New analysis of individualised learner record (ILR) data shows that the proportion of apprentices declaring a learning difficulty, disability or difference (LLDD) has increased steadily over the past five academic years, from 11.9 per cent in 2020-21 to 16.1 per cent in 2024-25.
That is a 50 per cent increase in the number of apprentices requiring additional learning support compared to five years ago. For providers, this is a material shift that directly affects staffing, delivery models and quality assurance. The challenge is whether the apprenticeship system is realistically resourced to support learners, particularly in the context of Ofsted’s renewed emphasis on ensuring that no learner is left behind.
Better identification, broader need
There are good reasons why LLDD rates are rising. Increased awareness of neurodiversity, reduced stigma around disclosure and improvements in initial assessment all play a role. Many providers have invested in improving screening and learner conversations at the start of programmes.
In 2024-25, learning difficulties accounted for the largest share of declared needs, with 8.1 per cent of apprentices identifying a learning difficulty as their primary LLDD. Dyslexia remains the most common condition at 5.5 per cent.
More notable, however, is the growth in areas historically under-identified. Apprentices reporting autism spectrum disorders have increased more than threefold since 2020-21, as have those reporting other learning difficulties not otherwise specified.
This suggests that providers are seeing a wider range of needs that require flexibility, resources and time. As inspection frameworks place greater emphasis on inclusion, personalisation and progress for all learners, the operational implications of this shift become even more significant.
Pressure concentrated at level 2
While LLDD rates have increased across all apprenticeship levels, the impact is not evenly spread. At Level 2, 20.9 per cent of apprentices now report a primary LLDD need, up from 15.2 per cent five years ago. By comparison, LLDD rates at level 7 remain below 12 per cent but are increasing at the same rate.
For providers, this matters because level 2 apprentices are more likely to require structured support, confidence-building and regular intervention. Rising LLDD prevalence at this level places additional pressure on providers, particularly where funding does not reflect the intensity of support required.
Many providers are responding creatively by adjusting caseloads, redesigning reviews and investing in staff training, but these responses are often constrained by limited resources. In an inspection landscape that increasingly looks at how well providers support disadvantaged learners; capacity pressures are not just operational, they are strategic.
Identification is improving but delivery challenges remain
Apprenticeship funding rules require providers to screen learners for learning support needs as part of initial assessment. Structured screening tools, including platforms such as Aptem Assess, are helping providers identify previously undisclosed needs earlier.
Embedding support into day-to-day delivery by adjusting reviews, tailoring learning activities, and coordinating employer expectations takes time and skilled staff. In a system under cost pressure, this is often the hardest part to sustain. Yet this is precisely the area where inspectors will look for evidence that identification leads to meaningful support and measurable progress.
With LLDD rates rising, providers are expected not only to identify needs, but to demonstrate how those needs are actively supported and reviewed, and how they translate into sustained progress. If we want apprenticeships to remain an inclusive and credible route into skilled employment, learning support needs to be factored into how programmes are funded, staffed and evaluated, particularly as the sector works to uphold a clear commitment that no learner is left behind.
Planning for the learners we now serve
The apprenticeship system is becoming more neurodiverse. Providers are adapting at pace, but adaptation alone cannot bridge a growing gap between learner need and system capacity.
The conversation now needs to move beyond awareness. If apprenticeships are to work for an increasingly diverse learner base, the system must recognise what that support costs in time, training and people. The learners have changed. Providers are responding. The question is whether the system will change with them, and whether it will truly deliver on the ambition that no learner is left behind.
Your thoughts