Guidelines for Operating Within the SEQF Frameworks for Connect to Work While Incorporating Local Approaches and Needs

A recent visit to Preston offered unique and valuable insights as we engaged with Lancashire County Hall, which has been allocated £23 million for local distribution within the Lancashire area.

We also met with an employment specialist overseeing three teams of job coaches in Lancashire, focusing on assisting individuals with disabilities.

Additionally, we consulted with a newly appointed Employment Engagement Expert.

Nicola from the council shared information on the guidelines for Connect to Work and SEQF, as well as key performance indicators specific to Lancashire, ensuring accountability within the region.

Regarding the funding for individuals with disabilities under Connect to Work, it is crucial to adopt a comprehensive support approach while adhering to expected timelines.

Individuals participating in Connect to Work and following SEQF standards must proceed through five stages:

The 5-Stage Supported Employment Model

⭐ Stage 1: Engagement & Vocational Profiling

⭐ Stage 2: Job Finding & Employer Engagement

⭐ Stage 3: Job Matching & Job Negotiation

⭐ Stage 4: On-the-Job Coaching & Training

⭐ Stage 5: Ongoing Support & Career Development

However, funding through Connect to Work is limited to 12 months.

Lancashire aims to complete Stage 1 within a four-week period, with the expectation that participants will begin vocational profiling within days of enrollment.

Job coaches assist individuals throughout all five stages in Lancashire and have received internal training, with opportunities for complimentary BASE Certificate 3 training.

The average time for a person with disabilities to secure employment is between four to six months.

Not all participants will immediately enter employment. Job coaches are knowledgeable about additional grants that support other areas, such as transportation training.

Participants may also consider pursuing apprenticeships, with the UK offering 850 types, some equivalent to a Master's Degree.

Connect to Work is tailored for individuals with complex intellectual barriers, whereas IPS is suited for those with less complex barriers and requires less comprehensive support.

An essential aspect of the journey is career progression and job development.

The employment specialist we consulted manages three team leads and a total of 17 job coaches. Job coaches must meet the requirements of both Lancashire and SEQF.

The Strategic Role of Job Coaches: Employer Engagement Beyond Individual Participants

A key insight from the UK’s SEQF and Connect to Work model is that employer engagement is not only triggered by having a participant ready for a job. Instead, it is understood as a continuous, proactive, and strategic function of job coaches.

In Lancashire and other UK regions, job coaches are expected to:

✔ Build relationships with employers before a participant is ready

This strengthens networks, reduces cold-calling, and creates more open-minded, disability-confident employers.

✔ Develop a Job Analysis Toolkit for each employer

Job coaches gather information such as:

• workplace culture

• peak periods and staffing pressures

• tasks that are repetitive, time-consuming, or specialised

• accessibility strengths and barriers

• training and supervision styles

• potential for job carving or customised roles

This creates a bank of job information that becomes invaluable when matching participants to opportunities.

✔ Share employer networks across the whole team

Employer knowledge is not held by one job coach. Instead, networks are shared:

• in team meetings

• within CRM systems

• through cross-team employer profiles

• through job development mapping

This aligns the service with how business development functions in any other sector—using shared intelligence rather than individual relationships held in isolation.

✔ Increase employer confidence through regular contact

Not every contact has to lead to a job immediately. Sometimes the interaction builds trust, introduces supported employment concepts, or prepares employers for future candidates.

Over time, this leads to:

• more willing employers

• better job matches

• faster job development

• stronger sustainability

• greater understanding of disability inclusion

✔ Reduce dependency on one person or one moment

By making employer engagement an ongoing responsibility—not a reactive one—services become more:

• resilient

• consistent

• predictable

• professional

• connected to local workforce needs

This is a significant contrast to many Australian services where employer engagement is often:

• ad hoc

• tied to meeting placement KPIs

• done only when a participant is “job ready”

• dependent on individual job coaches

• reactive rather than strategic

Critical View of the 5-Stage Model in Relation to Customised Employment

Including strengths, limitations, and differences in practice—especially within the UK SEQF and Connect to Work.

1. Overview: The Tension Between “Fidelity” and “Flexibility”

The SEQF 5-Stage Model is structured, linear, and outcome-driven. Customised Employment (CE) is exploratory, flexible, and deeply individualised.

SEQF is built to standardise quality. CE is built to personalise opportunity.

Both share overlap (Discovery, vocational profiling, job carving, negotiation), but the intent and depth differ significantly.

The UK model, especially through Connect to Work, emphasises:

• Speed (Stage 1 within 4 weeks)

• Measurable outputs

• Timelines

• Structured fidelity

• “First job” as a stepping stone

Customised Employment, in contrast, aims for:

• Deep Discovery (not just profiling)

• Non-linear exploration

• Individualised negotiation

• A job that aligns closely with strengths, interests, and conditions for success

• Long-term fit rather than short-term placement

This creates philosophical and practical tension.

2. Where SEQF Aligns With Customised Employment (Strengths)

✔ 1. Both value individualisation

SEQF Stage 1 (Vocational Profiling) mirrors the intent of Discovery:

• get to know the person

• explore interests

• understand learning style

• identify strengths

✔ 2. Job carving and customised negotiation occur under both

Stage 3 of SEQF ("Job Negotiation") is effectively CE-lite:

• identify tasks

• negotiate duties

• tailor the job

✔ 3. SEQF creates structure that many CE services lack

In Australia, CE delivery varies from brilliant to extremely poor. SEQF creates:

• A consistent model

• Clear expectations

• Measurable fidelity

• A transparent quality process

This is something Australia does not yet have.

✔ 4. The first job as a pathway concept is psychologically sound

Lancashire’s approach acknowledges:

The first job may not be the dream job, but it is a platform for growth.

This can reduce pressure, build confidence, and offer real-world learning.

✔ 5. Time-limited funding forces efficiency

12 months of funding encourages:

• Avoiding drift

• Fast engagement

• Clear structure

• Regular progression

CE in Australia sometimes stalls due to no time expectations.

3. Where SEQF Conflicts With Customised Employment (Limitations / Risks)

❌ 1. Four-week profiling contradicts the depth of Discovery

CE Discovery requires:

• Multiple contexts (home, community, routines)

• Observed activities

• Time to uncover strengths organically

The UK 4-week requirement prioritises speed over depth.

This risks:

• Surface-level interests

• Misalignment of conditions for success

• Assumptions replacing observation

• Rushed or incomplete Discovery

❌ 2. The 12-month funding window constrains personalisation

Customised Employment is not innately time-bound. Some students need longer exploration before job development.

12 months may cause:

• Pressure to place quickly

• Reduced exploration

• Prioritising "job ready" individuals

• Reduced match quality

❌ 3. “First job as pathway” can turn into “any job will do”

While the stepping-stone model has benefits, it can also lead to:

• Underemployment

• Poor job match

• Placements driven by KPIs rather than person-centred fit

• Limited employer negotiation

For individuals with complex needs, a poor match increases the risk of burnout or job loss.

❌ 4. Vocational profiling ≠ Discovery

Discovery in CE is:

• Experiential

• Observational

• Multi-environment

• Non-standardised

Vocational profiling is:

• Interview-based

• Time-limited

• Often dependent on verbal answers

• Sometimes biased toward known interests

This difference is significant.

❌ 5. Linear stages can be unrealistic for people with fluctuating needs

CE recognises:

• nonlinear progression

• returning to earlier stages

• blending job development with exploration

SEQF’s rigid staging can unintentionally:

• exclude people with complex behaviours

• penalise services for necessary flexibility

• discourage deeper customisation

4. Pros and Cons of the UK Approach (SEQF + Connect to Work)

Pros

• ✔ strong accountability

• ✔ consistent, teachable model

• ✔ clear role expectations for job coaches

• ✔ ability to train teams at scale

• ✔ measurable quality indicators

• ✔ faster progression for many participants

• ✔ structured employer engagement

• ✔ alignment with government funding priorities

• ✔ clear KPIs and pathways

Cons

• ❌ time pressure risks shallow vocational understanding

• ❌ “first job” may overshadow long-term career vision

• ❌ limited freedom for deep customisation

• ❌ Discovery becomes diluted

• ❌ complex-needs participants may need longer than 12 months

• ❌ risks becoming placement-focused if not monitored

• ❌ employers may be chosen for ease, not fit

5. Critical Insight: Why the UK’s Model Works There (But May Not Work As-Is in Australia)

UK Context

• National commissioning model

• DWP adopts SEQF as a mandatory tool

• Strong local councils

• Long tradition of structured supported employment

• IPS and SEQF coexisting but clearly defined

• Job coaches embedded within services

• Large national training body (BASE)

Australia’s Context

• Fragmented systems (NDIA, IEA/DES, schools, states)

• No national fidelity framework

• CE used inconsistently and often incorrectly

• Funding is patchy and disconnected

• Workforce capability varies significantly

• No mandated state or national model

Australia needs structure and fidelity, but without losing the deep, individualised power of CE.

6. Balanced Conclusion

SEQF ensures quality. CE ensures personalisation. The best systems build space for both.

The UK has prioritised:

• structure

• timelines

• rapid engagement

• measurable accountability

Australia currently prioritises:

• personalisation

• autonomy

• flexible approaches

A hybrid model—CE principles embedded inside SEQF structure—may provide the best of both worlds.

This includes:

• Deep Discovery (CE)

• Structured fidelity (SEQF)

• Transparent job matching processes

• Training for job coaches

• Clear KPIs without rushing

• Flexibility to revisit stages

• “First job as pathway” only when appropriate

Why Fidelity Matters: A Critical Issue in the Australian Context

In Australia, many service providers deliver “Customised Employment” or “supported employment-style” approaches without any formal fidelity framework. This lack of structure means:

• There is no consistent definition of quality

• Providers can say they are delivering Customised Employment without following the actual model

• Job coaches and employment specialists receive inconsistent training

• <