The government has this morning confirmed in a newly-published implementation plan that it would put apprenticeship design in England in the hands of employers.

And the skills minister, Matthew Hancock, went further, saying: “It will also provide a blueprint for wider reform in vocational education.”

The plan comes at a difficult time for the programme with a major training provider having collapsed last week, the latest government figures showing apprenticeship all age starts and success rates falling and employers increasingly paying their apprentices below the legal minimum wage. Meanwhile, out of 131 Ofsted inspections last year, no independent training provider recieved the top grade.

Nevertheless, the decision to put the apprenticeships programme in the hands of employers follows the Richard Review, published in November last year and the subsequent consultation, which ended in May.

The key announcements in today’s plan include:

 Apprenticeships will be based on “standards designed by employers”, which will “replace current frameworks.” The “aim is that, from 2017/18, all new Apprenticeship starts will be based on the new standards. As the new standards are developed and agreed, we plan to cease funding Apprenticeships under current frameworks”.

 Employers will also “have a key role in developing the high level assessment approach” to include “rigorous independent assessment, focused primarily on testing their competence at the end of their apprenticeship”.

 Eight sector-based Trailblazer projects, supported by Lord Sainsbury’s Gastby Foundation, have already “signed up” to lead the first phase of apprenticeship standard design. They are: aerospace; automotive; digital industries; electrotechnical, energy and utilities; financial services; food and drink manufacturing and life sciences & industrial sciences.

— Apprenticeship completions will be graded in future, as either pass, merit or distinction.

— The 12-month minimum duration will be applied without exceptions, such as for prior attainment.

— ‘Mechanisims’ to enforce at least 20 per cent off-the-job training will be considered.

— English and math requirements “will be stepped up gradually”.

— A National Apprenticeship Council will be created and “run by young people with elected representatives to spread peer to peer messages”.

It said in the plan: “Given the radical and far-reaching nature of these reforms, it is essential that we carefully monitor and evaluate their impact. This will enable us to determine whether they are having the intended positive effects, whether they are having any unintended consequences and, if so, whether any further refinements to the reforms are needed.”

Stewart Segal, chief executive at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) said he supported the key objectives of the reform but they “need to be carefully thought through with the key decisions made by employers in partnership with the sector specialists such as providers, awarding bodies and other stakeholders”.

He said: “Some of the changes such as the grading of Apprenticeships could add complexity and cost without adding significant value, so we should ensure that the implications are properly considered.”

But Mr Segal appeared cautious about the Trailblazers scheme, adding: “Trailblazers appear to be heavily biased towards larger employers.” He also recommended that, “any funding proposals are held back until the sector has an opportunity to see how the Trailblazers develop”.

Katja Hall, chief policy director at the Confederation of British Industry, said: “The real test of the new system will be whether it is simple; works for firms of all sizes; and puts the funding in the hands of businesses.”

Whether apprenticeships will be funded via the tax system, one of three options outlined in a separate consulation that closed in early October, won’t be announced until “later this year and the implementation timescale for it will depend on our choice of delivery model.”

Employers or professional bodies interested in getting involved in an existing or new Trailblazers should contact: Apprenticeship.Trailblazers@bis.gsi.gov.uk

————————————————————————
Join FE Week editor Nick Linford and Skills Minister Matthew Hancock for a webinar to discuss the government’s plan tomorrow at 3pm. Click here to register.

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply to Ken Flood Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 Comments

  1. “The real test of the new system will be whether it is simple; works for firms of all sizes; and puts the funding in the hands of businesses.” … if that is the case, why are there no smaller sectors amongst the Trailblazers that will drive the new system? It’s all well and good saying “we will also examine the system specifically from a small business point of view to learn lessons for future implementation” but if they involved these smaller organisations and sectors from the beginning they would actually see the issues SMEs and smaller sectors will face rather than theorize based on the experiences of BT, Jaguar, BAE Systems, IBM etc.

    The majority of employers (based on BIS research) are happy with Apprenticeships as they are, so if a change really is necessary then this was the perfect opportunity to involve a broad cross-section of employers and sectors in creating a system that is fair and works for all. Instead, once again policy is driven by large corporations who can afford to run their own apprenticeship programmes with no Government funding whatsoever and, with the imminent demise of SASE regulations, very possibly will.

    Mind you, it sounds like the funding arrangements will be one of the 3 options they consulted on (as opposed to an alternative based on the enormous amount of feedback saying all three systems would disincentivise SMEs) so perhaps that is why SMEs/small sectors aren’t involved at this stage. They probably won’t be able to offer these new Apprenticeships by 2017/18 anyway.

  2. Steve Roe

    “Employers are increasingly paying their apprentices below the legal minimum wage” so government decides to put apprenticeship design (and potentially funding) in the hands of employers – worrying!

  3. It would be a mistake for anyone to consider the current system as broken remembering that providers/colleges have been operating in a climate of recession and austerity for the last 4 years. It is no wonder apprenticeship numbers have declined when there’s been little employment especially for young people and no wonder success rates go down when people get laid off during their programme. We are subject to the wider economic business cycle and this has impacted on performance. Over the last 4 years the unit funding for Apprentices has declined with the expectation that employers during a recession would make up the difference through a contribution. As a Managing Director I can tell you that during a recession businesses cut their training spend not increase it. The story should be that the Apprenticeship brand, providers and colleges have weathered 4 years of dismal youth unemployment figures, declined productivity and cuts to funding with some robustness. The weak have fallen along the way and it would be naive to suggest that the broader economic climate wouldn’t have affected an employment based programme like Apprenticeships. However, we have all survived it and it is testament to the current depth and strength of the Apprenticeship brand that we’re here to support the recovery. This should be recognised and built upon in any new plan so that we avoid throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

  4. CITB ConstructionSkills, a Work Based Learning Provider, achieved OUTSTANDING in an OFSTED inspection report dated 9 Jan 2013. [FE Week Editor: But CITB ConstructionSkills is not classified as an independent training provider by Ofsted]

  5. Peter Cobrin

    Putting funding in the hand of the employers. Hmmm….. some I would trust totally,others, and one “leading supermarket” comes to mind, no way!!!

    Given the abject failure of the SFA to provide consistent standards of monitoring and policing of the present regime, who will police the new regime. And as I have asked before, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who will police the enforcers when they fail, as they always do?

    All employers, colleges and training providers want is consistency, stability and honesty from government and administration. What have they had? U-turns, goalposts moved mid-contract, frequent changes in personnel, obfuscation and political opportunism.

  6. Here we go again….. FTSE 100 companies driving the agenda and the SME is being locked out. Let’s not beat about the bush here, this is about reducing the cost of FE to government. I’m sure that I must be missing something in the “small print” – but aren’t the Sector Skills Councils supposed to “own” the sector standards?
    I can see this having two major problems that will cause it to backfire spectacularly:

    1. large companies with deep pockets will be setting the industry standards, so they will be complex and self serving i.e. all IT based on Microsoft products for instance
    2. the funding will be complex and difficult to access (look at the Work Force Development funding in the Health and Social Care sector)

    The outcomes of this are depressingly easy to predict

    1. a collapse in the Apprenticeship scheme in SME sector
    2. a collapse in providers ability to service apprenticeships leading to more and more pulling out of the Apprenticeship market.
    3. failure of the SFA to manage a complex process of funding (look at the issue this year with SFA software)

    It is also relatively easy to see how finding will be diverted for “business reasons” – but maybe I’m being to cynical here.

    Another more interesting scenario is – who will OfSTED inspect? The entity receiving public funding is normally the one inspected.

  7. If Ofsted’s Assessment framework is valid and I believe it is, then the stats relating to the assessed competence of independent learning providers (no one makes the top grade) and the 3-fold increase in colleagues being graded inadequate speaks to me of the need to be radical and far reaching.

    What do the stats point to as the issues to be addressed…..I wonder!

    Can’t help feeling the employer Standard is a smoke screen. Functional analysis underpins performance criteria. Is there something here about needing more relevant learning through teaching and a little less assessing. What are the competences and competencies we need to be top flight?

  8. The real need for growth in apprenticeships is amongst SMEs – if half of SMEs in this country could take on an apprentice we would see NEETs wiped out. When it comes to producing the relevant vocational qualifications sector skills bodies have always been meant to do so in conjunction with industry. Some do this very well others don’t. Knowing just what went wrong back in the late 1980s with the development of the first NVQs there could be real trouble ahead. Writing qualifications is something that requires particular skills and regulation, not sound bites such as trailblazers. I will be watching with interest knowing some of the decisions that have already been made by employers in one of the sectors highlighted. Please learn from the mistakes of the past and don’t repeat them.

  9. Congratulations to Hawk Training who featured in the Ofsted Survey of good practice in 2010 ‘Learning from the Best’ on their grade 1 from Ofsted published this morning. Many of the other independent learning providers featured in the report would also do well if they were inspected. When it comes to reform of apprenticeships Hawk is the kind of provider who work extremely well with employers of all sizes.

  10. Debbie Morrey

    Reading ‘trail blazers’ seems to me that this is being left with employers; however, as I understand it and do forgive me my ignorance at this early stage of knowledge of which I am not fully understanding; I feel that this is yet another change that will fail as in my experience some companies have no interest in the employee, but the government apprenticeship payment! I do wonder though: companies will at the end of the so called apprenticeship time will awards their employee with a pass, merit or higher mark on their skills gained ; again forgive me but isn’t this called ‘getting to know the ropes’ of the new role as we all do in a new job! Are companies equipped to set the standards and assess them? My answer is yes because it’s a normal job induction in my mind and I cannot for the love of money understand why things are changing again. Bring back the stand alone NVQ and Train to Gain funding. Functional skills is a must but you can take a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

    Backing from major providers such as City and Guilds and the qualification guidance is a must as these are a recognised accreditation and can be recognised any where. Can trail blazers be recognised any where and nationally?

    I agree with Phil Hatton’s comments above, watch this space.