Connect to Work Equality Analysis

Question 1

1.  Introduction

Accepted Answer

1. This document records the analysis undertaken by the Department to enable DWP to consider the needs of individuals in their day-to-day work - in shaping policies, making secondary legislation, delivering services, and in relation to their own employees to fulfil the requirements placed on them by the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) as set out in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

2. The PSED requires a public authority to have due regard to the need to:

eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act;
advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not; and
foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

3. The above requirements apply to eight of the nine protected characteristics – age, disability, sex reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. The protected characteristic of marriage and civil partnerships are slightly different in that the requirement is only in respect to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination.

4. In particular, paying due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity is very different from paying due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination. To help explain the difference please note that having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity involves considering the need for those with protected characteristics to

remove or minimise disadvantage
meet their needs
encourage participation in public life or in other activities where participation is low

Question 2

2.  Brief outline of policy or service and main aims and outcomes

Accepted Answer

5. The Government’s number one mission is to kickstart economic growth, so as to raise living standards for everyone and to enable investment and funding for public services. The Autumn Budget 2024 sets out seven ‘pillars’ for the Government’s growth mission, which includes a ‘People’ pillar built on more people in good jobs, with improved employed prospects, skills and productivity’ and a ‘Place’ pillar of improved regional growth through investment, devolution and reform ^{[footnote 1]}.

6. The Government’s plan to Get Britain Working and improve our labour market is central to the Growth mission: enabling more people to get into work and on in work and addressing regional disparities through greater devolution and local working^{[footnote 2]}. The Government has set a bold ambition to reach 80% employment, which will mean in particular enabling more people who are currently outside the labour force (defined as being ‘economically inactive’) or at risk of becoming economically inactive to stay in work or get into work. Whilst reasons for economic inactivity vary, there were, in November-January 2025, 2.0 million economically inactive people who want a job^{[footnote 3]}. Long-term sickness continues to be the most common reason for economic inactivity among the working age population. Disabled people and people with additional barriers to employment are a diverse group, so access to the right work and other integrated support, in the right place, at the right time, is vital.

7. For disabled people and disadvantaged groups (defined in paragraph 30 below) who have been out of work for some time, it can be challenging to obtain, and then remain, in a job. A wide range of employment support and initiatives are available at national and local level, commissioned not only by DWP but other bodies including local authorities and Health Boards with strong links to other support and services. This includes work to further join up employment and health systems, including rolling out Employment Advice in NHS Talking Therapies, testing the introduction of Employment Advisors into Musculoskeletal services, expanding Individual Placement and Support for Severe Mental Illness (IPS SMI) and reforming Occupational Health provision.

8. DWP has also invested in employment support to help disadvantaged groups into work, such as the Individual Placement and Support programme for drug and alcohol dependency, as well as working with Communities That Work and the Learning and Work Institute to trial the Jobs-Plus model, to understand the role that social housing providers can play in addressing key labour market challenges.

9. In the Get Britain Working White Paper, the Government set out ambitious plans for reform: to extend access to employment support, to improve the quality of that support, and to enable local areas to lead and drive action to tackle economic inactivity and extend opportunity^{[footnote 4]}. The Government also confirmed its commitment to expanding access to ‘Supported Employment’ – an evidence-based model for supporting disabled people and those with significant health conditions using a ‘place, train and maintain’ approach – through a new voluntary, locally led programme called Connect to Work. This is the first programme within the Government’s new Get Britain Working Fund and marks the first step towards greater devolution of responsibilities and funding for employment programmes to local areas.

10. Connect to Work support builds on the delivery of a number of existing and historic DWP funded programmes:

Local Supported Employment (LSE) – Supported Employment Quality Framework (SEQF)-based support for learning disabled and/or autistic adults.
Individual Placement and Support in Primary Care (IPSPC) – Individual Placement and Support based support for people with mental and physical health issues.
Individual Placement and Support for Alcohol and Drug Dependence (IPS-AD) – Between 2018 and 2021, first study of IPS for adults in treatment for alcohol and drug dependence, IPS - Alcohol and Drugs (IPS-AD), was run in 7 community treatment centres in England. It found that IPS helped more study participants achieve employment in the open job market than standard employment support ^{[footnote 5]}.This is now a programme beyond the trial, providing support coverage across 96% of England and hoping to receive funding to extend this to all of England for 26/27.
Work and Health Programme (WHP) Pioneer - Focuses on delivering some elements of the ‘place and train’ Supported Employment model by WHP providers within the constraints of WHP contracts. Referrals to WHP Pioneer ended in September 2024.

11. The key objective for Connect to Work is to help disabled people, people with health conditions, and those with more complex barriers to work who are outside the labour market who wish to be in employment, to find a suitable job and sustain work, using the evidence-based Supported Employment model. It will also help those in work who are at risk of falling out of the labour market (and who will struggle to get back into work if they lose their job) to retain their employment. This is consistent with the support being delivered through IPSPC and that previously delivered via the health-led trials.

12. Connect to Work takes a collaborative, locally led approach, with local areas able to determine how support is delivered locally, in line with local priorities. It supports the wider development of locally planned systems to drive growth, working jointly with the United Kingdom Government, and will be an important strand in local plans to tackle inactivity and expand employment opportunity.

13. Connect to Work went through a design and implementation phase that included impacting the draft policy design and processes with internal stakeholders, Local Authorities and an Expert Reference Group (ERG) made up of academics, trade bodies and supported employment experts and having extensive engagement with DWP’s local authority advisory groups. We also undertook external engagement with experts, customer groups and other stakeholders including employers.

Participant Journey

14. The Connect to Work programme follows the five-step supported employment model and will primarily provide support for out of work participants (85% of participants) with intensive employment support for up to 12 months. It will also include support for up to 4 months for people in-work who are at risk of losing their job (15% of participants). This time limit can be extended on a case-by-case basis where individuals are actively seeking employment or in need of continued support.

15. The support offer for the participant will include early access to jobs based on job preferences, access to a wide range of support including job and skills matching, on the job training and help to sustain employment. This might include job coaching at work, training, support from a workplace mentor and regular workplace reviews. Support is provided to the employer. Connect to Work will also provide tailored self-employment support where appropriate.

16. Participants will work with their advisors to complete a vocational profile, shaped around their skills, experiences and goals. Advisors will also complete full job profiles on opportunities with employers (built through direct engagement) and then begin matching these roles to participants. Once a role is matched and agreed, advisors will engage with employers to shape recruitment practices and job responsibilities, adapting the roles to the individuals, if needed. Advisors then act as a third-party advocate once successful in achieving a role for the participant, helping to support both the individual and the employer to maintain employment.

17. For those in work but at risk of falling out of employment and into economic inactivity, an in-work retention support offer has been included in the Connect to Work design that will give up to 4 months of support. This is a preventative measure which featured in the Health-Led Trials and is part of the IPSPC design.

18. To gain access to Connect to Work support, we expect potential participants to receive information about Connect to Work from a range of local contact points including primary health care and employers. Once a potential participant is aware of Connect to Work, they may submit an expression of interest (EOI) in participating. All EOIs are voluntary, and a potential participant may submit this themselves or with their consent a support organisation can submit on their behalf.

19. Employers are supported by employment specialists through direct employer engagement to identify vacancies, as well as job matching between the employees and employer. It will be ensured that employment specialists have the knowledge, skills, and experience to tailor their support to people from a range of groups which we know face disadvantage in the labour market, and the expertise to engage and work with groups which services have found harder to reach. Ongoing support will be provided to employers to help address any concerns or challenges that may arise during the employment relationship, working to ensure job retention and success. This could last up to 18 months, or for up to 6 months for in-work retention. Employers will also be upskilled about mental health and complex issues, reducing stigma, and understanding the capabilities of individuals with complex needs.

Delivery approach

20. Connect to Work will take a collaborative, locally led approach to tackling inactivity. Connect to Work funding will provide support in all areas of England and Wales.

21. From 2025/26 in England, it will be delivered by 43 lead local authorities (Accountable Bodies), and four Accountable Bodies will cover all of Wales on the basis of grant award by DWP. There will be a phased rollout of Connect to Work shaped by local authorities’ own timetables. Local areas will open their Connect to Work programmes through 2025. The first area, covering the seven West London Alliance delivery areas, opened for Expressions of Interest at the end of April 2025.

22. Funding is being provided from the Connect to Work budget to the Greater Manchester and West Midlands Combined Authorities in the new Integrated Settlement from 2025/26 to deliver separate supported employment provision in their areas. It is a matter for Greater Manchester and West Midlands to shape their support offer within the terms of the agreed settlement ^{[footnote 6]}.

23. Four more Established Mayoral Strategic Authorities were confirmed in the Autumn Budget 2024 to be eligible to receive an Integrated Settlement from 2026/27 – the North-East, South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire and Liverpool City Region. Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Governments (MHCLG) are considering how to apply the integrated settlement to London as well.

24. How Established Mayoral Strategic Authorities spend their Connect to Work funding through the integrated settlement is specified through a functional responsibility. For the 2025/26 settlement, that functional responsibility is: ‘Responsibility for supporting disabled people, people with long-term health conditions, and other agreed disadvantaged groups with complex barriers who are economically inactive, or at high risk of becoming economically inactive, to sustain work through delivery of supported employment’. As such, we can be confident that in 2025/26 Integrated Settlement areas will be supporting similar target groups with similar interventions to the national programme, and therefore the impact assessment is likely to still apply.

25. The Accountable Body for each of the delivery areas will be the grant recipient and represent the constituent upper tier (where appropriate) and unitary authorities in the area. Delivery Partners and DWP will be responsible for delivery of Connect to Work as outlined in their Delivery Plan. DWP will support, as necessary, the Accountable Bodies in developing Delivery Plans which will give all parties confidence around the quality of Connect to Work delivery. The Connect to Work Grant Guidance, including guidance to help Accountable Bodies develop their Delivery Plans, was published in November 2024 ^{[footnote 7]}. Extensive engagement with local authorities is ongoing to ensure all people who would benefit can access support consistently across all areas and that LAs are also meeting their duties under the PSED. Our expectation is that local organisations will adapt their approach to overcome any barriers to reaching all parts of the group we are targeting.

26. DWP is working closely with Welsh stakeholders, including the Welsh Government, to support the establishment of the Connect to Work programme in the four regions covering Wales. We are also working with the Welsh Government to determine how the funding will be managed in future given our longer-term commitment to devolve non-Jobcentre Plus employment support to the Welsh Government.

27. Provision of employment support for disabled people and those at risk of long-term unemployment is devolved to Scotland and they are provided funding allocated under the Barnett formula. The Scottish Government’s provision - ‘No One Left Behind’ (NOLB) will be run by Local Authorities in Scotland.

Participant Groups

28. DWP’s previous employment programmes for disabled people, identified them by reference to the definition in the Equality Act 2010 on the basis of a self-declaration that they considered themselves a disabled person. We think this definition is too narrow and will mean some people with health conditions who would benefit from support will miss out because they do not consider themselves disabled. We have therefore widened the definition to include the Social Model of Disability. This is also supported by Cabinet Office advice on the greater use of this definition across Government. Although, Disability as defined in the Equality Act 2010 is the protected characteristic, our expectation is that people who would self-declare with the wider Social Model of Disability definition would be treated equally as if they met the Equality Act definition.

29. Our starting point on agreeing the disadvantaged groups that should be eligible for Connect to Work has been the WHP “Early Access” disadvantaged Groups (EAGs). A small number of priority groups have been added to this list including victims of modern slavery. We are widening the definition of refugees within the EAG definition to include people displaced from other countries who do not have refugee status but have the right to work in the UK. Local areas will not have the flexibility to add to the list of groups in their areas but will be able to suggest groups that should be considered for adding at a national level and will be able to prioritise within these included groups to reflect local needs. This is because we want to ensure consistency of access to support for all individuals that would benefit from Connect to Work.

30. The proposed disadvantaged groups that will be eligible for Connect to Work are: an ex-offender (someone who has completed a custodial or community service), an offender (someone who is serving a community service), a carer, an ex-carer, people with experience of homelessness, a former member of His Majesty’s (HM) Armed Forces (AF), a member of the HM AF reserves, or a partner of current or former Armed Forces personnel, a person for whom a drug or alcohol dependency, including a history of dependency, presents a significant barrier to employment, a care leaver or a young person with care experience, a refugee, a resettled Afghan, a person on the Ukrainian Scheme, a victim of domestic abuse, young people identified as being involved or at risk of being involved in gangs or serious violence and a victim of modern slavery.

Eligibility and Suitability criteria

31. Accountable Bodies are responsible for identifying people who will meet i) the eligibility criteria (which is a factual assessment); and ii) the suitability criteria (which requires judgement of the individual’s circumstances), for Connect to Work within the criteria (as summarised below). Accountable Bodies will shape provision around priority groups, for those who meet the Eligibility and Suitability Criteria, to reflect local need and consideration of other employment support available within the Delivery Area.

32. To identify who would benefit from the intensive support that will be provided on Connect to Work, some key eligibility and suitability principles have been developed, which should be met for individuals to be referred to Connect to Work by recognised lead referral organisations and should support consistent opportunity to access Connect to Work across England and Wales. These key principles are that support should be targeted at the right people, at the right time based on an individual’s circumstances. LAs and local service partners will be responsible for referrals to provision, and they need to be able identify suitable, eligible individuals with reasonable confidence.

33. LAs will equally need to ensure that they meet their own responsibilities as public authorities under the PSED in identifying participants (including for example, through training and marketing) considering individuals’ support needs and making decisions on who is referred to Connect to Work. These criteria will therefore need to support consistency and equality of opportunity for consideration of who is referred across all LA areas (both by LAs and through other referral sources including JCP Work Coaches). We therefore want to find the balance between clear criteria that achieve Connect to Work objectives and value for money but allow local services to identify who within the eligible groups the Connect to Work offer is suitable for.

34. Individuals will be assessed for basic eligibility and suitability including that they meet the definition of one of the participant groups and that they meet all standard eligibility criteria. These include; they must not currently be doing any paid work and would be available to start a suitable job (looking for work only), or at risk of losing work (retention support only); not already participating in another DWP employment programme, are of working age, aged 18 or more in England (with some exceptions for people aged 16 or 17), or aged 16 or more in Wales and have the right to live and work in the UK.

35. Individuals who are eligible will then be considered if they are suitable. A set of suitability criteria has been developed that identify who will benefit from Connect to Work rather than other, or no, support. The criteria are split into two lists and to be suitable for Connect to Work, individuals will need to meet at least one criterion from both of the lists. People that do and also confirm that having considered the offer they are motivated to start Connect to Work and fully engage with support, will be eligible and suitable for Connect to Work and can be referred to the provision.

36. The suitability criteria are:

Employment situation

Individuals must fit at least one of the situations below:

1. Economically inactive or unemployed:

Person has not worked for around 6 months due to their disability, long term health condition or disadvantages ^{[footnote 8]}and feel they need comprehensive tailored employment support to help them to identify the right roles for their needs and to engage in effective job search towards work.

2. Employed but risk of dropping out of work:

Person is working/self-employed for at least 3 months and are struggling to sustain employment due to their disability, long term health condition or disadvantages.

3. Maintaining work:

Person has never worked or has a track record of struggling to retain jobs/sustain employment due to their disability, long term health condition or disadvantages.

Would benefit from connect to work support

Individuals must also fit at least one of the situations below.

1. Comprehensive tailored help:

Person is unlikely to be able to move into/retain paid work without very frequent, comprehensive and tailored support above and beyond standard provision (e.g. Info, advice, guidance, CV and application support) or other national provision including Restart.

2. Adaptability:

Person has previously, or is expected to, struggle with learning new skills or adapting to new environments due to their disability, long term health condition or disadvantages.

3. Integration:

Person needs employment support that is integrated with support for their other needs e.g. health services, probation, social care.

4. Job role and workplace:

Person will need employer flexibility to tailor the role and/or workplace to support with their disadvantages or disability or health condition.

5. Sustained work:

Person requires/will require significant support to retain work over and above standard reasonable adjustments.

Supported Employment Model

37. Connect to Work support will follow the five-step fidelity Supported Employment model. This model follows the main principle that anyone can be employed if they want paid employment or want to be self-employed and if sufficient support is provided. The model is a flexible and continuous process, designed to meet each person’s individual needs - and those of their employer. The 5 steps are:  

Engagement – An opportunity for jobseekers to find out about the supported employment model and make an informed choice on whether it is right for them. The advisors will begin to learn about the characteristics of the participant, and how they may be best supported into work or to retain work.
Vocational Profiling – A detailed and unique discovery and planning process that enables participants to identify what they want to achieve and work out a plan for getting there. 
Employer Engagement – The SE service identifies and engages local employers who could be interested in bringing new employees into their workplace with the support of supported employment. The SE advisor works out a plan with the employer on how they will support potential applicants through the recruitment process and in the workplace, with measures such as reasonable adjustments, or changing recruiting practices.
Job Matching – The advisor and participant work together to find vacancies and job opportunities that meet the participant’s employment goals. The advisor builds up vocational profiles of both the participant and the roles and uses these tools to match suitable vacancies.
On and Off the Job Support – The participant is supported to learn whilst in their role and to sustain their employment. For example, this support could include job coaching at work, training, support from a workplace mentor and regular workplace reviews. The participants are also encouraged to discuss longer term career planning and progression goals and are supported to make informed choices. The advisors will also support the employers with any issues as they arise, working as an advocate for the participant.

38. Connect to Work will deliver support based on two of the most recognised quality standards for Supported Employment, the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) and Supported Employment Quality Framework (SEQF) to ensure that there is a model which is suitable for all participants on Connect to Work. IPS integrates employment support alongside primary and secondary health services, and other support services.

39. This integration ideally occurs at a physical level, through co-location and other policies, where applicable. IPS is being utilised by DWP within the Individual Placement and Support in Primary Care (IPSPC) programme. SEQF is (as required) a more intensive intervention than IPS, due to the depth of support. In delivery terms, this may mean that a participant will receive more contact and support from their Employment Specialist. SEQF is being utilised by DWP within the Local Supported Employment (LSE) programme.

40. Extensive engagement with a wide range of expert stakeholders established that a single Supported Employment model would not be able to deliver for the wide and diverse support needs of Connect to Work participant groups without sacrificing integrity to the models. For example, adhering to the integrity of IPS may be less effective in achieving employment outcomes within some eligible participant groups, because integration with health and other support services would not meet their support needs. This applies to some participants facing learning difficulty and autism barriers, as well as those facing barriers to the labour market that are not health related. Connect to Work will therefore deliver support based on IPS and SEQF to ensure that there is a model which is suitable for all participants on Connect to Work. 

41. The Department is looking to build a high quality, national model of supported employment provision, empowering Accountable Bodies to deliver with appropriate flexibility to their local needs. A consistent national model ensures we are able to provide support for all eligible groups, with flexibility applied in the local context around local infrastructure and priorities. 

42. Certain routes for recruiting participants may be associated with disparities between ethnic groups across local areas. The experience of the COVID-19 pandemic was that there was differential impact between groups (e.g., with many ethnic minority groups affected more severely by the pandemic, compared to those of the White British group) and that this was related to communications and environmental issues. For example, Office for National Statistics (ONS) analysis has found that people living in large households were at higher risk from COVID-19 and noted that multi-generational households are more common among South Asian people. Connect to Work referral routes / outreach / marketing, etc. may therefore need to be adapted to reflect the communities we need to reach. Similar considerations may require work with employers e.g., to ensure that their recruitment practices are suitably inclusive, not just in relation to the groups as we define them (disability, health etc.) but more broadly.

Connect to Work volumes

43. Connect to Work funding will provide support for around 100,000 individuals each year at peak delivery including the Integrated Settlements areas. Distribution of volumes between Accountable Bodies will be driven by a formula. The Connect to Work Grant Formula determines each area’s share of total volumes and total funding. The Grant Formula has been designed to estimate shares of volumes and funding in a consistent and transparent way, using the same publicly available data sources with LA-level data for all areas as far as possible. Shares of total volumes are estimated based on an area’s working age population and demand indicators. The indicators are the proportion of the working age-population who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness, disability employment gap and measures of deprivation (the latter for disadvantaged groups participants). Shares of total funding are based on estimated volumes with cost adjustments to reflect variations in staffing and premises costs and the additional costs faced by rural areas.

44. The Grant Formula estimates for programme starts at peak and unit cost are indicative, with final volumes and funding to be set by agreement with Accountable Bodies of their Delivery Plans.

Question 3

3.  Considering United Nations Conventions

Accepted Answer

45. In undertaking the analysis that underpins this document, where applicable, the Department will take into account the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). In particular, the department has taken into account: 

46. Article 12 of the UNCRPD recognises that persons with disabilities have the right to recognition everywhere as persons before the law and appropriate measures to provide access to support they may require.

47. All 3 parts of Article 19 of the UNCRPD which recognises the equal rights of all disabled people to live in the community, with choices equal to others, and that the Department should take effective and appropriate measures to facilitate full enjoyment by disabled people of this right and their full inclusion and participation in the community.

48. Article 27 of the UNCRPD and in particular the promotion of employment opportunities and career advancement for persons with disabilities in the labour market, as well as assistance in finding, maintaining and returning to employment.

49. Individual with a disability is defined as those meeting the criteria set out in the Equality Act 2010. Individuals are considered disabled under the Equality Act 2010 if they have a physical or mental impairment that has a ‘substantial’ and ‘long-term’ negative effect on their ability to do normal daily activities. Definition of disability under the equality act 2010. 

50. In undertaking the analysis that underpins this document, where applicable, the Department will also take into account the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).

51. Further iterations of this document will be produced as the design progresses. The Public Sector Equality Duty is an on-going duty and once the detailed design proposals are settled, further consideration of the equality impacts will be undertaken.

Question 4

4.  Evidence and Analysis Impacts

Accepted Answer

52. The Equality Analysis uses the available evidence to assess the equality impacts of Connect to Work in relation to each of the protected characteristics. The Evidence and Analysis Impacts section focuses on evidence related to specific characteristics. The Summary of Analysis section provides an overview and discusses how the assessments provided relate to the three limbs of the Public Sector Equality Duty.

53. Equality Analyses are continually kept under review for the lifetime of a project and this document will therefore be subject to periodic updates and revisions, including where we identify opportunities to improve/update the analysis.

54. It is judged that it is most proportionate to assess the equality impacts of Connect to Work mainly through the lens of the policy achieving expected impacts on employment, earnings, health and wellbeing outcomes for Connect to Work participants overall, and to explore the equality implications of this (i.e. based on the make-up of the participant groups or variations in impacts). As with all interventions, there is a risk that Connect to Work may not achieve its expected impacts and/or may result in unintended consequences (for example, displacing employment outcomes for non-participants). DWP is focusing on assessing the equality impact of positive effects on participant outcomes because this is the expectation for the policy based on evidence from previous initiatives. DWP will undertake an evaluation of Connect to Work, which will consider whether the policy has achieved its objectives.

55. Absolute negative impacts from the intervention are not expected. Given this, the assessment of differential impacts (which considers who may access the programme in relation to protected characteristics) focuses on understanding where positive impacts fall and to what extent that this is proportionate.

56. Where differential impacts related to protected characteristics occur due to the composition of participant groups, this will mainly reflect variations (relative to the general population) in the characteristics of disabled people, people with long-term health conditions and disadvantaged groups. These groups are under-represented in the labour force, justifying the decision to deliver Connect to Work as an employment intervention which is disproportionately targeted at people in these groups rather than the general population. For a description of under-representation of disabled people in the labour force, please see the discussion of the disability employment gap in the Disability section below. In relation to disadvantaged groups, there is evidence that this population is disadvantaged in the labour market and that some participants may have multiple and complex barriers cutting across eligibility sub-groups. For example, a 2015 report from the Lankelly Chase Foundation found long-term exclusion from the labour market among people affected by homelessness, substance dependency or offending; this report also highlighted that, of people with these circumstances, 38% fell into at least two of the groups, with 10% affected by all three ^{[footnote 9]}.

57. For each protected characteristic, the Evidence and Analysis section is split into two:

Analysis. To provide insight on who is more likely to access, and therefore benefit from, support (due to expected impacts on employment, earnings, health and wellbeing), the Analysis sub-sections use evidence to demonstrate the composition (in relation to each protected characteristic) of the two major eligibility segments of the Connect to Work target population: (a) disabled people and people with long-term health conditions and (b) disadvantaged groups. Where the data allows, the discussion focuses on people likely to be eligible and suitable for Connect to Work based on their labour market status. Where relevant to identifying differential impacts, evidence on the eligible population is compared to the evidence on the general population.
Assessment. Using the available evidence discussed in each preceding Analysis sub-section, each Assessment sub-section summarises the overall judgement about the equality impact of Connect to Work for each protected characteristic, for example where the policy is expected to have a differential positive impact on a sub-group or to expand equal opportunity. Where there is particular uncertainty about potential impacts based on the available evidence, this is noted.

58. For the segment of the Connect to Work target population that is disabled or has a long-term health condition, the key data sources for analysis are breakdowns of people who were economically inactive due to long-term sickness in the 2021 Census, which supports analysis of the population using a wider range of variables relevant to some protected characteristics, and disabled people in the Annual Population Survey (APS), which is more up-to-date and provides better coverage of the total disabled population than the Census data, but covers fewer characteristics. In using the APS data, DWP is conscious that the Office for National Statistics has recommended that accreditation is withdrawn for their APS-based outputs; it is noted that APS results have been assessed as appropriately robust at a national level ^{[footnote 10]}. APS statistics in this EA are at the national level. It is necessary to use a wider range of sources for disadvantaged groups, which are defined in Connect to Work eligibility criteria but do not consistently align with statistical concepts.

59. The quality and coverage of data sources, related to both the eligible population and participants on previous provision, varies between the nine protected characteristics. In each case, the best-available evidence to enable the assessment has been selected as part of the analysis.

60. In the analysis below, a range of differential impacts are found across the protected characteristics. The differential impacts related to particular characteristics are generally justified by the labour-market disadvantages faced by the target population (in particular disabled people and people with long-term health conditions), where we have evidence on labour market status. In particular, the policy is expected to have a positive, disproportionate impact on disabled people. The Equality Analysis also finds that (a) given the expected absolute positive impacts for people who will be supported, Connect to Work will contribute to advancing equality of opportunity for people with protected characteristics associated with poorer labour-market outcomes and (b) the role of Employment Specialists in the Supported Employment models may foster positive relations between people with and without specific protected characteristics, in the context of the barriers to work suggested by the evidence. The Summary of Analysis provides a fuller overview.

Age

Age: Analysis

61. Data from the 2023/24 Annual Population Survey (APS) suggests that, among people of working age, disabled people and people with long-term health conditions are more likely to struggle to enter or remain in employment if they are aged over 50. For example, for the 16 to 64 population, the age group with the largest disability employment gap was 50 to 64 year olds (31.5 points) and the age group with the second-largest gap was 35 to 49 year olds (27.3 points)^{[footnote 11]}. Additionally, the Labour Force Survey (LFS) shows that, of people in the UK who were economically inactive due to long-term sickness in April 2024 to June 2024, 55% were aged 50 to 64 ^{[footnote 12]}. If the age breakdown of the disability and health segment of Connect to Work participants mirrors the composition of people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness (see Table 1 below), the programme may have a disproportionately positive impact on older age cohorts.

Table 1: Shares of working-age population, disabled people in employment (working-age), disabled people not in employment (working-age) and disabled people economically inactive due to long-term sickness (working-age) by age band in the Annual Population Survey UK estimates for 2023/24 ^{[footnote 13]}.

Total	Working-age population	Disabled people in employment	Disabled people not in employment	Disabled people economically inactive due to long-term sickness
16 to 17	4%	1%	4%	1%
18 to 24	13%	9%	14%	9%
25 to 34	22%	22%	15%	14%
35 to 49	30%	32%	22%	23%
50 to 64	32%	37%	45%	54%

62. Recruited participants, however, may have a different age profile to the eligible. For instance, the interim survey baseline data from Health-Led Trials (HLTs), a randomised controlled trial (RCT) in Sheffield City Region (SCR) and West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) which tested a forerunner to Connect to Work, shows that only 19% of participants were aged over 55, which was similar to the proportion of participants who were aged 25 to 34 (21%); this is set out in Table 2 below ^{[footnote 14]}. Similarly, Table 2 shows that the composition of participants on the Work and Health Programme (WHP) up to May 2024 was evenly distributed between age cohorts and similar to the HLTs. There are differences in the age-related breakdown of (a) the target population based on national survey evidence and (b) participants in relevant prior programmes.

Table 2: Shares of participants by age band on the Health-Led Trials and Work and Health Programme

	HLTs (referred in May 2018 to October 2019)^{[footnote 15]}	WHP (November 2017 to May 2024)^{[footnote 16]}	WHP Pioneer (September 2023 to May 2024)^{[footnote 17]}
17 to 24 (18 to 24 on WHP and WHP Pioneer)	16%	16%	18%
25 to 34	21%	22%	25%
35 to 44	19%	20%	23%
45 to 54	24%	21%	18%
55+	19%	21%	17%

63. Depending on the age range that this programme reaches, there is the potential that people aged 50 to 64 may be under-served relative to what might be expected based on economic and health status. If so, this may reflect the motivation of people in that group to access support (as Connect to Work is a voluntary programme) and/or to take up work (as part of the selection criteria will include confirming that the individual wants to work and will engage with support, as is the case with all Supported Employment programmes). While the rate of economic inactivity for those aged over 50 has fallen over time, ^{[footnote 18]} the overall rate of economic inactivity rises by age group. By launching a programme targeted at sickness-related inactivity like Connect to Work and designing this support to draw on a wider referral routes than prior provision, DWP is increasing the possibility people of all ages will be successfully recruited.

64. The available evidence from the HLTs ^{[footnote 19]} and international IPS scholarship ^{[footnote 20]} suggests that there is the potential for impacts of receiving support to vary by age group, but the relevant studies do not provide strong evidence that this will be the case or which age groups will benefit relatively less.

65. There is a lack of data which provides splits of specific disadvantaged groups by age and labour market status, which makes it challenging to assess the age profile of participants who may benefit from the service as part of this eligibility route. We can, however, provide insights related to age demographics for some of the specific disadvantaged groups:

Homeless people: According to the statutory homelessness tables for England, based on data submitted by LAs, 72% of main applicants assessed as ‘owed a duty by local authority’ in each age group were aged under 45 in provisional figures^{[footnote 21]}. If Connect to Work homeless participants resemble statutory homelessness main applicants, rather than the general population estimates of 46% under 45, we may expect a higher proportion of this group who access the service may have experience of homelessness ^{[footnote 22]}

Table 3: Proportion of main applicants assessed as owed a prevention of relief duty by local authority population in England and Wales aged 16+ years, compared to the proportion of the general population by age range.

Age Category	Percentage of Homeless Population	Percentage of 16+ population in age bracket by ONS estimates
16-17	1%	2%
18-24	17%	10%
25-34	29%	16%
35-44	25%	16%
45-54	15%	15%
55-64	8%	16%
65-74	3%	12%
75+	1%	11%

People with a drug or alcohol dependency: The Adult Substance Misuse Treatment Statistics 2023 to 2024 for England show that the age distribution for people receiving treatment for substance misuse including both drugs (opiates and non-opiates) and alcohol ^{[footnote 23]} reflects the overall population. The report notes that 61% of those accessing treatment were aged 40 or over, compared to 60%% of the overall population, but reflecting the aging cohort of opiate users ^{[footnote 24]}. Only 14% of those receiving treatment were aged 18-30 (relative to 20% of the total 16+ population), with the highest age-group shares being 35-39 (15%), 40-44 (18%) and 45-49 (15%) – indicating that, if participants from this disadvantaged group resembled the breakdown of those treated, access to Connect to Work may be highest among those in middle age. The report indicates that the proportion of people starting treatment who are older than 40 has increased over time ^{[footnote 25]} If this continues, the population with substance misuse problems may be relatively older in the future than it was in 2023/24. Comparing this to ONS population statistics which indicate that 52% of the working aged population in England and Wales were aged 40 and over, we may expect a higher proportion of service users in this age group to have had experience with drug or alcohol dependency.
Ex-offenders: There is no suitable breakdown by age band available for ex-offenders specifically. If the March 2025 England and Wales statistics for sentenced prisoners are used indicatively, they show the following split in prisoner ages ^{[footnote 26]}, which can be compared to 2023 ONS population estimates ^{[footnote 27]} in Table 4. Of sentenced prisoners, 55% were aged 30-49, so Connect to Work participants who are ex-offenders may be more likely to be in this age range. This evidence has limitations, e.g. those who have finished sentences may be older and this may not reflect ex-offenders who have completed community sentences. Comparing this to 2023 ONS population estimates, proportions of sentenced prisoners in age groups 20-49 are higher than those of the general population, and slightly less likely amongst older and younger age groups.

Table 4: Proportion of total prison population in England and Wales aged 15+ years, compared to the proportion of the general population by age range.

Age category	Percentage of total prison population	Percentage of the 15+ population by ONS estimates
15 to 20	4%	9%
21 to 24	9%	6%
25 to 29	15%	8%
30 to 39	33%	17%
40 to 49	21%	15%
50 to 59	11%	16%
60 to 69	5%	13%
70+	2%	17%

Persons on the Ukrainian scheme: Of those arriving on the Ukraine schemes by end of June 2024, 28% were under 18, 67% were 18 to 64 and 6% were 65 or older ^{[footnote 28]} As the younger Ukrainians arriving in Britain reach working age, it is expected that there may be an over-representation of younger people in demand for employment support for this disadvantaged group. Of the total population of England and Wales, 21% were aged under 18 in 2023, so we may expect persons on the Ukrainian scheme to be overrepresented in the younger age groups seeking CtW support.
Refugees: For refugees aged between 18 and 69, approved in 2023, 55% were aged 18 to 29 (23% of whole population), 40% aged 30 to 49 (41% of whole population), 4% aged 50 to 69 (32% aged 50-65 in general population)^{[footnote 29]}. If Connect to Work refugee demand mirrors this population, the support provided by the service for refugees is likely to be concentrated among younger age groups with only a small proportion of refugees overall being over 50. We can therefore expect refugees to be overrepresented in the younger age bands compared to the general working age population.
Carers: According to the 2021 Census, the proportion of people in England and Wales aged 16 to 64 who are unpaid carers by age range can be found in Table 5, below ^{[footnote 30]} If carers recruited to Connect to Work resemble the characteristics of unpaid carers overall, the support provided for carers is likely to disproportionately help people in older age groups.

Table 5: Proportion of people in England and Wales aged 16 to 64 who are unpaid carers by age range, compared to the proportion of the general population by age range.

Age Range	Unpaid Carers	General Population
16 to 24	7%	17%
25 to 34	13%	21%
35 to 49	31%	31%
50 to 64	49%	31%

Former Armed Forces: In the 2021 Census, among people in England and Wales who had previously served in the UK Armed Forces aged 16 to 64, 55% were aged 50 to 64 (compared to 30% for those who had not served in UK Armed Forces) and shares of veterans by age band tend to rise with age ^{[footnote 31]} As such, to the extent that veterans enrolled in Connect to Work are similar in this respect to all veterans, we would expect support for this group to have a disproportionate impact on those aged over 50.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, 4.8% of the population had experience domestic abuse (compared to 4.4% in 2023) ^{[footnote 32]}. The proportions of people who were victims of domestic abuse by age band were:

Age Range	Victims of Domestic Abuse (2024)	Victims of Domestic Abuse (2023)
16 to 19	8.7%	8.0%
20 to 24	7.1%	6.0%
25 to 34	5.1%	4.9%
35 to 44	5.1%	5.3%
45 to 54	4.8%	4.2%
55 to 59	3.8%	4.4%
60 to 74	4.0%	3.2%
75 years and over	2.1%	1.4%
All people aged over 16	4.8%	4.4%

Prevalence was highest amongst 16 to 19 and 20 to 24 year-olds.
Although the percentage of people who were victims of domestic abuse was additionally above the 4.8% overall prevalence rate among people aged 35 to 44 and people aged 25 to 35.
If victims/survivors of domestic abuse recruited to Connect to Work resemble the wider population, the impact of support for this group may be relatively greater for younger age bands relative to older age bands.
Care leavers: The Department for Education provides statistics for care experienced young people (care leavers) aged 17-25. Care experience is defined as having been looked after for a total of at least 13 weeks after their 14th birthday, including some time after their 16th birthday. Local Authorities have a duty to contact and offer support to care leavers aged 17-21. For those aged 22-25 the LA has a duty to support if the care leaver contacts and requests it. In March 2024, 55% (50,680) of care leavers were aged 17 to 21 (amounting to 1% of the total population of England and Wales for this age group21, and 45% (42,300) were aged 22 to 25 (or 1% of the total population in this age group). There were an additional 22,620 children aged 16+ currently still looked after but who may be expected to join the workforce and become eligible for this programme in the future ^{[footnote 33]}. It is expected that there may be an over-representation of younger people in demand for employment support for this disadvantaged group.

66. Suitable data regarding the age of certain disadvantaged groups, such as young people at risk of being involved in serious violence, victims of modern slavery, or resettled Afghans, was not available. It can be inferred that young people at risk of being involved in serious violence would be in lower age groups.

Age: Assessment

67. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed will not treat people less favourably based on age. (the eligibility criteria include justified provisions which limit access for 16 and 17 year-olds in England, discussed below)
Differential impacts from participant access to support relative to the general population: If the policy intention to tackle sickness-related inactivity is fully realised, there may be differences in impacts by age group due to the relationship between age, health and economic status. Specifically, in that scenario, there may be a disproportionate positive impact on older people relative to their share of the general population. Based on engagement in previous programmes however, and given the disparate age-group composition of different disadvantaged groups, it cannot be assumed that Connect to Work participants will have the same age structure as the target population of those economically inactive due to long-term sickness. As such, the extent to which older working age people will disproportionately benefit is uncertain.
Differential impacts arising from participant access to support relative to the potentially eligible population: Based on the evidence about who was recruited to the HLTs and WHP, relative to their share of the working-age population that is economically inactive due to long-term sickness, people aged 50 to 64 will be under-represented among out-of-work Connect to Work participants accessing the service for disability and health reasons. Therefore, that the positive benefit that they will receive will be proportionately less than their share of the potentially eligible population.
Potential differences in impacts of delivered support: There is a broader risk that the effectiveness of support for recruited participants will vary based on age, but there is insufficient evidence to predict variations for specific age groups. The Connect to Work design reflects the need for tailoring of support to account for the employment goals (e.g. types of work) and skills of participants.
Advancing equality of opportunity: People aged 50 to 64 are more likely to be economically inactive, including due to long-term sickness, and the disability employment gap is largest for those aged 50 to 64, followed by those aged 35 to 49 (see figures discussed above). This reflects an inequality between younger and older people in this context. Where the service has a positive impact on employment and earnings for older participants, this may reduce labour-market disadvantages that they experience due to age.
Fostering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding. To the extent that older people face barriers related to societal perceptions of age, health and work, Supported Employment (including through job matching and job development) may result in positive relations by developing a more accurate understanding of the types of work appropriate for each person based on their aspirations and abilities.

68. The Connect to Work eligibility criteria include provisions excluding 16- and 17-year-olds in England from accessing Connect to Work except where exceptional circumstances exist ^{[footnote 34]}. The restrictions on access for 16- and 17-year-olds in England are justified because young people are legally required to be in education or training until 18. The recognition for exceptional circumstances serves to mitigate any detriment.

69. It is intended to collect information on participant age via the programme evaluation and to undertake analysis of outcomes by age as far as possible, subject to any applicable considerations (e.g. survey sample sizes and data quality).

Disability

Disability: Analysis

70. The policy aim of this programme is to have a disproportionately positive impact on disabled people, a protected characteristic. This differential impact is justified because disabled people are under-represented in the labour force, e.g. there was 27.5 ppt gap between the employment rates of disabled people and non-disabled people in Q3 2024 ^{[footnote 35]}. The eligibility criteria and presentation of the programme are explicitly targeted at disabled people (alongside people in disadvantaged groups). APS estimates indicate that 23% of working age adults in the UK had a disability in 2023/24 ^{[footnote 36]}. By contrast, 77% of people who have started on WHP since November 2022 have been in the Disability Group (meaning that they met the definition of disability as defined in the Equality Act 2010), compared to 23% in the Early Access Group (the groups covered by the Early Access Group provided the starting point for the Connect to Work disadvantaged groups). Informed by the WHP evidence (whilst bearing in mind differences in eligibility criteria, referrals and branding), the Connect to Work Grant Formula uses weightings of 75% and 25% for the disability/health and disadvantaged groups components of the Connect to Work population (some participants will also be disabled and in one of the disadvantaged groups). Thus, there is an expectation that the share of disabled participants on Connect to Work will exceed the disabled share of the working-age population, and this is built into the Connect to Work design.

71. To the extent that the programme directs out-of-work support specifically towards people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness (to a greater extent than previous DWP disability employment programmes), Connect to Work is likely to have a highly disproportionate positive impact on disabled people. Connect to Work has been designed to ensure that out-of-work support reaches people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness or have similar needs. (This is reflected in the tailoring of the suitability criteria and in the Grant Formula for developing estimates of volumes per Delivery Area.) In the APS UK estimates, 96% of people who identified long-term sickness as their main reason for being economically inactive in 2023/24 were disabled and this proportion was stable at close to this level during the preceding 10 years ^{[footnote 37]}. This underlines that the emphasis of out-of-work support, on tackling economic inactivity due to long-term sickness, will disproportionately provide support to disabled people.

72. The in-work retention support offer is also likely to be disproportionately accessed by, and therefore disproportionately benefit, disabled people. The suitability criteria focus support on people who are working but are struggling to retain employment for reasons related to disability, a long-term health condition or disadvantage. Sickness absence is the best-available proxy for people who are working but struggling to retain work. LFS evidence at UK level shows that the sickness absence rate for disabled people in 2022 was 7.5%, compared to the sickness absence rate of 1.7% for non-disabled people ^{[footnote 38]}. Given the disability gap in sickness absence rates, Connect to Work in-work retention support is likely to have a disproportionately positive impact on disabled people.

73. Connect to Work will provide Supported Employment to disadvantaged groups as well as disabled people and people with long-term health conditions. This reflects the need to provide employment support to people with complex barriers to work. Based on available data, it is expected that a high share of Connect to Work participants in disadvantaged groups may also be disabled. This means that disabled people are likely to be a higher proportion of participants who are in disadvantaged groups than the general population and may particularly benefit from support from disadvantaged groups (as well as from support for eligibility groups expressly related to health and disability). For example, in the European Social Fund evaluation (ESF) qualitative case study research, evidence (including qualitative insights from staff feedback, and separately MI forming part of the prison and probation service case study) reflected the high prevalence of health conditions (particularly mental health conditions) among people with other types of barriers to work (e.g. housing) ^{[footnote 39]}. The co-occurrence of health barriers to employment, among people with other barriers, indicates that a subset of participants is likely to be both disabled and in a disadvantaged group, as opposed to the two cohorts being wholly distinct. This point is underlined by data on disability status and health conditions for some specific disadvantaged groups:

Carers: In the 2021 Census, 27.5% of unpaid carers in England and 29.8% of unpaid carers in Wales were disabled, compared to 17.8% of people who were not unpaid carers in England and 21.4% of people who were not unpaid carers in Wales ^{[footnote 40]}.
People with a drug or alcohol dependency: The Adult Substance Misuse Treatment Statistics 2023 to 2024 report notes that 72% of people starting drug or alcohol treatment in 2022/23 reported a need for mental health treatment ^{[footnote 41]}. While this does not provide data on the proportion that were disabled, it indicates the association between this characteristic and having a mental health condition.
Former Armed Forces and partners of former Armed Forces: Data from the 2021 Census for England and Wales shows that, for people aged 16 years and older, 32.1% of people who previously served in the UK Armed Forces were disabled, compared to 19.6% of people who never served in the UK Armed Forces ^{[footnote 42]}. The Census data also shows that 26.1% of spouses of UK Armed forces veterans were disabled ^{[footnote 43]}.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, 9.2% of disabled people were victims of domestic abuse compared to 3.9% of people who were not disabled ^{[footnote 44]}
Care leavers: Department for Education statistics show that in March 2024, 7% of care leavers aged 17-21 were not in Education, Training or Employment owing to illness or disability, and 5% of care leavers aged 22-25 ^{[footnote 45]}. Research from Coram Voice indicates that 13% of care leavers were recorded as having a disability according to Local Authorities, but when asked directly over a quarter (27%) self-reported as having a disability or long-term health condition ^{[footnote 46]}. According to 2021 Census data, 11.3% of young people aged 15-19, and 13.2% aged 21-24 were disabled in the general population of England ^{[footnote 47]}.
Homeless: Statutory Homelessness statistics show that 54% of households initially assessed as threatened with homelessness (owed prevention duty) or homeless (owed relief duty) report having 1 or more support needs. 19% reported having physical ill health and disability, 26% reported a history of mental health problems, and 6% reported a learning disability ^{[footnote 48]}.

74. As well as the direct positive impacts on disabled Connect to Work participants from accessing Connect to Work, and the outcomes which result from the support provided, the influence of Connect to Work on advancing equality of opportunity for disabled people will depend in part on how the Supported Employment model is received and experienced within communities and by employers.

75. If Connect to Work participants who are disabled resemble the wider disabled population, we would expect Connect to Work to particularly support people with mental health conditions or musculoskeletal conditions as a main or secondary condition. APS has found that among disabled people, a mental health condition (44%) was the most frequently reported main or secondary health condition, followed by a musculoskeletal condition (41%) ^{[footnote 49]}(Mental health conditions include depression, bad nerves, anxiety, mental illness, or other nervous disorders. Musculoskeletal conditions include problems or disabilities connected with the arms, hands, legs, feet, back or neck.)

76. There is a realistic prospect, however, that Connect to Work participants who are disabled will have a different breakdown of conditions compared to disabled people in general. There may also be greater co-morbidity among potential Connect to Work participants. The HLTs baseline data for interim survey respondents showed that 84% of respondents reported a mental health condition and that 58% of respondents reported conditions related to arms, hands, legs, feet, neck or back ^{[footnote 50]} This suggests that higher shares of Connect to Work participants may have mental health conditions and, to a lesser extent, musculoskeletal conditions, relative to the disabled population overall (44% and 41%, see the preceding paragraph). A key context for this is that the HLTs baseline data for interim survey respondents also showed that 52% of participants had six or more long-term health conditions, and that an additional 36% of participants had three to five long-term health conditions ^{[footnote 51]}. By comparison, APS results for 2023/24 estimated that only 15% of disabled people had 5 or more long-term health conditions and that only 36% had 3 or more long-term health conditions ^{[footnote 52]}.

77. If the population accessing Connect to Work mirrors the level of co-morbidity seen in the HLTs rather than the disabled population overall, then the most common condition groups (mental health, musculoskeletal) may be over-represented among Connect to Work disabled participants relative to all disabled people. The HLTs accepted referrals in 2018 and 2019 in two city regions and had different eligibility and suitability criteria to Connect to Work, so Connect to Work may differ in this regard. Nonetheless, the HLTs suggests that co-morbidity among Connect to Work participants will be high. If the breakdown of Connect to Work participants’ conditions resembles that of HLTs participants, there may be disproportionate positive impacts on disabled people who have a high level of co-morbidity and/or on disabled people with musculoskeletal and especially mental health conditions. If many Connect to Work participants have multiple and complex needs (including multiple health conditions and disadvantages) to a greater extent than the disabled population overall, a disproportionate focus on this group is likely to be justified by their needs.

78. Within the HLTs, there were differences in the prevalence of specific health conditions among people in the SCR in-work trial group compared to the SCR out-of-work trial group. For example, 72% of SCR in-work interim survey respondents had fatigue, concentration or memory conditions, compared to 61% of the SCR out-of-work trial group ^{[footnote 53]}.Thus, the inclusion of an in-work retention support might be particularly likely to benefit people with fatigue, concentration or memory conditions.

79. Given the barriers faced by disabled people in entering, retaining and sustaining employment, the expected differential positive impact of Connect to Work on disabled people will improve equality of opportunity for disabled people who access the programme. In the context of the number of disabled people not in employment (4.4m) ^{[footnote 54]} the number of Connect to Work disabled participants who obtain additional employment outcomes is likely to be small given the size of the programme and the expectation that only a subset will obtain employment outcomes additional to the counterfactual. There may be consequences for equality of opportunity beyond outcomes which directly result from support, e.g. if employers adopt an inclusive approach and make long-term changes as a result. (A systematic review found that hiring disabled people leads to increased profit, market advantages and improved work environment ^{[footnote 55]}. Where that is so, supporting employers to realise these benefits in the first instance may incentivise wider changes). Overall, a positive effect on equality of opportunity is expected, but the magnitude of this impact is unclear.

80. By supporting and empowering disabled people to successfully participate in work, Connect to Work is likely to contribute to the inclusion of disabled people in society, fostering positive relations between disabled and non-disabled people. The Supported Employment model that the Connect to Work will deliver includes employer engagement and job matching to secure appropriate opportunities, and ongoing support to participants and employers for a participant placed in a role. Qualitative research with employers has highlighted the value that employers place on Employment Specialists in a Supported Employment service fulfilling ‘broker’, ‘guide’ and ‘troubleshooter’ roles, both preventing and resolving problems ^{[footnote 56]}. The Connect to Work policy design reflects that on, and off, the job support provided by Employment Specialists should include support to build inclusive workplace culture, to act as an advocate for the participant and to promote career development. If this is achieved as intended, the intervention provides a framework for fostering positive relations which extends beyond initially attaining additional employment outcomes.

Disability: Assessment

81. The following judgements are made:

Intended differential positive impact on disabled people relative to the share of the general population: Disabled people are substantially more likely to be supported, and therefore positively impacted, by Connect to Work than non-disabled people. There is a higher overlap between disability and many of the disadvantaged groups than the general population, further increasing this impact, this applies to both the out-of-work and in-work retention support offers. This is intended and is justified as disabled people are under-represented in the labour force and in employment. Those with a disability are also over-represented in other disadvantaged groups, further increasing the positive impact on this group.
Differential impacts based on type of health condition or impairment: Connect to Work is particularly likely to support disabled people with mental health conditions and people with musculoskeletal conditions, as these are the two largest long-term health condition groups in the disabled population. Based on the HLTs evidence, and the prevalence of mental health conditions in some of the disadvantaged groups, there is also the potential that these groups (especially people with mental health conditions) will be over-represented among Connect to Work participants relative to their shares of the disabled population, but the extent to which Connect to Work participants will resemble HLTs participants in this respect is uncertain.
Advancing equality of opportunity: The participation of disabled people in employment is disproportionately low (in the context of the disability employment gap noted above). If this programme achieves the expected positive impacts on the employment of disabled participants, this will expand employment opportunity for disabled people and contribute to overcoming the substantial disadvantages that disabled people suffer in the labour market.
Fostering good relations: Connect to Work is likely to contribute to strengthening relations between disabled and non-disabled people, by supporting the successful inclusion of disabled people in the workplace within the support offer for the out-of-work and in-work retention cohorts. For example, Employment Specialists may ensure that disabled people are in roles which are likely to have successful long-term outcomes based on their aspirations, promote employer understanding of reasonable adjustments required and identify solutions to challenges that would otherwise undermine relationships.

Gender Reassignment

Gender Reassignment: Analysis

82. The evidence on gender identity suggests that people who are undergoing, or who propose to undergo, a process for the purpose of reassigning their sex are more likely to have long-term health conditions and to encounter health-related disadvantages in the labour market. Evidence from the English General Practice Patient Survey has shown that transgender people are considerably more likely to report having a long-term mental health condition ^{[footnote 57]}. Health characteristics appear to be reflected by need for employment support and representation within the population potentially eligible for Connect to Work. In the 2021 Census in England and Wales (among usual residents aged 16 or over who answered the question on gender identity), 7% of people whose gender identity was different from sex recorded at birth were economically inactive due to a long-term health condition or disability, a larger share than 4% of people whose gender identity was the same as sex registered at birth ^{[footnote 58]}. This evidence indicates that people with this protected characteristic are more likely to be economically inactive due to long-term sickness. Please note the limitations of the Census evidence related to gender identity, discussed in paragraph 85 below.

83. Overall, people whose gender identity is different from sex recorded at birth, are more likely to meet eligibility and suitability criteria related to disability or long-term health condition status and labour-market situation. As such, if the programme is effective in recruiting all parts of its intended target population, we would expect people with this protected characteristic to be more likely to access support provided to disabled people and people with long-term health conditions, and therefore to particularly benefit from the Connect to Work programme. 

84. For some of the specific Connect to Work disadvantaged groups, we have evidence on the proportion of the potentially eligible population whose gender identity is different from sex recorded at birth. This data may indicate the impact of providing access to the service, for these specific groups, in relation to this protected characteristic. For instance, the evidence indicates that people whose gender identity is different from sex recorded at birth may be under-represented to a small extent among carers and UK Armed Forces veterans relative to the general population, whereas this group may be over-represented among victims/ survivors of domestic abuse. This data, however, does not account for labour market status and has wider limitations (discussed in paragraph 85 below). The evidence relates to the following groups:

Carers: In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, for people aged 16 or over, 10% of people whose gender identity was the same as sex recorded at birth were unpaid carers (for any amount of time), compared to 9% of people whose gender identity was different from sex recorded at birth with no specific identity given in the response; 9%of all people who identify as trans men were unpaid carers and 11% of all trans women were unpaid carers, with an overall rate of 9% for the latter three groups combined ^{[footnote 59]}.
Former Armed Forces: 94.1% of UK Armed Forces veterans answered the 2021 Census question on gender identity, out of which 0.3% reported that the gender identity was different from sex recorded at birth, below 0.5% for people who were not UK Armed Forces veterans ^{[footnote 60]}.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, for people aged 16 or over, the percentage of transgender people who had been victims of domestic abuse was 9.8% compared to 4.7% for cisgender people ^{[footnote 61]}.

85. The range of data available for assessing characteristics and outcomes associated with gender reassignment is limited. Data quality may also be affected by non-response (including the 2021 Census data cited above) and other limitations (such as respondent errors in question interpretation). The ONS has highlighted the limitations of the Census-based gender identity statistics, particularly for sub-national or smaller sub-group breakdowns of the data ^{[footnote 62]}. Overall, the national-level evidence from the 2021 Census, and related to specificity eligibility groups (such as evidence on health condition prevalence from the English General Practice Survey), provides assurance that the analysis presents relevant insight.

Gender Reassignment: Assessment

86. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on gender reassignment.
Differential impacts: If Connect to Work disabled and long-term sick participants resemble the composition of the potentially eligible population in this respect, the service delivered to disabled people and people with long-term health conditions is relatively more likely to be accessed by people whose gender identity is different from sex recorded at birth. Based on that evidence, but subject to the caveats related to the available data, we expect Connect to Work to have a positive differential impact on people with this protected characteristic overall. This differential impact is justified by the employment support needs of this group. Subject to the limitations identified, there may also be differential impacts related to specific disadvantaged groups, including in line with the evidence above (e.g. support for victims/survivors of domestic abuse may be more likely to include people whose gender identity is different from sex recorded at birth).
Advancing equality of opportunity: People with this protected characteristic are more likely to be economically inactive due to long-term sickness than the working-age population. This group therefore faces disproportionate health-related barriers to work. By delivering employment support for people with these barriers, Connect to Work may extend opportunity by reducing the extent of the disadvantage faced in participating in the labour force.
Fostering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding (among Connect to Work participants and employers), including in contexts where gender reassignment intersects with disability and specific disadvantaged groups relevant to Connect to Work. As people with this protected characteristic are disproportionately likely to be economically inactive due to a long-term health condition, Employment Specialists may be able to promote understanding of reasonable adjustments required to support participant needs.

87. The Connect to Work evaluation is not expected to capture data regarding gender reassignment. This is based on a proportionality assessment which considers, in relation to the insight that could be gained, the burden (of collecting additional information) on participants who participate in surveys and programme data collection, and local authorities and providers which must collate and report Management Information. Minimising burden is an ethical requirement for research, as well as being important to maximise response rates and to ensure that expectations on local partners are feasible to meet. There is also a consideration that some participants may find questions related to this protected characteristic to be sensitive or intrusive in the context of an employment programme evaluation.

Marriage and Civil Partnership

Marriage and Civil Partnership: Analysis

88. Evidence is considered about the relationship between this protected characteristic and economic inactivity due to long-term sickness (which is an indicator of demand for Connect to Work disability/health out-of-work support). Based on data from the 2021 Census for England and Wales (shown in Table 6 below), there is a higher prevalence of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness among people who were never married and, to an even greater extent, people who have divorced or had a civil partnership dissolved, separated, or been widowed/survived their civil partnership partner. These groups are therefore expected to be more likely to access Connect to Work via disability/health eligibility route and therefore benefit from support. By comparison, people who are married or in a civil partnership have a lower rate of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness than the working-age population overall. Thus, based on this evidence of need, we would expect relatively fewer people who are married or in a civil partnership to access the Connect to Work service.

Table 6: Rate of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness by marital status for working-age population, 2021 Census in England and Wales ^{[footnote 63]}.

Marital and civil partnership status	Rate of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness for the working-age population
Widowed or surviving civil partnership partner	12.3%
Divorced or civil partnership dissolved	9.7%
Separated, but still legally married or still legally in a civil partnership	9.5%
Never married and never registered a civil partnership	5.2%
All	4.7%
Married or in a registered civil partnership	2.7%

89. We have evidence on marital status for some of the Connect to Work disadvantaged groups, with variations in potential differential impacts depending on the composition of each group. Any differential impacts will depend on the composition of those who are recruited (and therefore benefit from support), which may be affected by labour market status (which the statistics below on the marital status of these groups do not capture). The groups for which we have suitable evidence on marital status are:

Carers: In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, most unpaid carers were married or in a civil partnership. People who provided 50 or more hours of unpaid care had the highest percentage of people who were “married or in a registered civil partnership” in England (53.0%) and Wales (53.5%) ^{[footnote 64]}. This suggests that providing support for carers, a Connect to Work disadvantaged group, may have a differential positive impact on people who married or in a civil partnership, if those recruited to support resemble the characteristics of carers overall in this respect.
Former Armed Forces: In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, a smaller share of UK Armed Forces veterans had never been married or in a civil partnership (14.6%) compared to people who were not veterans (38.8%), whereas higher shares of veterans than non-veterans were married or in a civil partnership, divorced or in a dissolved civil partnership, or widowed or a surviving partner in a civil partnership ^{[footnote 65]}. If veterans recruited to Connect to Work reflect the composition of veterans overall, then support for veterans, a Connect to Work disadvantaged group, may have a positive differential impact on people who are married or in a civil partnership, divorced or in a dissolved civil partnership, or widowed or a surviving partner in a civil partnership.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, the shares of people who had been a victim of domestic abuse for those aged 16 or over by marital status were: 2.5% for people who were married or in a civil partnership, 5.1% for those who were cohabiting, 7.6% for those who were single, 15.0% for those who were separated, 11.8% for those who were divorced or had a legally dissolved partnership, and 2.4% for those who were widowed, compared to 4.8% for all people aged 16 or over ^{[footnote 66]}. This suggests that the largest positive differential impacts of support for this disadvantaged group are likely to be for people who are separated, then people who are divorced or have a legally dissolved partnership, then single people, if those recruited to the service reflect the composition of victims/survivors of domestic abuse overall in respect of marital status.

Marriage and Civil Partnership: Assessment

90. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on marriage and civil partnership status.
Differential impacts: If Connect to Work disabled and long-term sick participants reflect the composition of the potentially eligible population in this respect, the service overall is expected to have a differential positive impact on people who are divorced or have had a civil partnership dissolved, who are separated, and who are widowed or a surviving civil partnership partner. People who are married or in a civil partnership are relatively less likely to benefit from support for disabled and long-term sick participants. There may also be differential impacts related to access to the service for specific disadvantaged groups. For example, carers and veterans are more likely to be married than non-carers and non-veterans respectively, there may be a relative positive impact on married people from support for those groups, but that is not generalisable to disadvantaged groups overall.
Advancing equality of opportunity: Not being married/in a civil partnership and especially having previously been married/in a civil partnership and no longer being married/in a civil partnership, is associated with health-related disadvantages in the labour market. It follows that, by delivering disability employment support, Connect to Work may contribute to advancing equality of employment opportunity for groups which are suffering from a disadvantage in the labour market for reasons associated with their marital status.
Fostering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding. This may include contexts where marriage or civil partnership status intersects with the Connect to Work eligibility criteria, including related to sickness-related inactivity or disadvantaged group status (where an association is suggested by the data).

91. A decision regarding whether the Connect to Work evaluation could gather information regarding marriage and civil partnership will be taken as part of the evaluation design, based on an assessment of the appropriateness, feasibility and proportionality of doing so. The Equality Analysis will be updated as early as possible to capture this decision and rationale.

Pregnancy and Maternity

Pregnancy and Maternity: Analysis

92. There is not suitable data to assess the prevalence of this protected characteristic among participants in relevant previous employment programmes or the potentially eligible population. (For example, data on pregnancy and maternity was not collected in the Health-Led Trials.) This limits the ability to assess differential impacts.

93. Overall, the supported employment programme is aimed at assisting people getting work. Therefore, there would be a risk of discrimination if sufficient consideration is not given to meeting and supporting the needs of those who are pregnant or have just given birth and may not be willing or able to enter the workforce immediately. The guidance does not discriminate on the grounds of pregnancy and will consider individuals’ personal circumstances, including for example, allowing break or pause in support after giving birth if individual wishes to continue support at a later date.

Pregnancy and Maternity: Assessment

94. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on pregnancy and maternity.
Differential impacts: There is a lack of evidence to assess whether there is likely to be a differential impact on this group. The service will be tailored to reflect the personal circumstances of participants, including by allowing a break or pause in support for people who are pregnant or in the period following birth. This flexibility is intended to minimise the risk of a relative negative impact.
Advancing equality of opportunity: Access to employment support (particularly ongoing in-work support to sustain employment) may enable people with this protected characteristic to manage issues within the workplace linked to pregnancy and maternity. This support may advance equality of opportunity for those who share this protected characteristic.
Fostering good relations: In general, Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding (among Connect to Work participants and employers). This may include acting as an advocate for people who are pregnant or have recently given birth and ensuring that their legal rights are understood and protected.

95. The Connect to Work evaluation is not expected to capture data regarding pregnancy and maternity. This is based on a proportionality assessment which considers, in relation to the insight that could be gained, the burden (of collecting additional information) on participants who participate in surveys and programme data collection, and local authorities and providers which must collate and report Management Information. Minimising burden is an ethical requirement for research, as well as being important to maximise response rates and to ensure that expectations on local partners are feasible to meet. There is also a consideration that some participants may find questions related to this protected characteristic to be sensitive or intrusive in the context of an employment programme evaluation.

Race

Race: Analysis

96. It is expected that shares of Connect to Work participants by ethnicity may not reflect the general population due to the relationship between ethnicity and the Connect to Work eligibility criteria (particularly disability and health status). APS data shown in Table 7 estimates that White people are 83% of the working-age population, but 87% of disabled people of working age in employment and 88% of disabled people of working age not in employment, whereas all ethnic minority groups are 17% of the working-age population, 13% of disabled people of working age in employment and 12% of disabled people of working age not in employment ^{[footnote 67]}. The evidence suggests that a disability employment programme (including Connect to Work but also other disability employment provision) might be expected to deliver more support, relative to shares of the general population, to White people relative to people from ethnic minority groups, in particular Asian and Black people.

Table 7: Shares of working-age population, disabled people in employment (working-age) and disabled people not in employment (working-age) by ethnicity in the Annual Population Survey UK estimates for 2023/24 ^{[footnote 68]}.

	Working-age population	Disabled people in employment	Disabled people not in employment
Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese or Any other Asian background	9%	6%	6%
Black, African, Caribbean or Black British	4%	3%	4%
Mixed/Multiple ethnic groups	2%	2%	2%
Other ethnic group	2%	2%	2%
All ethnic minority groups	17%	12%	13%
White	83%	88%	86%

97. If focusing on people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness using Census data (see Table 8 below), there is a gap between the Asian or Asian British share of the working-age population (10%) relative to the Asian or Asian British share of people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness (6%) ^{[footnote 69]}. If shares of Connect to Work participants resemble the available statistical evidence, it is likely that, relative to shares of the general population, there will be a higher share of Connect to Work participants for White people (from a disability or economic inactivity due to long-term sickness perspective), a lower share of Connect to Work participants for Asian or Asian British people (from a disability or economic inactivity due to long-term sickness perspective) and a lower share of Connect to Work participants for Black people (from a disability perspective).

Table 8: Shares of working-age population, disabled people working-age) and people economically inactive due to long-term sickness (working-age) by ethnicity in the 2021 Census in England and Wales ^{[footnote 70]}.

	Working-age population	Disabled people	People economically inactive due to long-term sickness
Asian, Asian British or Asian Welsh	10%	6%	6%
Black, Black British, Black Welsh, Caribbean or African	4%	3%	4%
Mixed or Multiple ethnic groups	2%	3%	2%
Other ethnic group	2%	2%	2%
White	81%	86%	86%

98. Only limited insight is gained about differential impacts related to ethnicity from comparing the breakdown of HLTs participants by ethnicity to Census profiles for the HLTs trial areas. In isolation, the WMCA data suggests that under-representation of some ethnic minority groups is likely, while the data for SCR does not show this pattern. Table 9 below compares the HLTs baseline data for interim survey respondents across the trial groups to the 2021 Census area profiles for West Midlands and South Yorkshire combined authorities ^{[footnote 71]}. The labels for the five ethnic groups slightly differ between the 2021 Census and the HLTs evaluation, with the HLTs labels used below. Compared to the Census values for the general working-age population in these areas, the proportion of participants by ethnic group in West Midlands showed some differences, with 6 percentage points (ppt) fewer people in the Asian or Asian British ethnic group, 5ppt more people in the Black, African, Caribbean or Black British ethnic group, and 3ppt more people in the White ethnic group. By contrast, in both SCR trial groups, all proportions for each ethnic group only differed by 2ppt or under from Census values for the general population. Prior to Connect to Work delivery, it is not possible to confidently assess whether the HLTs pattern (when comparing the supported population to the general population) for either area would apply for Connect to Work nationally.

Table 9: Shares of participants/working-age population in the HLTs baseline data and Census 2021 Area Profiles ^{[footnote 72]}.

	HLTs West Midlands Combined Authority	Census 2021 Area Profile West Midlands Combined Authority	HLTs Sheffield City Region (included Bassetlaw) OOW group	HLTs Sheffield City Region (included Bassetlaw) IW group	Census 2021 Area Profile South Yorkshire Combined Authority
Asian, or Asian British	17%	23%	6%	4%	6%
Black, African, Caribbean or Black British	13%	8%	4%	3%	3%
Mixed or Multiple ethnic groups	4%	4%	2%	2%	2%
Other ethnic group	2%	4%	2%	1%	2%
White	64%	61%	86%	90%	88%

99. The disadvantaged groups covered by Connect to Work include refugees, Afghan resettlers and persons on the Ukrainian scheme. It is inherent that, for these segments of the Connect to Work population, there will be over-representation of people from ethnic minority groups (relative to shares of the general population). Using the March 2024 published data of applications for asylum which were not rejected or withdrawn, Afghans were 14% of the cohort, with Iranians making up 18% and Syrians making up 9% ^{[footnote 73]}. This over-representation is intended, as these groups are specifically targeted as groups in need of support.

100. Beyond specific disadvantaged groups where over-representation of ethnic minority groups is inherent, the data is limited. There is suitable relevant evidence on ethnicity for the following groups:

People with a drug or alcohol dependency: Adult Substance Misuse Treatment Statistics 2023/24 show that 82% of all people in treatment for substance misuse were White British. The proportion in other ethnic groups is as follows: 5% Other White, 1% Indian, 1% Not Stated, 1% White and Black Caribbean, 1% Caribbean, 1% White Irish, 1% Other Asian, 1% African, 1% Pakistani, 1% Other, 1% Other mixed, 1% Other Black, and 1% Bangladeshi ^{[footnote 74]}. This suggests that ethnic minorities are likely to be a smaller share of people with a drug or alcohol dependency than the ethnic minority share of the UK working-age population (16%, see Table 9 above).
Former Armed Forces and Armed Forces reservists: In April 2024, 11% of UK regular Armed Forces (not including Reserve Forces) and 6% of outflows ^{[footnote 75]} were from ethnic minorities, an increase in current members from 7.0% in 2014 ^{[footnote 76]}. In the same month, 6% of reservists were from ethnic minorities ^{[footnote 77]}. This suggests that ethnic minorities are likely to be a smaller share of former members of the Armed Forces and Armed Forces reservists than the ethnic minority share of the UK working-age population (16%, see Table 9 above). In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, 94% of UK Armed Forces veterans aged 16-64 were White, compared to 80% for people who were not veterans, which suggests a slightly greater differential impact than the Armed Forces statistics on outflows ^{[footnote 78]}.
Homeless people: Of those accessing homelessness support assessed as ‘owed a duty by local authority’ were as follows for 2023/24 (provisional figures): 63% were White, 11% were Black/African/Caribbean/Black British, 7% were Asian/Asian British, 4% were in mixed/multiple ethnic groups and 6% were in other ethnic groups ^{[footnote 79]}. Comparing to the shares of the working-age population by ethnicity shown in Table 7 above, this suggests that the inclusion of this disadvantaged group is likely to have a positive disproportionate impact on access to support for ethnic minority groups, in particular on people in the Black/African/Caribbean/Black British (4% of the working-age population), Mixed (2%) and Other (2%) ethnic groups.
Ex-offenders: We lack a breakdown by ethnicity for ex-offenders specifically. We can, however, use data on people subject to Probation Service supervision post-release as an indicator of the composition of this group. In 2022, persons supervised post-release within England and Wales had the following proportions by ethnic group: 8% were Asian or Asian British people, 11% were Black or Black British, 5% were mixed ethnic groups, 75% were White, and 2% were in other ethnic groups ^{[footnote 80]}. This indicates that support for ex-offenders may lead to relative positive impacts related to accessing the service for Black or Black British people and people in mixed ethnic groups (compared to 4% and 2% shares for these groups in the working-age population shown by the 2021 Census data in Table 8 above).
Carers: In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, unpaid carers aged 16 to 64 had the following proportions of unpaid carers by ethnic group: 8% were Asian, Asian British or Asian Welsh, 4% were Black, Black British, Black Welsh, Caribbean or African, 2% were in mixed or multiple ethnic groups, 84% were White and 2% were in other ethnic groups ^{[footnote 81]}. This suggests that White people may be over-represented and Asian, Asian British or Asian Welsh people may be under-represented (compared to 81% and 10% shares of the working-age population for these groups respectively shown in Table 8 above).
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, the shares of people who reported having been a victim of domestic abuse among those aged 16 or over by ethnic group were: 3.0% for Asian or Asian British people, 3.45% for Black or Black British people, 7.1% for people in mixed or multiple ethnic groups and 5.0% for White people, relative to 4.8% overall ^{[footnote 82]} (the percentage of victims of domestic abuse for people in other ethnic groups is suppressed for statistical disclosure control reasons). To the extent that the composition of victims of domestic abuse enrolled in Connect to Work mirrors the survey estimates for percentages of victims/survivors of domestic abuse by ethnic group, this indicates that Asian or Asian people or Black or Black British people may be less likely to access support as part of this eligibility group.
Care Leavers: Department for Education statistics show that in March 2024, 55% of care leavers aged 17-21 were White, 15% were Black, African, Caribbean or Black British, 10% were Asian or Asian British, 8% were Mixed or Multiple ethnic groups, and 13% were an Other ethnic group. Comparing to the shares of the working-age population by ethnicity shown in Table 7 above, this suggests that the inclusion of this disadvantaged group is likely to have a positive disproportionate impact on access to support for ethnic minority groups, in particular on people in the Black/African/Caribbean/Black British (4% of the working-age population), Mixed (2%) and Other (2%) ethnic groups. Ethnicity data is not available for care leavers aged 22 to 25.

101. The evidence suggests that some Connect to Work disadvantaged groups (e.g. refugees, care leavers and homeless people) are likely to include a higher share of people in ethnic minority groups relative to participants who are disabled and economically inactive due to long-term sickness. Other Connect to Work disadvantaged groups (e.g. former members of the Armed Forces) may have a higher or similar share of White people as Connect to Work disabled and long-term sick participants. There is the potential that the breakdown of disadvantaged groups by ethnicity will affect the extent to which there are differential impacts of the policy overall related to race, but there remains uncertainty about the aggregate size and composition by ethnicity of the disadvantaged groups.

102. Table 7 above suggests that ethnic minority groups are a higher share of the working-age population than of the disabled working-age population (in or out of work) or people economically inactive due to long-term sickness. Table 10, however, shows that the unemployment rates and economic inactivity rates (8.1% and 24.5%) for all other ethnic groups combined are greater than for White people (3.6% and 20.9%). This suggests that the general need for employment support, relative to employment support specific to long-term health conditions or disability, may be higher among ethnic minority groups. Table 7 also highlights particularly high rates of economic inactivity for Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Chinese people compared with the overall average. The reasons for higher rates of economic inactivity for these ethnic minority groups may or may not be related to Connect to Work eligibility and suitability criteria, so it does not necessarily follow that people in these groups are more likely to access Connect to Work as a result.

Table 10: Unemployment rate (proportion of economically active population aged 16 or older) and economic inactivity rate (proportion of working-age population, 16-64) by ethnicity, Labour Force Survey UK estimates for Jul-Sep 2024 ^{[footnote 83]}.

	Unemployment rate	Economic inactivity rate
Overall	4.4%	21.6%
White	3.6%	20.9%
All other ethnic groups combined	8.1%	24.5%
Mixed/multiple ethnic groups	13.9%	29.2%
Indian	5.0%	16.5%
Pakistani	10.2%	37.1%
Bangladeshi	8.3%	31.5%
Chinese	5.5%	32.6%
Black/African/Caribbean/Black British	8.0%	20.6%
Other	9.0%	25.7%

Race: Assessment

103. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on ethnicity. There will be inherent positive impacts related to ethnicity due to support for refugees and some related groups (see next bullet point); this is justifiable based on the disadvantages faced by these groups.
Differential impacts from access to support for disadvantaged groups: The over-representation of specific ethnicities within relevant disadvantaged groups (refugees, Afghan settlers, persons on the Ukrainian scheme) is justified based on policy aims. Overall, across the disadvantaged groups, it is uncertain whether there will be a differential impact on access to support, and thus to positive outcomes, related to ethnicity. The inclusion of disadvantaged groups within the Connect to Work policy design – which provides an access route for people with barriers to work beyond health – may, however, widen representation.
Differential impacts from access to support for disability and health reasons: Based on the statistical evidence about the potentially eligible population, which has been used to understand who may participate in Connect to Work and therefore benefit from the service, it is expected that there will be differential impacts related to ethnicity. White people are likely to disproportionately benefit relative to their share of the general population, while ethnic minority groups (particularly Asian or Asian British people if recruitment of participants focuses on people economically inactive due to long-term sickness) may access the service and therefore benefit to a lesser extent, relative to shares of the general population.
Advancing equality of opportunity: The decision to provide support to some disadvantaged groups defined or characterised by nationality and/or ethnic group status (including refugees, Afghan resettlers and persons on the Ukrainian scheme), is expected to advance equal employment opportunities for those groups. More generally, there are material labour-market disadvantages related to ethnicity (reflected by the disparities in unemployment rates and economic inactivity rates for White people and all other ethnic groups shown in Table 10 above). Where there will be an absolute positive impact on employment for Connect to Work participants in ethnic minority groups (whether accessing Connect to Work as part of the disadvantaged groups or health eligibility routes), this may contribute to overcoming inequalities that they face in the labour market.
Furthering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding (among Connect to Work participants and employers), including in contexts where ethnicity intersects with disability and specific disadvantaged groups relevant to Connect to Work. For example, providing Supported Employment for the specific groups with inherent over-representation related to nationality may contribute to fostering good relations, between people in those groups and wider society, by ensuring that employers understand their circumstances and needs in the workplace.

104. A decision regarding whether the Connect to Work evaluation could gather information regarding this protected characteristic will be taken as part of the evaluation design, based on an assessment of the appropriateness, feasibility and proportionality of doing so. The Equality Analysis will be updated as early as possible to capture this decision and rationale.

Religion or Belief

Religion or Belief: Analysis

105. If the 2021 Census measure of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness is used as a proxy for the people who may access the Connect to Work service for disability and health reasons, the data points to variation in access to the service by religion or belief. Evidence about religion or belief is not available from previous employment programmes delivered to relevant target populations.

106. If recruited participants resembled the composition of the eligible population, the rate of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness by group provides an indication about how likely individuals in a group are to be recruited. Based on Table 11, people who follow other religions (as a category of all religions not captured by the specified groups) may be expected to disproportionately benefit from Connect to Work (relative to the general population) if the composition of Connect to Work participants resemble the make-up of the potentially eligible population. On the other hand, Hindus, Sikhs and Jews may be expected to be relatively less likely to be eligible for Connect to Work and accordingly less likely than the general population to benefit from Connect to Work. Less substantially than the other groups mentioned, Christians may be slightly over-represented, people of no religion to be represented roughly proportionately, Muslims to be slightly under-represented and Buddhists to be slightly more under-represented. The degree of representation may affect how positive programme impacts are distributed between religions or beliefs.

Table 11: Rate of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness by religion or belief for working-age population, 2021 Census in England and Wales ^{[footnote 84]}.

Religion or belief	Rate of economic inactivity due to long-term sickness for the working-age population
Other religion	10.0%
Not answered	5.1%
Christian	5.0%
All	4.7%
No religion	4.6%
Muslim	4.2%
Buddhist	4.0%
Jewish	2.9%
Sikh	2.9%
Hindu	1.6%

107. Among disadvantaged groups, there is suitable data to assess differential impacts related to religion or belief for the following groups, summarised in Table 12:

Armed Forces and Armed Forces reservists: In April 2024, of UK regular Armed Forces, 55.4% identified as Christian, 39.4% as no religion, 1.1% as Hindu, 0.9% as Buddhist and 0.6% as Muslim, with other specified religions or beliefs receiving lower shares; of Armed Forces reservists, 65.9% identified as Christian, 30.7% identified as being of no religion, and 3.4% identified as being of other religions ^{[footnote 85]}. In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, amongst people aged 16 to 64, 51% of those who had previously served as Christian, while 41% identified as being of no religion. This contrasts with 42% and 41% respectively for those who have not previously served ^{[footnote 86]}. This evidence suggests that Christians may be more likely than the wider population to access Connect to Work as a veteran or a reservist.
Carers: In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, among people aged 16 to 64, the share of unpaid carers within each group by religion or belief were: 9.1% for Buddhists, 11.3% for Christians, 7.8% for Hindus, 10.4% for Jews, 9.2% for Muslims, 8.8% for people of no religion, 9.2% for those who did not answer the question on religion or belief, 15.5% for those of other religions, and 9.7% for Sikhs, compared to 10.0% overall ^{[footnote 87]}. This suggests that people of other religions and to a lesser extent Christians and Jews may be more likely to access Connect to Work as a carer.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, the share of people who reported having been a victim of domestic abuse among those aged 16 or over by religion were: 5.3% for people of no religion, 4.5% for Christians, 5.2% for Buddhists, 4.5% for Hindus, 2.2% for Muslims and 6.8% for people of other religions ^{[footnote 88]}. When compared to an overall rate of 4.8% for the general population, these survey estimates suggest that people of no religion and people of other religions may be disproportionately more likely to access support, and thus achieve outcomes due to support, as a victim/survivor of domestic abuse.

Table 12: Proportion of disadvantaged groups by religion or belief

Religion or belief	UK regular Armed Forces	Armed Forces Reserves	Carers	Victims/ survivors of domestic abuse
Other religion	NA	3.4%	15.5%	6.8%
Not answered	NA	NA	9.2%	NA
Christian	55.4%	65.9%	11.3%	4.5%
No religion	39.4%	30.7%	8.8%	5.3%
Muslim	0.6%	NA	9.2%	2.2%
Buddhist	0.9%	NA	9.1%	5.2%
Jewish	0.1%	NA	10.4%	NA
Sikh	0.1%	NA	9.7%	NA
Hindu	1.1%	NA	7.8%	4.5%

Religion or Belief: Assessment

108. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on religion or belief.
Differential impacts: If Connect to Work participants who are disabled or have long-term health conditions resemble the profile of religion and belief within the potentially eligible population, then Hindus, Sikhs and Jews may be materially under-represented among Connect to Work participants and therefore less likely to receive a share of positive impacts equivalent to their share of the general population. On the other hand, people whose religion or belief is categorised as “Other religion” may be over-represented and therefore disproportionately likely to benefit from the intervention. There is insufficient data to comment on disadvantaged groups in general, but there may be differential impacts related to the characteristics of each group based on the evidence available for former Armed Forces, Armed Forces reservists, carers and victims/survivors of domestic abuse. For example, there may be a positive impact on Christians, relative to other religious groups, from access to the service by veterans and reservists.
Advancing equality of opportunity: By extending disability employment support, there may be a positive impact on equality of opportunity for people of other religions, as the data suggests that this group is materially disadvantaged relative to the working-age population in the labour market for health-related reasons.
Fostering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding. This may include contexts where religion or belief intersects with the Connect to Work eligibility criteria, including sickness-related inactivity (where an association is suggested by the data).

109. The Connect to Work evaluation is not expected to capture data regarding religion or belief. This is based on a proportionality assessment which considers, in relation to the insight that could be gained, the burden (of collecting additional information) on participants who participate in surveys and programme data collection, and local authorities and providers which must collate and report Management Information. Minimising burden is an ethical requirement for research, as well as being important to maximise response rates and to ensure that expectations on local partners are feasible to meet. There is also a consideration that some participants may find questions related to this protected characteristic to be sensitive or intrusive in the context of an employment programme evaluation.

Sex

Sex: Analysis

110. Connect to Work aims to provide support to individuals of both sexes. Although the potential breakdown of Connect to Work participants by sex is uncertain, evidence suggests that women may be under-represented among Connect to Work out-of-work disabled and long-term sick participants relative to their share of the disabled population.

111. If Connect to Work participants who are disabled and have long-term health conditions resemble the breakdown by sex of disabled people overall, then it would be expected for women to be a larger share of this segment of Connect to Work participants than the general population. Women and men are roughly even as shares of the working-age population (50.2% to 49.8% in the 2023/24 APS, see Table 13 below), but women are a majority of disabled people (56.9% of disabled people in employment and 57.7% of disabled people not in employment, see Table 13) ^{[footnote 89]}. Women are also a smaller majority of people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness 53.9% according to the APS evidence for 2023/24 shown in Table 13, ^{[footnote 90]} 53.0% on LFS evidence for Jul-Sep 2024 shown in Table 15 below). On this basis, it may be expected that women will be a small majority of Connect to Work participants and over-represented relative to the general population.

Table 13: Shares of working-age population, disabled people (of working age) and people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness (of working age) by whether female or male in the Annual Population Survey for 2023/24 ^{[footnote 91]}.

	Working-age population	Disabled people in employment	Disabled people not in employment	People economically inactive due to long-term sickness
Female	50.2%	56.9%	57.7%	53.9%
Male	49.8%	43.1%	42.3%	46.1%

112. Evidence from relevant prior provision, however, suggests that women may be more likely to be under-represented among Connect to Work participants. Women were only 48% of HLTs participants, including only 44% of out-of-work participants in SCR and 47% of participants in WMCA (during 2018 to 2019), 40% of participants on WHP (since 2017), and 48% of participants on WHP Pioneer (since 2023) – see Table 14 below for a breakdown of these figures. There are caveats to this finding. WHP and WHP Pioneer include groups other than disabled people (including long-term unemployed benefit claimants for WHP until October 2022), which may have affected their figures (splits by sex are not published by eligibility group). In respect of the HLTs, it is relevant that, in the APS for 2018/19, the proportion of people who were economically inactive due to long-term sickness who were women was 51.1%, smaller than 53.9% in 2023/24 ^{[footnote 92]}. Despite these caveats, the female shares of participants who have accessed the HLTs, WHP and WHP Pioneer suggests that women are likely to be slightly under-represented relative to their share of the disabled population and, to a lesser extent, their share of the population that is economically inactive due to long-term sickness.

Table 14: Shares of participants by whether female or male in the Health-Led Trials (referred May 2018 to October 2019) and Work and Health Programme ^{[footnote 93]}.

	HLTs overall	HLTs SCR in-work	HLTs SCR out-of-work	HLTs WMCA (all out-of-work)	WHP (Nov 2017 to May 2024)	WHP Pioneer (Sept 2023 to May 2024)
Female	48%	57%	44%	47%	40%	48%
Male	51%	43%	56%	53%	60%	52%

113. A potentially relevant context, in the LFS UK estimates for Jul-Sep 2024, is that the estimated proportion of people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness and want to work who are women is 44.7%, 8.2ppt lower than the 53.0% female share of all people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness (see Table 15 below). This suggests that, if the population successfully reached by Connect to Work is people who already want to work, this may lead to female under-representation among those who benefit from the policy.

Table 15: Shares of working-age population, people economically inactive due to long-term sickness (working-age) and people economically inactive due to long-term sickness who want to work (working-age) by whether female or male in the Labour Force Survey UK estimates for Sep-Nov 2024 ^{[footnote 94]}.

	Working-age population	People economically inactive due to long-term sickness	People economically inactive due to long-term sickness who want to work
Female	50.8%	53.1%	47.3%
Male	49.2%	46.9%	52.7%

114. Unlike the out-of-work HLTs trial groups in SCR or WMCA, women were a majority of the HLTs SCR in-work trial group (57%, see Table 15 above). In 2018/19, APS UK estimates suggest that women were 55.6% of disabled people in employment ^{[footnote 95]}. The 55.6% share in 2018/19 is similar to the 56.9% share today shown in Table 13 above. It may be relatively less difficult for the Connect to Work in-work retention support strand of Connect to Work to recruit women in proportion to their share of the disabled population, relative to the context of out-of-work support where social barriers may be stronger. On the other hand, the sickness absence rate for women in 2018 was 2.5% compared to 1.6% for men, indicating that sickness absence for women is 1.56 times greater, in which case a slightly higher female in-work proportion (e.g. 60%) would be more proportionate; the latest sickness absence rates by sex in 2022 were 2.2% for men and 3.2% for women ^{[footnote 96]}. Given the continued gap in female and male sickness absence rates, it is likely that a higher share of participants accessing the in-work retention support offer within the Connect to Work policy design will be women than the female share of the general population.

115. There are several specific disadvantaged groups where male over-representation is expected relative to shares of the general population:

Offenders and ex-offenders: Data on probation caseload provides insight into the breakdown by sex of people accessing support while still serving a community sentence. On 30th September 2024, 84% of people on the probation caseload with a community sentence were men and 16% were women ^{[footnote 97]}. There is no suitable demographic data to report the breakdown of ex-offenders specifically by sex, but we can use prison releases and probation caseload data as indicators of the likely composition of this group. Of people released from prison between July to September 2024, 92% were men and 8% were women ^{[footnote 98]}. Of offenders under supervision by the Probation Service in the community on 30th September 2024 (including those serving a community sentence or subject to post-release supervision), 88% were male and 12% were female ^{[footnote 99]}. While these statistics may not translate precisely to the ex-offender population, this evidence indicates that ex-offenders (people who have completed a custodial or community sentence) and, to a lesser extent offenders (people serving a community sentence), are likely to be overwhelmingly disproportionately male.
Former Armed Forces and Armed Forces reservists: In April 2024, UK regular Armed Forces were 88% male and 12% female ^{[footnote 100]}. In March 2024, outflows from the UK regular Armed Forces were 91% male and 9% female ^{[footnote 101]}. In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, UK Armed Forces veterans were 14% female and 86% male^{[footnote 102]}. In April 2024, UK Armed Forces reservists were 84% male and 16% female ^{[footnote 103]}. Based on the available evidence, it is likely that former Armed Forces and Armed Forces reservists will be highly disproportionately male. The Armed Forces Connect to Work eligibility group also includes partners of Armed Forces, which may reduce the extent of the differential in representation by sex for the full group.
People with a drug or alcohol dependency: In 2023/24, of people receiving treatment for drug (opiate and non-opiate) and/or alcohol misuse, 68% were men and 32% were women ^{[footnote 104]}. This may not reflect people not in treatment but indicates that this group is likely to be highly disproportionately male.
Refugees: Of refugees assessed and approved in 2023, 75% were male, 25% were female and 1% not known. On this basis, we would expect people who participate in Connect to Work via this eligibility route to be disproportionately male ^{[footnote 105]}.
Care Leavers: In March 2024, 64% of care leavers aged 17 to 25 were male, and 36% were female. On this basis, we would expect care leavers who participate in Connect to Work to be disproportionately male ^{[footnote 106]}.

116. There are also specific disadvantaged groups where female over-representation is expected relative to shares of the general population:

Carers: The 2021 Census showed 3.0 million female unpaid carers and 2.0 million male unpaid carers in England and Wales ^{[footnote 107]}. If the carers who access Connect to Work resemble the unpaid carer population in the Census, then we would expect more women than men to access the programme via this route.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, 72.5% of victims of domestic abuse were women and 27.5% were men ^{[footnote 108]}. As such, we expect that there will be greater female representation as part of this group.
Persons on the Ukrainian scheme: Up to the end of June 2024, 65% of people arriving via the Ukrainian schemes were women and 35% were men ^{[footnote 109]}. There may be a differential positive impact on women as part of this group.

117. The breakdown of homeless people by sex is related to household composition. The extent to which a differential impact occurs as part of this disadvantaged group is likely to depend on the mix recruited. In the statutory homelessness tables for 2023/24 (provisional figures), sex is recorded for main applicants who are single, separately for those owed a prevention or relief duty, but not for couples (which are a smaller group); if numbers across single adults and single parents with dependent children are aggregated, women are 49% and men are 50% of applicants, whereas men are 65% of main applicants if only single adults other than single parents with dependent children are considered ^{[footnote 110]}. Thus, the composition of the homeless group cohort by sex is likely to be influenced by the balance between lone parents with dependent children and single adults.

118. Overall, there is not a sufficient basis to confidently assess the composition of the disadvantaged groups eligibility cohort by sex, given the mix of evidence across different disadvantaged groups and the lack of suitable evidence about the size of each specific disadvantaged group among the participants that will be recruited.

Sex: Assessment

119. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on sex.
Differential impacts related to access to out-of-work support for disability and health reasons: Based on female shares of those previously supported (shown in Table 14 above) compared to female shares of potentially eligible people (shown in Tables 13 and 15 above), it is more likely than not that women will be slightly under-represented in Connect to Work out-of-work support for disabled and long-term sick participants, relative to shares of the disabled population. As the demographics of participants supported determine which individuals receive positive impacts from support, this suggests that the differential impact will be at least slightly less favourable to women and at least slightly more favourable to men.
Differential impacts related to access to in-work retention support for disability and health reasons: The Connect to Work in-work retention support offer may disproportionately benefit women relative to their share of the general population, given the available statistical evidence indicating higher female sickness absence and the higher share of women recruited to the HLTs SCR in-work trial group relative to the out-of-work trial groups. The inclusion of an in-work retention support offer in Connect to Work (with 15% of starts nationally) represents a change from WHP, where all starts were out of work at the baseline.
Differential impacts related to access for disadvantaged groups: The decision to extend support to some specific disadvantaged groups (e.g. ex-offenders, people with drug or alcohol dependency), as part of the Connect to Work eligibility criteria, is likely to lead to more men accessing support from those groups (proportionate to men’s share of the general population) and therefore benefiting from positive impacts. Conversely, there is likely to be a differential positive impact in favour of women from the inclusion of other groups in the Connect to Work eligibility criteria (e.g. carers, victims/survivors of domestic abuse) and impacts on outcomes for participants in these groups. The inclusion of these groups within the Connect to Work target population is justified by their support needs.
Advancing equality of opportunity: Tables 13 and 15 above illustrate that women are more likely than men to be disabled (and therefore to be disabled outside of employment), as well as to be economically inactive due to long-term sickness. In that context, expanding the offer of disability employment support through this service may improve equality of opportunity for women. Support for female Connect to Work disabled and long-term sick participants is likely to contribute towards reducing the limitations in opportunity faced by women, leading to positive impacts on female disability employment in absolute terms.
Furthering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding (among Connect to Work participants and employers), including in contexts where gender intersects with disability and specific disadvantaged groups relevant to Connect to Work. For example, providing Supported Employment to carers (a disproportionately female disadvantaged group, see above) is likely to improve employer understanding of the aspirations and support needs of women who are unpaid carers.

120. It is intended to collect information on participant sex via the programme evaluation and to explore opportunities for analysis of outcomes by sex, subject to any applicable considerations (e.g. survey sample sizes and data quality).

Sexual Orientation

Sexual Orientation: Analysis

121. Based on variations in disability status by sexual orientation in the 2021 Census for England and Wales (see Table 16 further below), it is expected that bisexual people are substantially more likely to be disabled than people overall, and gay or lesbian people are slightly more likely to be disabled than people overall. On the other hand, data on economic activity rate (for any reason, potentially influenced by age, e.g. for retired people) shows that gay or lesbian people were substantially less likely to be economically inactive, and that bisexual people were less likely to be economically inactive, than straight or heterosexual people or people overall. Comparison of the unemployment rates, which will be less affected by age, suggests that straight or heterosexual people are the group which faces the least disadvantage, with greater employment rates in the other groups, and this evidence mirrors disability rates more closely.

122. Unlike many of the other sources cited in this analysis (which focus on the working-age population), due to lack of working-age population data, the disability and labour market statistics in Table 16 reflect all people aged 16 or over (i.e. including people aged 65 or older, which may affect disability and economic inactivity rates especially). Compared to other characteristics where we have the rate of people economically inactive due to long-term sickness, disability data in Table 16 is not tied to employment status and the data on labour market status in Table 16 is not tied to health. Overall, the disability rates by sexual orientation are likely to be most indicative of people eligible for Connect to Work employment support for health/disability reasons, bearing in mind that disabled people in general have poorer employment outcomes (see the Disability section) and the same would be expected to be true in this context. As such, positive differential impacts on bisexual people and to a lesser extent gay and lesbian people are expected from support for disabled people, as reflected in the breakdown of disability rates by sexual orientation shown as part of Table 16.

Table 16: Disability rate ^{[footnote 111]} and economic inactivity rate and unemployment rate ^{[footnote 112]} by sexual orientation for people aged 16 years and over in the 2021 Census in England and Wales

Sexual orientation	Disability rate	Economic inactivity rate	Unemployment rate
All other sexual orientations	36.1%	36.7%	7.9%
Bisexual	34.1%	34.1%	7.2%
Not answered	23.3%	50.0%	5.9%
Gay or Lesbian	22.7%	24.8%	5.0%
All	20.1%	39.4%	4.7%
Straight or Heterosexual	19.5%	38.8%	4.5%

123. We have suitable evidence related to the composition of the potentially eligible population by sexual orientation for the following disadvantaged groups:

Carers: In the 2021 Census for England and Wales, of people aged 16 or over, more unpaid carers (3.9% in England, 4.0% in Wales) identified with a LGB+ orientation (gay or lesbian, bisexual, other sexual orientations) than non-carers (3.0% in both of England and Wales) ^{[footnote 113]}. This indicates that support for unpaid carers may have a positive differential impact on people who identified with a LGB+ sexual orientation related to increased likelihood of accessing the service as part of this group.
Former Armed Forces: Using data from the 2021 Census for England and Wales, ONS analysis for UK Armed Forces veterans suggests that the breakdown by sexual orientation of veterans and non-veterans is similar if differences in sex, age and geography are adjusted for ^{[footnote 114]}.
Victims/survivors of domestic abuse: In the Crime Survey for England and Wales for 2024, the shares of people who reported having been a victim of domestic abuse among those aged 16 or over by sexual orientation were: 4.5% for heterosexual/straight people, 6.06% for gay or lesbian people, 9.3% for bisexual people, and 9.6% for people of other sexual orientations, compared to 4.8% overall ^{[footnote 115]}. This suggests positive differential impacts related to increased probability of accessing the service as part of this disadvantaged group for bisexual people as well as people of other sexual orientation and to a lesser extent gay or lesbian people.

124. Differential non-response to questions on sexual orientation (for instance, as the 2021 Census question on sexual orientation was voluntary) may affect the findings related to this protected characteristic across the segments of the Connect to Work target population.

Sexual Orientation: Assessment

125. The following judgements are made:

Direct discrimination: The service as designed, including the application of the eligibility and suitability criteria, will not treat people less favourably based on sexual orientation.
Differential impacts: Relative to other characteristics, the existing evidence gives less assurance about the likely composition of the eligible population (in addition to general caveats about the possibility of differences between participants and eligible people). The analysis, however, suggests there may be a differential positive impact on bisexual people, as well as a smaller positive differential impact on gay or lesbian people.
Advancing equality of opportunity: To the extent that bisexual people, as well as gay or lesbian people, suffer from labour-market disadvantages for disability/health reasons, we would expect the absolute positive impact of providing disability employment support to advance equality of opportunity for these groups (this reflects the relationship between this protected characteristic and disability). There is, however, uncertainty about the extent of disadvantage faced due to lack of evidence on the population by sexual orientation covering both health and economic status attributes.
Furthering good relations: Employment Specialists delivering Connect to Work may tackle prejudice and promote positive understanding, including. This may include contexts where sexual orientation intersects with the Connect to Work eligibility criteria, including disability (where an association is suggested by the data).

126. The Connect to Work evaluation is not expected to capture data regarding sexual orientation. This is based on a proportionality assessment which considers, in relation to the insight that could be gained, the burden (of collecting additional information) on participants who participate in surveys and programme data collection, and local authorities and providers which must collate and report Management Information. Minimising burden is an ethical requirement for research, as well as being important to maximise response rates and to ensure that expectations on local partners are feasible to meet. There is also a consideration that some participants may find questions related to this protected characteristic to be sensitive or intrusive in the context of an employment programme evaluation.

Question 5

5.  The Family Test

Accepted Answer

127. The Department has considered the impact of the proposals on families, in accordance with the Family Test. Increased work-related activity for individuals in the programme client group may have implications for childcare, especially for lone parents: Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) can provide help with childcare costs while parents prepare for and (for a limited time) when parents take up employment via the Flexible Support Fund (FSF). DWP can also help parents to source childcare and works with local authorities and other partners to assess the demand for childcare in their local areas. Once someone moves into work, Universal Credit and Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) claimants may be entitled to childcare costs via Tax Credits and in Universal Credit (UC) - 85% of eligible childcare costs up to a cap can be paid.

128. If expected impacts of Connect to Work out-of-work and in-work retention support on employment and earnings outcomes are achieved, higher incomes may contribute to family formation (including participants deciding to enter couple relationships and/or to have children) and the quality of relationships. For example, a study suggests that people in temporary work tend to delay marriage and parenthood due to low incomes, ^{[footnote 116]} and analysis of Italian Labour Force Survey data indicates that people are less likely to have children if they are not in employment or in less secure work ^{[footnote 117]}. There is also, however, evidence that not being in employment may lead to people choosing to form families earlier, conditioned by wider social factors. Analysis of the British Household Panel Study indicates that being unemployed generally leads to men and women becoming parents earlier ^{[footnote 118]}. Wider evidence suggests that the influence of employment and earnings on the timing of marriage can vary by gender. For example, an analysis of data for Flanders showed that unemployment delayed marriage for men but not for women, ^{[footnote 119]} while analysis of the relationship between income and marriage in the United States indicates that higher earnings levels and future earnings potential increase the likelihood of marrying sooner for younger men and reduce the likelihood of marrying sooner for younger women ^{[footnote 120]}. Where families are formed earlier in the context of limited labour-market opportunities, this may have a long-term adverse effect on family outcomes, e.g. a paper has shown that, while women in Sweden who finished secondary education during poor economic conditions in the early 1990s tended to form families at earlier stages, this group also experienced higher incidences of divorce and long-term poverty ^{[footnote 121]}. Overall, while the evidence is complex and not certain, we might reasonably expect higher incomes and expansion of employment opportunity due to Connect to Work to have a positive impact on family formation.

129. There may be a positive impact on families if a parent enters the workforce and has sustained employment. This may lead to increased disposable income for the family, which would have knock-on effects with parents facing less financial stress. There may be broader positive impacts for families and children from parents achieving sustained employment outcomes as part of Connect to Work, as evidence shows that life outcomes for children improve in households where at least one parent is working, e.g. the Improving Lives: Helping Workless Families evidence pack published by DWP in 2017 shows that children are considerably more likely to have poorer outcomes throughout their education if they are in a workless family ^{[footnote 122]}. Based on the Health-led Trials: Evaluation Synthesis Report there is also evidence that taking part in a supported employment programme improves health and wellbeing outcomes ^{[footnote 123]}. This improvement in health and wellbeing may have a positive impact on the family unit.

Question 6

6.  Summary of analysis

Accepted Answer

130. In the analysis of equality impacts for each protected characteristic, the evidence about likely participation in Connect to Work (as the key driver of differential impact) has been analysed. It has been assessed that Connect to Work will not involve unlawful direct discrimination. An assessment has also been undertaken of differential impacts, with a range of impacts identified, mainly related to the relationship between the protected characteristics and eligibility criteria based on statistical evidence. It is also judged that, in the context of disability and in the instances identified above for other protected characteristics, Connect to Work is expected to contribute to advancing equality of opportunity and fostering good relations between people with and without protected characteristics.

131. Based primarily on considering which groups are more likely to access Connect to Work and therefore benefit from the expected positive effects of the programme (on employment, earnings, health and wellbeing outcomes), the analysis above has identified a range of differential impacts. These are findings are about how the positive impacts of the programme are distributed across protected characteristics. All groups are expected to benefit from the programme in absolute terms, compared to a scenario where Connect to Work did not exist. The differential impacts identified are mainly related to:

The relationship between (a) each protected characteristic and (b) disability/health and employment/economic activity status. This underpins most judgements, as evidence on other factors is more limited.
The relationship between protected characteristics and specific disadvantaged groups targeted by Connect to Work, where there is suitable evidence about this. Unlike the discussion related to disability and health, the available data does not usually consider the labour market status of people within disadvantaged groups. As there are a range of separate groups, there are limits in the ability to generalise about overall characteristics of people in disadvantaged groups.
Recruitment and take-up within the potentially eligible population, where there is relevant evidence of previous programme participation compared to the eligible population (particularly for age, disability and sex).

132. An overall key point is that it is intended that there will be a considerable disproportionate positive impact on people who are disabled. The policy has been designed to disproportionately support disabled people, to address poor labour market outcomes for this group relative to the general population (as set out in the Disability section above). The identified differential impacts related to disabled people specifically, and for other groups based for reasons related to disability and health, are justified by the achieving the goal of improving employment outcomes for disabled people.

133. The support for disadvantaged groups also reflects that these groups, or subsets within them, commonly have employment support needs (see discussion in paragraph 56 above) which justify targeting the groups with additional support (and therefore wider differential impacts associated with focusing on these groups).

134. The assessments reached reflect that, to the extent that Connect to Work participants have protected characteristics associated with disadvantage in the labour market, providing support which improves their employment outcomes expands equal employment opportunities. The analysis above finds that specific characteristics (e.g. older age, being disabled, gender reassignment) are commonly associated with unemployment and/or economic inactivity due to long-term sickness. In that context, the impact of labour-market support for people with these characteristics will have the benefit of addressing the marginalisation of these groups in the labour market.

135. This analysis has found that the intervention may contribute to fostering good relations between people with and without specific protected characteristics, related to an expectation that “place, train and maintain” support will enable integration of participants with protected characteristics into the workplace, including by promoting understanding related to their protected characteristics, especially when these have a connection their disability or disadvantaged group status. Employment Specialists, in delivering both out-of-work and in-work retention support, will support creating an inclusive workplace and act as an advocate for participants, including during employer engagement, job matching and on and off the job support phases of Supported Employment.

Question 7

7.  Plans to monitor and evaluate the equality decision

Accepted Answer

136. DWP is committed to monitoring the impacts of its policies and using evidence from commissioned evaluations to explore any impacts of the policy. It is our intention to conduct a robust and proportionate evaluation of Connect to Work. The evaluation will include impact, value-for-money and process strands. The evaluation will use a mixed methods approach, and we expect that this will include participant surveys which will collect data on demographic variables as well as participant experience and outcomes. The evaluation will aim to capture early insight on key areas (e.g. referral routes, eligibility) to ensure that learning from initial delivery informs programme design and implementation insofar as possible. Please note that although this paragraph reflects current planning assumptions, the evaluation design is subject to final approvals.

137. As part of monitoring the service, monthly Management Information (MI) on programme referrals, programme starts, job starts, job outcomes (participants meeting earnings thresholds or self-employment durational thresholds), early exits, extensions and end of allocated time on provision data through PRaP (Provider Referrals and Payments system) will be collected and reported. There will be other MI and evaluation data collated which will be required for monitoring and evaluation and includes (but not limited to) data related to benefit receipt, routes of introduction to the programme, participant characteristics, and intensity of support delivered, among other areas, some of which may be manually collated monthly or quarterly. The participant characteristics data collected will be used to monitor the breakdown of programme participants, which will support drawing insight on equality implications prior to evaluation evidence.

Question 8

8.  Outcome of the evaluation

Accepted Answer

138. Data from the evaluation, including demographic information on participant groups and their outcomes will be used to review the impacts of Connect to Work and this section will be updated once such findings are available. Final evaluation reports, which are expected to include robust impact estimates, are planned to be at least four years after the launch of the programme after sufficient time to track participant cohorts throughout the programme and for a number of years. The evaluation will follow best practice guidance as outlined in the Magenta Book and Green Book.

139. Where equality data is not routinely collected or available in suitable secondary admin data sources, for example data on sexual orientation, gender re-assignment, religion or belief, and pregnancy and maternity, we will not be able to estimate the proportion of programme participants from these groups or evaluate the impact of the intervention for these groups. There is the potential that, for some groups, even if we were to collect information on their characteristics, the numbers would be too small to be able to report any difference in impact with confidence. The intention is that Connect to Work will help all groups in accordance with Equality Act requirements.

APS	Annual Population Survey
BAU	Business As Usual
CtW	Connect to Work
DWP	Department for Work and Pensions
EA	Equality Analysis
EAG	Early Access groups
EOI	Expression of Interest
ERG	Expert Reference Group
FSF	Flexible Support Fund
GLD	Government Legal Department
HLTs	Health Led Trials
HM AF	His Majesty’s Armed Forces
HMT	His Majesty’s Treasury
IPES	Intensive Personalized Employment Support
IPS	Individual Placement Support
IPS-AD	Individual Placement Support for Alcohol and Drug Dependence
IPSPC	Individual Placement Support in Primary Care
IWRS	In Work Retention Support
IWS	Intensive Work Search
JCP	Jobcentre Plus
LAs	Local Authorities
LGBO	Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Other
LSE	Local Supported Employment
MCAs	Mayoral Combined Authorities
MH	Mental Health
MHCLG	Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Governments
MI	Management Information
MSK	Musculoskeletal
OHID	Office for Health Improvement and Disparities
OOW	Out of Work
ONS	Office for National Statistics
PC	Protected Characteristics
PSED	Public Sector Equality Duty
PRaP	(Provider Referrals and Payment system)
RCT	Randomized controlled trial
SCR	Sheffield City Region
SE	Supported Employment
SEQF	Supported Employment Quality Framework
SMI	Severe Mental Illness
SMOD	Social Model of Disability
SYMCA	South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority
UKSPF	UK Shared Prosperity Fund
UNCRC	United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
UNCRPD	United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
WHP	Work and Health Programme

Cookies on GOV.UK

1. Introduction

2. Brief outline of policy or service and main aims and outcomes