and Pobal, the agency which ensures compliance to the criteria 5 of the scheme by making on-site visits to childcare facilities. Childcare facilities apply to the local Childcare Committee to take part in the ECCE scheme, and the committee provides advice for those facilities wishing to access the scheme. Applications are then passed on to the DCYA, which issues contracts and payments to the facilities. Payments are made in a lump sum at the start of each term, and the service is required to pass on the fee to parents, either by making no charge to parents using just the preschool hours, or by reducing full-time parents’ fees. There are concerns about the limitations of the ECCE scheme, particularly the capitation level in Dublin, where childcare costs are at their highest. In addition, there is no additional funding for children from disadvantaged communities, and a lack of flexibility between other schemes, so that parents have to choose one or the other i.e. Childcare employment and Training Support or ECCE or Community Childcare Subvention scheme. The scheme has also been criticized for its lack of flexibility for parents who work part-time. Although it is an important step in providing universal access to preschool education, it does not provide a realistic childcare option for working parents, who still have to pay for any additional hours care provided by the childcare facility. Eldercare policy case study The policy that is mapped below is the Nursing Home Support Scheme introduced in 2009 6 and known as the ‘Fair Deal Scheme’ (FDS). The policy is a national rather than a local policy but as will be explained below local actors influence how this policy is delivered. Prior to the introduction of the FDS there was a great deal of controversy regarding access to public nursing home beds and the inadequacy of the existing nursing home subvention scheme. Timonen noted in 2006 that access to public nursing home care “appears to be based on high nursing care needs, luck, ability to apply pressure, reluctance to entertain other alternatives (usually motivated by fear of high costs in private nursing homes) or a combination of all three”. For many years the Irish State did not accept that it had an obligation to provide long-term residential care (Office of the Ombudsman 2010). Elderly people and their families who needed long term care and could not access a bed in a public nursing home had to meet the very high charges for private nursing home care with only limited state subvention. Uncertainty regarding the duration of this financial burden added to the stress faced by families in this position. Complaints to the Office of the Ombudsman resulted in an investigation into the right to nursing home care in Ireland (Office of the Ombudsman 2010). In November 2010 the Ombudsman reported that there were more than 300 cases before the Irish High Court in which people are seeking compensation for the costs of private nursing home care which they claim should have 5 Criteria include; free of charge to parents; minimum qualification level of FETAC Level 5 for preschool leader; adherence to the principles of Siolta (the National Quality Framework for Early Learning); fully compliant in terms of tax, regulatory requirements and notified to the HSE Inspectorate. 6 See Nursing Home Support Scheme Act, 2009 (No.15/2009). 9 been provided by the HSE. In 2008 the then Minister for Health recognised that, “there was a serious problem of inequity” concerning the cost of Nursing Home care. 7 The FDS scheme was designed by the Department of Health over a period of several years before its introduction in 2009. A number of ‘building blocks’ which underpin the State’s policy on long-term care and the subvention of nursing home costs have been identified. 8 These include: Review of the Nursing Home Subvention Scheme (O’Shea 2003); OECD’s study of Long Term Care for Older People (2005); ESRI’s study of public opinion on long term care financing (Williams, Hughes & Blackwell 2005); analysis by the National Council for Ageing and Older People; Report of the National Economic and Social Forum on care for older people (2005); work and inputs from the Equality Authority and many of the social partners. Legal obstacles, in particular constitutional issues regarding the right to property and inheritance, had to be negotiated and overcome in cooperation with the Attorney General's office, with at least 10 drafts of the Bill being produced before publication of the scheme. Stakeholders including private nursing homes and eldercare groups were consulted to assess the funds required to implement the scheme. However, some of the money originally designated for long term care was later diverted to other areas of health spending. 9 The scheme is administered by the Health Services Executive (HSE). The HSE channels funding to both public and private approved nursing homes. In the case of private nursing homes the price charged for care must be agreed with the HSE. The price agreed is paid under the publically funded National Treatment Purchase Fund (NTPF). Nursing homes must comply with the National Quality Standards for Nursing Homes in order to be approved by the HSE. Persons who wish to avail of this scheme are subject to a care and financial needs assessment. The assessment is standardised so that needs and means are objectively evaluated. The assessment of care needs may involve several health professionals and may take account of the person’s ability to carry out the activities of daily living, cognitive and mobility needs, medical conditions and other relevant matters influencing care needs. The financial assessment takes account of a person’s income and assets. Persons availing of the scheme contribute 80% of their income and 5% of the value of their assets per annum towards the cost of their care. The contribution payable cannot exceed the cost of care. In calculating the contribution in respect of assets the first €36,000 (€72,000 for a couple) of assets are disregarded. The contribution payable in respect of the principal residence is capped at 15%. This means that after three years residence in nursing home care no contribution will be payable in respect of the principal residence. The scheme also provides for a Nursing Home Loan or “ancillary state support” which allows the State, through the HSE, to pay the nursing home on an individual’s behalf and to only collect repayment following the individual’s death. This means that in practice assets such as property and land need not be sold during the lifetime of a person requiring care. 7 http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/pricewatch/2010/1115/1224283321130.html Speech by Minister Harney on 12/12/2006. Accessed at http://www.dohc.ie 9 http://www.cardi.ie/news/governmenttellshsetodivertfundsfromnursinghomecare 8 10 Stakeholders have pointed out that some essential care and services are not included under the FDS. Materials such as incontinence pads and services such as chiropody and dental treatment are not covered by the FDS. Stakeholders have also argued that the FDS has taken funds away from community care and allocated it to institutional care which the vast majority of older people do not need or benefit from. Voluntary organizations representative of older persons and carers, have expressed the view that the conception and implementation of the ‘fair deal’ scheme was a ‘top to bottom’ process with stakeholders feeling that their position was one limited to ‘consultation rather than active involvement. Other stakeholders noted that despite the plethora of research that argues that the majority of older people wish to remain in community over residential care, the Minister for Health enacted legislation that increased spending for institutional care while abandoning the National Carers Strategy that would have supported more community care. Furthermore, those representing older persons with dementia argued that, ‘adequate levels of dementia-specific nursing homes - offering an appropriate environment, levels of trained staff, and philosophy of care – [were] critical but not in place’ and called for that continued debate of the scheme before implementation went ahead. 10 Criticisms have also been directed at the FDS by those in the private nursing home sector who have expressed concern over the limit in funds allocated. It has also been claimed that private nursing homes are under pressure to cut the costs charged to the HSE while also being expected to comply with stringent quality standards. The FDS has provided a framework for a transparent, fair and standardised nursing home subvention scheme. In theory it offers a significant advance on previous schemes in that it is targeted at the elderly with the highest care needs; it does not rely on any familial contribution towards the cost of care and the support offered is tailored in accordance with individual income and assets. However, one of the consequences of the FDS which does not seem to be widely appreciated is the interpretation of the Department of Health that the Nursing Homes Subvention Scheme Act, 2009 removes the obligation of the State to provide nursing home care (Office of the Ombudsman 2010:130).The subvention provided under the FDS is subject to the resources available to the HSE. Given the cuts to government budgets it is perhaps not surprising that there are reports of delays in processing applications and concerns regarding the adequacy of funding for the scheme. 11 Therefore, although the assessment process has been standardised variations in the resources available to local HSE offices may result in significant area based differences in the waiting time prior to approval of applications. The FDS provides a means of funding residential care for elderly people who are no longer capable of independent living. It therefore enables family members who might otherwise have had to become caregivers to continue/return to employment. However, as outlined above there are concerns regarding delays in accessing the scheme. 10 See http://www.alzheimer.ie/eng/Media-Centre/News-Releases-Statements/News-Releases-2007/Fair-Deal-Scheme-aletter-to-the-Irish-Times 11 See http://www.irishhealth.com 11 The scheme provides an example of a policy initiative which promises transparency and fairness but may be unable to deliver either due to inadequate funding and uncertainty regarding the State’s legal obligation to deliver long-term elder care. LLL/Training policy case study Equality for Women Measure (EWM) There are no city level policies in relation to LLL and training in Ireland. All the relevant policies are national policies. The policy measure chosen as a case study is a positive action programme for women funded by the ESF and the Irish government. There is no evidence to suggest that this measure was introduced as a result of demands by stakeholders in Dublin or to meet city rather than national needs. The programme for positive action known as Equality for Women Measure (EWM) was first introduced under the National Development Plan 2000-2006. The Equality for Women Measure was funded initially from the Regional Operational Programmes of the National Development Plan which set aside almost €30 million for the period 2000 to 2006. The current phase of the EWM is part-financed (50%) by the ESF under the Human Capital Investment Operational Programmes 2007-2013. Funding has been provided under the EWM to organisations to deliver positive action projects for women in their communities, in education and training, in work and in decision making. The EWM is managed and co-ordinated by the Gender Equality Division (GED) within the Department of Justice which is also responsible for devising and developing the National Women’s Strategy and advising government on gender policy issues. The EWM reflects the three key themes of the National Women’s Strategy (2007) namely: equalising socio-economic opportunity for women; ensuring the well-being of women and engaging as active and equal citizens. Funding is channeled through the EWM to initiatives which promote and support gender equality and the development and advancement of women. Funding is targeted under three strands:access to employment; developing female entrepreneurship; and career development for women in employment. In 2009 36 projects received funding of €30,000 each under strand 1 (Access to Employment) of the EWM. 32 of the original projects also received a second tranche of funding in 2010. A new phase of EWM was launched in May 2010 and a number of public information sessions were organised at venues throughout the country to make community and local organisations aware of the funding available and the relevant criteria. The information sessions were organised by Pobal, an intermediary state funded body which has a network of regional teams and extensive links and ongoing contact with local community based organisations. Applications for funding under the EWM were submitted to and assessed initially by Pobal, and Pobal was also the designated point of contact for further information and queries. Applications were assessed in accordance with the selection process and selection criteria set out in the guidelines issued. The key selection criteria identified include the quality of the 12 proposal; the capacity of the group and value for money. Pobal provided the GED with an initial assessment of all applications and made recommendations regarding funding. The GED made the final decision regarding funding. Pobal’s role in relation to EWM is a non-statutory role; indeed the GED previously engaged a different body to fulfil the role played by Pobal and conceivably could replace Pobal if it so decided. While it was noted that Pobal occasionally encroaches beyond its remit its performance was assessed in generally positive terms by a government official. Pobal provides key linkages with local stakeholders and has instituted a system for monitoring and evaluating projects and organisations. Applications were invited under all of the 3 strands outlined above. Over 200 applications were received. Applications were received from a wide variety of community based organisations including Local Development Companies (LDCs); Universities; and agencies working with specific marginalised groups. By the end of 2010 41 new projects had entered into contracts to deliver initiatives which will be funded, subject to a maximum of €50,000 per project per annum, under the EWM. These projects will also have the possibility of renewed funding subject to meeting specified conditions. The majority of the new projects which received EWM funding in 2010 (31/75%) came under strand 1. Nine projects (22%) received funding under strand 2 while only 1 project received funding under strand 3. Disappointment has been expressed in relation to the small number and quality of applications received in relation to strand 3 funding. A lack of clarity in the presentation of this strand may account for these failings. EWM funding is allocated roughly 28% to the BMW region and 72% to the South and East. This is in line with the spread of the population in the country. The 31 strand 1 projects funded for the first time in 2010 include 9 Dublin based projects, although 2 of these projects also cover areas outside Dublin. Just one of the strand 2 projects is targeted at an area in Dublin while a further project based in Dublin has a nationwide remit. The single strand 3 project is located outside Dublin. In discussions with researchers EWM funding was assessed by an official in the Department of Justice and Equality as being successful in reaching disadvantaged groups of women and conforming with EU policy objectives. A higher than anticipated rate of positive outcomes from access to employment initiatives was cited as well as satisfaction with the success of female entrepreneurship projects. The Dublin based projects under strand 1 include two initiatives targeted at lone parents, two initiatives targeted at female offenders, two initiatives targeted at migrant women, one scheme to support women who have become distant from the labour market to re- enter it; one scheme for women living in an area designated as disadvantaged and one scheme which provides support to unemployed women lawyers and women working in law to facilitate their entry or reentry into employment. The projects are therefore targeted at a number of diverse sections in the city’s population and reflect the changed profile of the unemployed which has emerged in the current economic recession as well as traditional disadvantaged and marginalised groups. 13 Women’s access to employment, up-skilling, and improving women’s employability are central pillars around which strand 1 projects are devised. However, some of the projects are directed at extremely marginalised women who have had little or no previous contact with the labour market. In such cases successful outcomes are framed as moving participants closer to employment and the training provided could be described as personal development and empowerment rather than formal education or skills based training. One of the Dublin based projects which received funding under strand 2 of the EWM is ‘Women Mean Business’ which is run by Northside Partnership. Northside Partnership has been running for 20 years and has sought to involve local employers from the outset. The partnership sees linkages with local enterprises as being pivotal to the success of the employment related initiatives it has developed over the years. Its operational area is located north of Dublin City and has a population of circa 127,000. An overall relative deprivation of -0.6 (which indicates deprivation levels that are ‘marginally below average’, see Haase & Pratschke 2008) has been applied to the operational area of the partnership but it should be noted that it encompasses areas and pockets of extreme disadvantage (Gleeson et al. 2009) as well as the most disadvantaged electoral division in Dublin City (Priorswood B,-40.5) (Haase 2008). The Enterprise and Employment manager of the partnership was aware for some time that it was largely men who were participating in the partnership run enterprise training programmes. Monitoring had indicated a significant gender imbalance in the participation rates on enterprise related courses with women accounting for just 30% of participants. There was also concern that the proportion of women participants on these courses was falling. The partnership was keen to develop and tailor a course specifically to attract women entrepreneurs and the Enterprise & Employment Manager commented that it was ‘fortuitous’ that the need for this service coincided with the availability of funds under strand 2 of the EWM. Staff commented that, ‘it has been great from our point of view because it has answered a huge need that we had identified.’ The course was advertised on the partnerships website and in the local newspaper which is delivered free to homes in the area. The advertisement was headed up ‘Calling all Women’. The profile of the women on this training course was described as being ‘very mixed’. While there are a lot of mature women there are also a sizable proportion of younger women with the ambition to set up their own business. The training course runs 2 mornings a week over 5 weeks; a total of 10 modules. In addition to attending the course participants are assigned work to prepare for the forthcoming modules and to develop and research their business ideas. The course was described as ‘highly interactive’ and ‘very demanding’. It was recognised that not all the women who complete the course will go on to self-employment but it was felt that ‘those who do will have the wherewithal to be sustainable’. The women receive certified leadership and management training and are provided with mentoring on an individual basis from the enterprise officers in the partnership. The Dublin Chamber of Commerce has also now agreed to provide free membership to 10 of the participants on the course and to link participants with members of the Chamber of Commerce who are willing to mentor course participants. It is also planned to provide IT and social media 14 supports to participants through links that are being developed with the business school of Dublin City University. The staff in the partnership also pointed out that support will be offered on an ongoing basis to women who complete the course. Networking evenings organised by the partnership provide women with opportunities to network with other course participants and with women who have completed earlier courses. They also underline the support that the partnership will continue to give to them. One staff member commented: ‘we don’t want them to think oh I’ve done a training programme and that’s the end of it’. In discussions partnership staff appeared to be very positive and excited about the success of the course. One staff member noted ‘it’s been really, really, good’. The women were described as being vibrant and very motivated. It was commented that, ‘it doesn’t matter if there is hail, rain, snow, sun, or football matches on… there is always a full turn-out’. The partnership plans to publish a report on barriers to enterprise for women and to make it available to enterprise stakeholders seeking to promote women in enterprise. This initiative highlights the importance of monitoring participation on training courses and of developing initiatives to target gender imbalances in participation rates. It shows that courses that are appropriately tailored and advertised can encourage women to engage with employment and enterprise opportunities which they might perceive as being ‘male’. Bibliography: European Council, (2002) Presidency conclusions, Barcelona European Council, 15-16 March 2002, available at: http://ue.eu.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/ec/71025.pdf Gleeson J, R Kitchin, B Bartley and C Treacy (2009) New Ways of Mapping Social Inclusion in Dublin City. Dublin: Dublin City Partnerships, Dublin City Development Board and NIRSA. Haase T (2008) 'Key Profile for Dublin City', retrieved online on 11/11/2011 from http://www.pobal.ie Haase T and J Pratschke (2008) New Measures of Deprivation in the Republic of Ireland, February 2008, retrieved online on 11/11/2011 from http://www.pobal.ie NESF (2005) Care for Older People: NESF Report No. 32, November 2005. Dublin: NESF. OECD (2005) Long-Term Care for Older People. Paris: OECD. Office of the Ombudsman (2010) Who Cares? An investigation into the right to nursing home care in Ireland, Dublin: Office of the Ombudsman. 15 O'Shea E (2003) Review of the Nursing Home Subvention Scheme. Dublin: Stationery Office. Timonen V (2006) 'Responsibility for the Costs of Long-Term Institutional Care: A Comparative Perspective' in Older People in Modern Ireland: Essays on Law and Policy, E. O'Dell (ed.). Dublin: FirstLaw, pp427-449. Williams J, G Hughes, and S Blackwell (2005) Attitudes Towards Funding of Long-term care of the Elderly. Dublin: ESRI. WRC Social and Economic Consultants (2010) Towards an Employment and Skills Strategy for the Dublin City Region. Dublin: Dublin Employment Pact. Legislation: 2001 Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act (No. 45/2001) 2009 Nursing Homes Support Scheme Act (No. 15/2009) 16