By Dr. C. Justine Pierre

Dr. C. Justine Pierre is a Researcher, Labour Market Statistician, and Workforce Development Consultant at DPB Global.

Every budget can promise jobs; the harder task is publishing proof of what was delivered. Budget 2026 established a TT$475 million Employment Fund, to be used together with TT$310 million from the Unemployment Fund, to replace CEPEP and URP, community maintenance and unemployment relief work programmes, with “full-time, better-paid jobs.” With Budget 2027 due on October 12, 2026, the public record still does not clearly show what the employment spending achieved. That information gap is why independent evaluation is needed.

1. The Promise: A Bold Shift in Employment Policy, October 7, 2026

Budget 2026 presented a significant change in the direction of employment policy. CEPEP and URP were to be phased out and replaced with full-time, better-paid employment, as described in the budget review.

The proposed delivery mechanism included a National Recruitment Drive offering more than 20,000 positions. Public reporting stated that more than 11,000 applications were received on the first day.

Moving from relief work to decent, stable employment is a sound policy goal. It can improve household security, strengthen workforce participation and support better long-term workforce development. However, a major policy transition needs to be assessed on evidence rather than assumption.

A programme may generate positive results, mixed results or results that differ across groups and communities. Without a built-in evaluation plan, even strong outcomes can remain difficult to verify. The central issue is not whether the policy objective is worthwhile. The issue is whether the public can measure what was funded, who benefited, how long the benefits lasted and whether the spending produced additional employment.

That is a methodological requirement, not a political criticism.

2. Why the Headline Numbers Don’t Tell the Story, October 7, 2026

The available labour market indicators show a changing environment:

• Employment fell from 569,900 in the fourth quarter of 2025 to 564,000 in the first quarter of 2026, a decline of 5,900 jobs.
• Unemployment rose to 5.4% in the first quarter of 2026, compared with 4.9% a year earlier.
• Labour force participation also rose, from 54.3% to 55.1%.

These figures matter, but they do not explain the effect of any single employment programme. A rise in unemployment can reflect job losses, but it can also reflect people re-entering the labour market and actively looking for work. Higher participation therefore changes how the unemployment increase should be interpreted.

The national figures are also not seasonally adjusted. The energy sector, wider economic conditions and migration can influence employment outcomes at the same time as a public employment intervention. Those factors make it difficult to attribute changes in national employment directly to the Employment Fund or the Unemployment Fund.

This is where the counterfactual becomes important. The question is not only, “What happened after the programme began?” It is also, “What would have happened without the programme?”

A credible labour market assessment could compare employment outcomes among affected workers with outcomes among similar workers who were not affected. It could also examine whether jobs were genuinely additional, whether they displaced other employment, and whether participants remained employed after public support ended.

This requires consistent statistics, data collection and administrative records that can be connected without compromising privacy. It also requires a defined baseline against which later outcomes can be measured.

DPB Global capability: DPB Global provides labour market assessments, surveys and statistical analysis to support workforce planning, policy development and economic strategies. Its Labour Market Information System (LMIS) approach integrates data on employment, unemployment, wages, vacancies, labour force participation, education and skills demand to support analysis, decision-making, forecasting and planning.

3. The Evidence Gap: Conflicting Accounts of the Fund, October 7, 2026

The public record contains different accounts of how the Employment Fund was used.

One press report stated that 1,801 Ministry of Works hires were paid from the fund. The same report stated that the Finance Minister could not say in Parliament how much had been disbursed.

A separate account in the parliamentary record states that, in June 2026, TT$475 million was withdrawn from the Employment Fund to help finance a variation of appropriation, which is a mid-year reallocation of approved spending. The reason given was that the enabling legislation had not been finalised.

No public reporting found so far explains how the TT$310 million Unemployment Fund was used.

These accounts should be presented carefully and even-handedly. This is not an accusation of impropriety. It is an observation that the information needed to settle the questions is not fully in the public domain.

The sequence also deserves attention. Money was allocated before the enabling legislation was finalised. That does not, by itself, establish that the spending was inappropriate. It does demonstrate why governance, reporting and evaluation arrangements should be designed before or alongside programme implementation.

When information is incomplete or disputed, public debate can become political rather than evidence-based. Independent evaluation gives government, the opposition, workers and taxpayers a shared set of facts. It can clarify the difference between funds allocated, funds withdrawn, funds disbursed, positions filled and jobs sustained.

4. What Independent Evaluation Looks Like in Practice, October 7, 2026

Independent evaluation should be practical, measurable and connected to the decisions that public officials and citizens need to make.

Outputs

The evaluation should establish:

• How many jobs were created.
• How long each job lasted.
• Whether the contract was permanent or three-month.
• Wage levels.
• Whether workers were paid on time.
• Whether the positions were additional jobs or existing employment opportunities reclassified under a new funding arrangement.

These are basic output measures. They do not yet establish long-term impact, but without them, impact cannot be assessed reliably.

Comparison

The evaluation should examine what happened to displaced CEPEP and URP workers compared with similar workers who were not affected.

Relevant outcomes could include employment status, duration of employment, earnings, participation in training and movement into work that is not publicly subsidised. The comparison should be designed before results are reviewed, so that the method is not changed after the evidence is known.

Ripple Effects

Employment spending can affect more than direct participants. An economic impact assessment can examine effects through contractors, local suppliers and household spending in affected communities.

This broader analysis can help identify whether the programme generated economic activity beyond the payroll. It can also clarify whether observed benefits were concentrated in particular areas or groups.

Value for Money

Evaluation should calculate the cost per sustained job and compare the results with alternatives such as wage subsidies or TVET-linked placements.

The purpose is not to reduce employment policy to a single number. Cost measures should be considered alongside job duration, wage quality, skills development and household outcomes. However, public spending cannot be assessed fully without understanding the relationship between resources committed and results achieved.

Why “Independent” Matters

The evaluator should be separate from the agency running the programme. The evaluation should use a baseline, defined indicators, transparent methods and public reporting.

This approach aligns with established international evaluation practice and widely accepted methodological standards. Independence does not mean opposition to government policy. It means creating sufficient institutional distance to examine implementation and outcomes objectively.

DPB Global capability: DPB Global provides economic impact assessment and independent evaluation services, supported by labour market research, statistical analysis and data collection. These capabilities can be applied to employment programmes, workforce development measures and public investments intended to improve labour market outcomes.

5. Building Evaluation into Budget 2027, October 7, 2026

Budget 2027 provides an opportunity to make evaluation part of the employment spending cycle rather than an afterthought.

Legal Basis First

Enabling legislation and governance rules should be finalised before money is allocated. The framework should clarify authority, eligibility, reporting responsibilities, financial controls and the relationship between the Employment Fund and the Unemployment Fund.

A Results Framework

Every employment measure should have clear targets and indicators. Quarterly public reporting should show allocations, disbursements, beneficiaries, job duration, wages and progress against targets.

A results framework should distinguish inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes. This makes it easier to identify whether a programme is delayed, underspending, producing short-term outputs or achieving sustained employment.

Evaluation Money Built In

Approximately 1–2% of programme funds could be set aside for independent monitoring and evaluation. This should be treated as part of programme infrastructure, not as an avoidable administrative cost.

A modest evaluation allocation can help protect a much larger public investment by identifying implementation problems early and documenting which approaches produce durable results.

Better Data

Employment measures should be connected to labour market information. Central Statistical Office (CSO) labour force data and administrative records should be structured so that outcomes can be tracked over time.

A functioning LMIS can support data collection, information dissemination, data analysis, decision-making support, forecasting and planning. It can also improve the connection between public employment spending and broader labour market analysis.

Skills Alignment

A national skills audit should identify whether new jobs match sectors where demand is growing. This is essential for workforce development, TVET consulting and skills gap analysis.

The same principle is relevant across the Caribbean labour market, including questions concerning labour productivity, informality and the alignment between training systems and employer demand. Public employment can provide immediate income, but skills alignment can improve the prospects of longer-term economic participation.

DPB Global capability: DPB Global supports national skills audits, data collection and research, TVET, Competency-Based Education and Training (CBET), workforce development and Human Resource Development. The firm also provides labour market information and research on Black Data and BIPOC populations where demographic detail is necessary for equitable analysis.

Employment spending is an investment in people, and investments need proof of return. Independent evaluation is not about blame. It is about learning what works, fixing what does not and protecting public money.

DPB Global supports governments, development partners and organisations with independent impact assessments, labour market data collection, statistical analysis and national skills audits. Organisations seeking to strengthen the evidence base for employment and workforce development programmes can make contact with DPB Global at dpbglobal1.com.

About the Author

Dr. C. Justine Pierre is a Researcher, Labour Market Statistician, and Workforce Development Consultant at Dunn Pierre Barnett and Company Canada Ltd (DPB Global), specializing in labour market trends, data-driven policy, and economic justice for BIPOC communities globally.

About DPB Global

Dunn Pierre Barnett and Company Canada Ltd (DPB Global) is a premier full-service consulting firm specializing in Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET), Competency-Based Education and Training (CBET), Labour Market Research and Social Surveys, and Workforce Development. With global expertise in Instructional Design, Management Consulting, Capacity Building, and Business Development, DPB Global maintains one of the world’s largest databases on Black Data and populations in the Global South, providing expert insights and AI-driven analytics to support diverse communities, governments and organisations across Canada, Africa and the Americas. Visit us at dpbglobal1.com.