A little less than 3 years after its birth, the Professional Development Counselling scheme (CEP) still has not erased doubts about its effectiveness. A major reason for the existence of doubts over the CEP’s effectiveness is due to the Cnefop (National Council for Employment, Vocational Training and Guidance) not having the necessary data to carry out a thorough evaluation of the CEP’s performance. On the qualitative level, the difficulty lies in the collection of elements relating to the impact of CEP on the career path of its beneficiaries. At the quantitative level, Cnefop can rely on data from operators such as Fongecif – Opacif, local missions, Apec, Cap emploi, Pôle emploi.
Beyond the fact that the training services offered by CEP (level 3 CEP) represent financial sources, Cnefop noted that they constituted the main offer of all services carried out by CEP in 2016.
In terms of local missions, the CEP has been included in the PACEA (Contractualized Career Path to Employment and Autonomy). This system replaced the Civis (Insertion Contract in the Social Life) at the beginning of January.
Local activities in decline
In 2016, local missions have experienced a decline in the number of beneficiaries of the CEP compared to the figures of 2015. According to the National Education board, this drop is explained by the number of dropouts which decreased considerably by 30% in 5 years (from 2011 to 2016). It also stems from the decline in the requirements of Pôle Emploi, which has its own training services in addition to the CEP proposition.
Breakdown of CEPs by agency
Training schemes with the Pôle emploi
Pôle Emploi is the operator that has carried out the most level 2 and 3 CEPs and which has consequently posted the largest annual increase of beneficiaries. In 2016, it set up a plan to facilitate change in order to set up the CEP, which is scheduled to end in 2017. Their scheme includes three training sessions for its counselors and work psychologists.
Training in CEP for teams
In the case of operators such as Fongecif Île-de-France and Apec, the establishment of the CEP demanded a reorganization of their services. Fongecif Île-de-France has opted for group training on construction sites following the “agile method” while Apec, for its part, has chosen to train its consultants in several stages.
The Cnefop has claimed that the CEP scheme is starting to find its place with each operator, even if the common indicators needed to evaluate them and the information systems used by each operator differ considerably. In 2016, Fongecif has strived to harmonize its offer while Cap Emploi has sought to clarify its offer of services for level 2 and 3 CEPs. More importantly, local missions have been encouraged to homogenize the their CEP programs and clearly link it to existing training services in a drive to make the CEP program more attractive and viable.