Qualification benefits, 2010

Nationally, one out of four participants were under 25 years of age. The counties of Møre og Romsdal and Nord-Trøndelag had the highest proportion of young participants (38 per cent), while in the capital of Oslo the share of young participants was only 8 per cent. These differences are in line with the year before.

Less than half of the participants had received some form of state or municipal support (such as employment measures or medical treatment) one week before applying for KVP. With regard to their income before applying for KVP, 51 per cent had social assistance as their major source of income, while another 11 per cent received social assistance as a supplement to other income.

Employment measures and work placements are the most common activities

Regarding the content of the programme, the most common activity was employment measures, and the second most important was work placements. This corresponds to the 2009 pattern. As for receiving other public benefits during the programme period, 16 per cent received long-term social assistance (in addition to the qualification benefits), while 28 per cent received short-term social assistance. Forty per cent received state support and 6 per cent received municipal housing payment support.

Only 6 per cent of the KVP participants in 2010 had interrupted their programme through absence as of 31 December. Of those who completed the programme or left in agreement with the employment authorities, 21 per cent went on to ordinary employment. This number is somewhat lower than the previous year, and one explanation may be the sharp increase in the number of persons completing their programme. One out of five of those completing KVP had become independent of public support after finishing the programme, up from 14 per cent the year before.

About the publication

A total of 417 municipalities reported data on KVP to the local employment authorities for 2010, while 413 of these reported data to Statistics Norway. In addition to these (generally minor) municipalities, we have excluded another 12 municipalities from all or some of the tables due to extensive errors. Consequently, our data are based on 12 000 participants out of the approximately 13 800 reported to the local employment authorities.

Data are published on county level and according to size of municipality.

Tables:

• Table 1 Number of cases on qualification benefits, by age, county and size of municipality. 2010
• Table 2 Did the participant during the last two months before application receive any of the following benefits? 2010. Per cent
• Table 3 Did the participant take part in any state or municipal programme one week before application for qualification benefits? 2010. Per cent
• Table 4 Status of the qualification programme as of 31 December 2010. Per cent
• Table 5 By completed programme or programme terminated as agreed - what was the participant's labour force status immediately after ended programme? 2010. Per cent
• Table 6 By completed programme or programme terminated as agreed - what was the participant's assistance status immediately after ended programme? 2010. Per cent
• Table 7 Did the participant in 2010, during the qualification programme, also received social assistance, municipal housing support or state housing support? Per cent
• Table 8 Which measures / activities/ support did the participant's program consist of during 2010? Per cent