A revised framework for traineeships has revealed a programme more restrictive for 19 to 24 year-olds than their 16 to 19 counterparts.

The updated Traineeships Framework for Delivery document, published by the government yesterday, says “for 19-24 year olds, the programme will be available only for those who have not yet achieved their first full level two qualification” — equivalent to five GCSEs grade A* to C.

However, the document says “for 16-19 year olds, providers will have flexibility to work with young people who have level two qualifications but not level three.”

The 19 to 24 year-old restriction has come as a surprise to the sector, and Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers told FE Week: “We were pleased that Traineeships were extended to 19 to 24-year-olds but having a different eligibility for different age groups is adding complexity to the system.

“It says in the Framework document providers and employers will have the freedom to work with the individuals within the target group who they feel would benefit most from traineeships.

“Therefore we would have liked the eligibility criteria for both age groups to have been the same. ”

“We really should also avoid any potential for confusion among employers and learners.”

A Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) spokesperson told FE Week: “BIS and the Department for Education have considered the target groups carefully for the 16-19 and 19-24 age groups. 16-19 year olds with a level two qualification are more likely to need this kind of provision than 19-24 year olds as they will have had less opportunities to gain experience in the labour market.”

She added: “Both departments will keep the traineeships policy under review.”

Traineeships were first proposed by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg in June last year for 16 to 24-year-olds. But there was disappointment throughout the sector in May when the first framework showed only those aged below 19 would be included in the programme.

The situation changed again however during this year’s Spending Review when the government decided to include the older age bracket when they are rolled out in August, also to include those with learning difficulty assessmentsup to academic age 25.

Yesterday’s revised framework set out what traineeships hoped to achieve. This included work preparation training such as interview preparation and CV writing, training in English and maths, a high-quality work placement between six weeks and five months and training from providers who were rated outstanding or good by education inspectors Ofsted.

Skills Minister Matthew Hancock said: “Young people in Britain deserve the chance to work and get on in life which is why we’re introducing traineeships to help them get on the first rung of the ladder.

“Employers value real experience which is why I’m delighted that more than 100 businesses have come forward. I now want to urge more employers – no matter what size – to sign up to the programme and make the most of the talents of our young people.

“This is vital for our economy to compete in the global race. Traineeships are just one of the ways this government is making sure young people cross the start line.”

There are three times as many young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) as there are apprenticeship placements for under-25s, a report revealed today.

The statistics were released in the same week as Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg announced a review of the options available to 16 to 25 year olds in the UK, including his own £1bn Youth Contract scheme launched in November 2011.

Mr Clegg announced the review in a speech at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) president’s dinner on Monday, but made no reference to the government’s traineeship scheme due to begin from August 1, a new framework for which has been announced today.

Kayte Lawton, senior research fellow at the Institute for Public Policy Research which conducted the report, said: “The Youth Contract has not been an adequate replacement for the Future Jobs Fund and youth unemployment remains a major concern.”

The report showed that one in seven under-25s was classed as NEET, totaling more than a million young people, and called for the government to make employment be the central focus of UK economic policy, targeting an employment rate of 80 per cent.

Ms Lawton added: “For many years, policy has focused on improving individuals’ skills and employability, often with impressive results.

“But if we are to pursue and achieve an employment rate that competes with the best in the world, we will need a more assertive approach to putting job creation and boosting the demand for labour at the centre of our economic and social policies.

“Many other European countries have an employment rate of 80 per cent, so this is not a ‘pie in the sky’ aspiration.”

In his speech, Mr Clegg acknowledged that the “average school leaver” was probably unaware of which government departments and schemes were there to help them.

“Right now it’s too easy for those young people who don’t think university is right for them to get lost in the maze of different employment and skills programmes available and never find the advice, support and options they need,” he said.

The comprehensive government review, he said, would be carried out over the summer by the cabinet office and report to him and the Prime Minister in the autumn.

He added: “What we want is a simpler, easier to use system that lays down a clear route ahead into work for our young people and gives businesses a coherent offer to find the workers they need.”

The Youth Contract programme comprises £1bn worth of delivery over three years, spread across three government departments.

The Department for Work and Pensions fund work experience placements, work incentives and support from Job Centre Plus advisers for unemployed 18 to 24 year olds, while the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills subsidies small businesses taking on 18 to 24 year olds.

A Department for Education spokesperson said their contribution was £126 million for 16 to 17 year olds between 2011 and 2015, “incentivizing organisations to re-engage young people in training or employment.”

An extra grade focussing solely on post-16 provision in schools and academies could be introduced to inspection reports, Ofsted has told FE Week.

It is hoped the move may give a more accurate reflection of the quality of a school’s sixth form provision and make it easier for prospective students to make comparisons between their local sixths forms and general FE colleges. 

An Ofsted spokesperson said: “Ofsted is now planning whether to provide a separate grading for a school’s sixth form within its inspection reports.”

She added that the effectiveness of post-16 provision did already inform wider inspection judgements on a school and that Ofsted recognised the importance of the importance of sixth forms in helping students to progress to employment or higher education.

The extra grade would reverse a decision made two years ago to produce a single overall grade for schools.  

Plans for the extra grade were welcomed by the Association of Colleges (AoC).

Joy Mercer, AoC’s director of policy, said separating sixth forms was “the right decision”.

“AoC has been campaigning for a separate grading for schools sixth forms for some time so we are very pleased that Ofsted have listened,” she said.

She added there was “an obvious injustice” in cases the AoC was aware of, where school and academy sixth forms did not retain their students after the age of 17, failed to achieve success rates comparable to a local college, but were part of a school rated “good” or “outstanding” by Ofsted.

The Sixth Form Colleges’ Association has also campaigned for this measure.

The Sixth Form Colleges’ Association Chief executive David Igoe said: “We are very pleased Ofsted have taken this step.”

Mr Igoe recently wrote to Her Majesty’s chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw, highlighting that parent and students were currently unable to make “meaningful comparisons” between school sixth forms and colleges.

His letter continued: “We understand the reason for this and the concern the Secretary of State has to reduce bureaucracy.

“However, we think it is important that parents and students can make an informed choice about where to study.

He added that the time was right to rethink the policy.

Today he said: “We are naturally delighted Sir Michael has responded to this request and we hope that further work will continue on developing a single benchmark for all 16-19 institutions.

“It would, after all, defeat the point if a school sixth form grade meant something different to a Sixth Form College grade and to a FE College grade.

“Frustratingly that is the case at present but we remain hopeful that Ofsted remain committed to developing national all institution benchmarks.”

Malcolm Trobe, policy director of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said the organisation had “no issues” with the introduction of a new grade but agreed that colleges and sixth forms were judged on the same criteria.

“There’s a logic to the way we’re doing it at the moment but there’s an equal logic in what they’re talking about,” he said.

“The key thing is they have got to use exactly the same criteria — there has to be a level playing field in terms of the use of data.”

He added: “Inspectors also have to make sure they are spending a significant amount time in the sixth form during a two day visit to the school, to ensure they are taking a good fair look at it.”

 Ms Mercer also called for Ofsted to use the same inspection framework for college and school sixth forms, pointing out that at key stage five, both were monitored and funded in the same way.

The boss of Elmfield Training has quit after Ofsted inspectors gave the firm an inadequate rating having come across “unacceptably low” results.

Ged Syddall resigned after ten years as chief executive, and founder, of the Cheshire-based independent training provider taking “full responsibility” for the results.

He said: “Despite many positive findings the business has received low grades and ultimately as chief executive I take full responsibility for that.

“I have therefore resigned as chief executive with immediate effect.”

However, it is understood Mr Syddall will remain majority shareholder of Elmfield, which currently has a £27.6m contract with the Skills Funding Agency.

Meanwhile, the agency has issued the firm with a Notice of Serious Breach and prohibited it from contracting any new employers while under the notice.

Skills Minister Matthew Hancock said: “We are taking tough and urgent action on failing colleges and training providers such as Elmfield that are not up to scratch to protect learners.

“I want to root out poor performance wherever I find it.”

The Ofsted inspection of Elmfield last month today resulted in a downgrading on 2011’s ‘requires improvement’ (grade three, and formerly termed ‘satisfactory’) rating to inadequate (grade four).

“The report says our staff are committed and enthusiastic, and inspectors told me at the end of the inspection they had nothing but admiration for the passion staff have for their work. I cannot thank them enough for that,” said Mr Syddall.

But Ofsted was critical on several areas of service provided by Elmfield, which previously counted supermarket giant Morrisons as its biggest customer. Barclays is among its current client base.

“Success rates in the apprenticeship programmes experienced a considerable decline last year and a high proportion of learners within the Morrisons’ contract did not complete the full framework,” said the report.

“Furthermore, the number of learners who completed their apprenticeship in the planned time fell to an unacceptably low level of 33 per cent.”

It added: “The number of learners who complete their qualification in the expected time continues to decline and has reached an unacceptably low 23 per cent of the retail apprenticeships, which make up the majority of Elmfield’s provision.”

And attendance at key skills sessions fell to a “very low 26 per cent,” said the report, which added: “Elmfield has been slow in implementing the delivery of functional skills and does not have sufficient numbers of staff with the appropriate qualifications in the teaching of functional skills.”

However, the report also said the 11,371-learner provider had experienced “changes at the board level within Morrisons, tough trading conditions in the retail sector, long periods of lockdown preventing activity other than trading taking place, intense media scrutiny and breakdown of relationships, combined with lack of commitment from some stores.” The report claimed these “all contributed to this unsatisfactory position”.

A spokesperson for Elmfield, which has 413 staff, said: “We are obviously disappointed by the grades in the report, but we think the inspection process itself was fair.

“We accept that in the current Ofsted framework it is almost inevitable for a provider with inadequate outcomes for learners to be given inadequate grades for leadership and management and overall effectiveness as well.”

She added: “Although the report is critical of the overall success rates achieved by learners in 2011/12, inspectors recognised that a high proportion of learners — 83 per cent — succeeded in the vocational element of their training and that achievement rates improved markedly this year, to 86 per cent.

“As far as teaching and learning are concerned, the report says that most teaching and assessment sessions are good, learners develop good vocational skills and the programmes we have started in the last two years are well planned and managed.

“We accept the recommendations for improvement in the report and will focus on tackling the success factors identified initially in our self-assessment report and by Ofsted.

“We continue to work closely with the Skills Funding Agency, our employer partners and most importantly our learners to build on the strong partnerships built up in the last two years.”

Ofsted inspectors will return to Elmfield in the autumn to see if it has improved.

Mr Hancock said: “A more rigorous and responsive skills system is crucial to our future economic success and our drive to tackle youth unemployment.

“Poor training undermines social mobility and holds back people who want to get on in life.”