For many people, hearing that changes are being made to employment support within NHS Talking Therapies may initially feel concerning. Change often raises questions about what will be lost. However, there is another perspective worth considering: the opportunity to create more specialist, targeted, and effective support for people who need it most.
Recent national guidance has confirmed that centrally funded Employment Advisor provision within NHS Talking Therapies will focus primarily on supporting people who are out of work, reflecting evidence that employment outcomes are strongest for this group. More than 347,000 people have accessed employment support through NHS Talking Therapies since 2018, demonstrating the significant value these services bring to individuals and communities.
The impact of employment advisors in NHS Talking Therapies on employee earnings and employment status was interesting and we can of course manipulate figures, facts and mitigation to suit needs but we can’t change what has ben concluded and how this information is being used.
This report by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) examines how Employment Advisor (EA) support, delivered alongside NHS Talking Therapies, affects peoples:
- Earnings
- Employment status
Key Findings
- Positive outcomes for people not in work
- Mixed outcomes for people already employed
These findings are important, but they don’t necessarily tell the whole story. The research doesn’t establish that Employment Adviser support caused the less favourable outcomes for people already in work.
Now do I believe the “mixed outcomes” for people have not considered things like reasonable adjustments, people reducing hours, changing roles and finding a better work life balance that keeps them in work even if on a lower income.
YES!! Can we change this fact. NO!!
Earnings and employment status are important measures, but they don’t always reflect the full picture. For some people, reducing their hours, changing roles or receiving reasonable adjustments can help them stay in work while managing their mental health. These are possibilities worth considering, although we shouldn’t assume they explain the findings.
A Greater Focus on Employment Outcomes
One of the key benefits of the proposed changes is the ability to direct resources towards those facing the greatest barriers to entering employment.
People who are unemployed often require intensive support, including vocational profiling, career planning, CV development, interview preparation, employer engagement, and navigating the transition from benefits into work. By creating services specifically designed around these needs, providers can develop greater expertise and achieve stronger outcomes.
Rather than offering a one-size-fits-all approach, services can become more focused and outcome-driven.
Recognising That Job Retention Still Matters
Importantly, the proposed changes do not mean that support for people already in work should disappear. Helping someone find a job and supporting them to remain in employment are closely linked, but the support they need can be quite different.
Does the specified allocation of centrally funded roles allow for looking funded roles to go in the opposite direction and target those requiring job retention support?
Many individuals experiencing mental health challenges need help to stay in employment, manage sickness absence, access workplace adjustments, or successfully return to work following a period away.
Do these changes pave the way for specific and dedicated Employment Retention services/teams and Advisor roles?
Does this mean there is the opportunity to recognises these unique challenges and creates a dedicated pathway for supporting people who may otherwise fall out of the labour market.
For Status this change represents an opportunity to build a more specialist service, rather than simply reducing provision.
Better Support Through Specialisation
Anyone working within employment services understands that supporting someone into work (though similar) is very different from helping someone remain in work.
Job-seeking support requires expertise in labour markets, recruitment practices, employer engagement, and career development. Retention support requires knowledge of workplace wellbeing, reasonable adjustments, return-to-work planning, employment legislation, and occupational health processes. there is of course a cross over, but it is where the focus lies that highlights the greatest differences.
By establishing specialist roles, advisors can deepen their expertise, develop stronger professional identities, and provide higher-quality interventions. This benefits not only service users but also employers and commissioners seeking measurable impact.
Creating Better Outcomes for Employers
Employers also stand to gain from a more specialist model.
A dedicated retention service can provide a clear point of contact for organisations seeking support around employee wellbeing, sickness absence, workplace adjustments, and staff retention. This can help reduce absence-related costs, improve productivity, and support healthier workplaces.
At a time when many employers are facing recruitment challenges, helping people stay in work can be just as important as helping people find work.
Strengthening the Future of Employment Support
The reality is that funding environments continue to evolve. Organisations that adapt successfully are those that respond to change while maintaining their commitment to delivering high-quality services.
Our proposed model where centrally funded roles focus on job seekers giving autonomy to local funding to target job retention work creates an opportunity to align with national policy, protect funding streams, improve workforce efficiency, and develop clearer measures of success. It allows services to demonstrate impact across both employment and retention outcomes while ensuring specialist support remains available for individuals facing different challenges.
Looking Ahead
The true measure of any change is whether it improves outcomes for the people we serve.
If implemented well, these proposals could create a stronger, more specialised employment support system: one that helps unemployed people move into meaningful work while ensuring those already in employment receive the targeted support they need to stay there.
The challenge now is not whether change is happening, but how we use this opportunity to create services that are more responsive, more effective, and better equipped to improve both mental health and employment outcomes for the future.
How can we ensure that people experiencing mental health difficulties receive the right support, whether they are looking for work or trying to remain in employment?
Warren Trunchion