The National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) has introduced a formal recognition process for Apprenticeship Training Agencies (ATAs) in order to safeguard the quality of provision delivered under the model.

The new approval system, which has been developed in partnership with the Confederation of Apprenticeship Training Agencies (COATA), applies to all ATAs in England and requires that they operate in accordance with the ATA framework.

ATAs which fail to pass the recognition process by August will not be listed on the National Register of Approved ATAs, barring all colleges and training providers from entering a contract with them. Peter Pledger, chairman of COATA, told FE Week: “It’s really simple, you can’t operate without it.

“If you are an ATA you need a Skills Funding Agency (SFA) provider to pay to deliver and pay for the training.

“If at the end of the process you are not recognised, then no SFA funded provider can work with you.”

Until the end of August the recognition process does, however, allow organisations to operate for up to six months without recognition as an ‘ATA in Development’.

The ATA Recognition Process guidance document, published by NAS, states: “There will be instances when a new organisation or one that is in the process of setting-up is not in a position to make a full application to become an Approved ATA.

“In these circumstances organisations are asked to register with NAS as an ‘ATA in Development’.

“The development phase can last for a maximum of six months and will allow the organisation time to set-up, develop their business model and operate as an ATA prior to full approval.”

NAS were concerned about organisations coming to them to say they were ATAs”

In a traditional apprenticeship, an employer recruits a young person and then places them on an apprenticeship framework, taking on all of the employment responsibility and training them either in-house or with an independent training provider.

An ATA on the other hand employs the apprentice themselves, hiring them out to businesses with a management fee until they decide whether or not to recruit them full-time.

The training, however, is still delivered by a provider with a Skills Funding Agency (SFA) contract.

While the ATA model is new to the UK, it has been operating in Australia under the Group Training Organisations (GTO) system for more than 20 years.

The ATA model has proven particularly popular with small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).

“Some SMEs are reluctant to employ the apprentice themselves either because they’re worried about the HR risks or they’re worried about the hassle involved,” Mr Pledger said.

“They may not have ever employed 16 to 18 year olds, or even 19-24 year olds, and therefore the only way to persuade them to take on an apprentice is to step in and be the employer.”

Mr Pledger said the new recognition process was conceived by NAS to try and root out any unscrupulous businesses pretending to be ATAs.

“NAS were concerned about organisations coming to them to say they were ATAs,” Mr Pledger said.

“So the NAS knew about the ATAs that they had funded, but they were getting calls, on what I understand as a daily basis, from people saying we have an ATA and how do we work with you or how can we progress.”

He added: “Some of those ATAs, to be quite frank, were scams.”

Businesses were trying to scam NAS by using the ATA model as a front for a programme led apprenticeship, or by pretending to use a host business when there was none at all.

“There was a whole range of other mechanisms just to simply extract training funding from the NAS for programmes that simple weren’t apprenticeships,” Mr Pledger said.

The new recognition process was launched during the Easter break, however the NAS are unable to promote or comment on the launch due to the pre-election period, known as ‘purdah’.

Paul Coxhead, chief executive of the Logistics Apprenticeship Training Academy (LATA), said the new recognition process “all makes sense”.

“It is all about quality, it’s about what we want at the end at the end of this,” Mr Coxhead told FE Week.

“It’s not just quality for the employers so they get quality people, its quality for the kids so they’re getting something which is meaningful, which is going to carry them through.”

The recognition process follows the ATA framework released by the NAS on April 2, which lists the key behaviours associated with an ATA, such as how to engage properly with apprentices, host employers and training providers.

Ashley Langdon, chief executive of Impact Apprenticeships, says while he thinks the framework and recognition process is “a great move forward”, he has concerns about who the framework and recognition process will be monitored by.

Mr Langdon said: “I have some questions as far as the overall on-going policing of it.

“Obviously NAS local directors which we work with will visit regularly and all the rest of it, but I’ll be interested to see how they actually audit and police practitioners that are operating ATAs.”

Mr Pledger says because ATAs are independent organisations and not directly funded by the NAS, even with the framework it’s very difficult to monitor and protect the ATA brand.

“All we will do is say you are not recognised by COATA and the NAS if you don’t meet our framework,” Mr Pledger said.

“What you do with your own money and your own resources are entirely up to you, but we won’t work with you and the SFA won’t fund providers to work with you either.”

 

Does the ATA model need a makeover?

The ATA model was criticised by Tom Wilson, director of unionlearn at the House of Commons last week.

Mr Wilson, speaking at an evidence session held by the Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Select Committee, said it wasn’t “a genuine employment relationship” for the apprentice.

“It’s a device which is being used to create the impression of an employment relationship and that’s frankly in our view something which is, antithetical to the fundamental idea of what an apprenticeship is all about,” Mr Wilson said.

“Which is you work with an employer, not a group of employers, and that that employer, when you complete the apprentice takes you on ideally and gives you a full time job.”

He added: “The ATA model is much more like an agency, frankly.”

Mr Wilson later added that the ATA model was damaging the apprenticeship brand.

“We’ve got so many examples that we’ve come across through our networks with unions of ATAs which provide frankly not very good quality, not all, some are better than others, absolutely, but we have many, many examples where the ATA model has not served apprenticeships all that well,” Mr Wilson said.

“They may have achieved the apprenticeship but they’ve then not actually got a job afterwards, or the quality of their training was not all that great, or in effect what they’ve been doing is working for an employer, not a group of employers, in the same way as if that employer frankly could have taken them on properly as we would have argued they should anyway.”

Martin Doel, chief executive of the Association of Colleges (AoC), defended the ATA model and said they had “a really strong role to play here with SMEs”.

“I think there is a very powerful model which was setup as a concept two years ago,” Mr Doel said.

“We’re clearly in the process of learning what makes it work and work in the best way, in terms of regulation and, we’re perhaps not there with sharing best practices and oversight in order to continue to improve the model… but I do think there is a role for Group Training Associations (GTA) and ATAs, particularly for small employers.”

Mr Doel added: “I think it is a very persuasive offer and a very useful model to use.”

Education destination measures for students entering and leaving FE will be published for the first time this summer.

The measures, due to be published in July, will show percentage of students progressing to further learning in a school, further education or sixth form college, apprenticeship or higher education institution.

The Department for Education (DfE) announced the move on their website on April 19, saying: “We have made it very clear that we want to put more information into the public domain so that parents and students can make informed choices about the performance of schools and colleges in their area.

“The destination measures will provide clear and comparable information on the success of schools and colleges in helping all their students take qualifications that offer them the best opportunity to progress.

“They will also encourage institutions to make sure their students receive the support needed to prepare for and complete the transition on to a positive sustained destination.”

Two destination measures will be introduced, which will show the destinations of young people the year after they leave school or college.

The Key Stage 4 measure, according to the DfE, will be based on activity at academic age 16, the year after the young person left compulsory schooling, while the 16-18 measure will be based on activity in the year after learning at age 16-18.

The DfE said: “The measures will be based on participation in all of the first two terms (defined as October to March) of the year after the young person left the institution.

“This will encourage schools and colleges to support and prepare their students to progress to a destination which offers sustained engagement. It is also the measurement period that is closest to the point at which the young person left their former institution and so is the point over which the institution has most influence.”

However, this is only phase 1 of the project. For phase 2, the DfE will work on including the “more complex” employment destinations and, if the data is robust enough, they we aim to publish both education and employment destinations in Spring 2013.

The measures will be based on the data the DfE already receives and there will be no additional data collection required.

The businessman behind a review into apprenticeships has spoken of the “cluelessness” surrounding the programme among employers.

Jason Holt has been tasked by the government to take charge of an employer-led review into how businesses can be encouraged to hire an apprentice.

Mr Holt, chief executive of Holts Group of Companies, was given the role in early February and has since been gathering evidence from small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) about what the government can be doing to reduce bureaucracy and simplify the process for recruiting and training new apprentices.

In an update on the progress of his review, Mr Holt told FE Week that there are three areas that he is currently investigating.

He said: “One is very much around the issue of awareness from the employer point of view; there’s a sense of cluelessness out there, which is unbelievable.

“Such as not being aware of what an apprenticeship is or where to begin in looking where to recruit an apprentice.”

Mr Holt also said there is an issue with schools. He said: “They are focused on an academic route and the opportunities for apprenticeships aren’t something that’s clearly defined. However, engaging schools with colleges and employers is something that I’m looking to investigate.”

The final area of investigation, he says, is “the process”, adding: “Where’s the best place to broker the marriage between an apprentice and an employer?

“Is it better at a local level or through the National Apprenticeship Service?”

Mr Holt also revealed that he is “getting to the end of the evidence gathering phase now”, but there is still time to submit views.

One of the ways Mr Holt is gathering evidence is through an online survey, which will stay open until the end of April.

He said: “The final phase is putting it together and testing recommendations with various business focus groups. So I’m beginning to form ideas, but they haven’t been fully formed just yet.”

The recommendations, Mr Holt expects, will go to ministers sometime in May.

Meanwhile, the government has revealed there is no current launch date for a separate employer-led review, which is due to assess quality of apprenticeships.

At the time of announcing Mr Holt’s review in February, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills signalled the separate review would be “launched shortly”, but no further announcement has been made.

A BIS spokesperson said: “It is important sufficient preparatory work is undertaken and that a suitable lead reviewer is secured, so as to ensure the review is as effective as possible. The review will take place alongside the extensive measures already undertaken and work currently underway to raise standards and improve quality of apprenticeships.”

Although the final scope and terms of reference for the review will be announced when the review is launched, BIS has given an insight into how it could be formed.

The spokesperson added: “The broad purpose of the review will be to take a medium-long term look at the future of apprenticeship standards in England; aiming to identify best practice and ensure every apprenticeship delivers professionally recognised qualifications which employers need, to world class benchmarks, and ensure that government is maximising the impact of public investment in apprenticeships.”

Majority of colleges and training providers support minimum fee for apprenticeships

A minimum employer fee for apprentices aged 19 or above has been supported by professionals in the further education (FE) sector, according to a new survey.

The research, conducted by Lsect, funding consultancy and publisher of FE Week, shows that of those who had a view, 60 per cent of respondents said they thought it would be a “quite good” or “very good” idea if the government introduced a minimum fee for 19+ apprenticeships.

Allan Lewis, managing director of Education and Training Associates Ltd, said: “It will create a level playing field and encourage greater commitment from employers towards the programme and its delivery.

“Hopefully it would lead to increased support to learners and increased monitoring of their progress by employers to achieve the outcomes.”

The survey had 194 respondents including senior managers of private training providers, union representatives, as well as MIS managers, principals and vice principals from FE colleges.

Mick Fletcher, a visiting Research Fellow at the Institute of Education and consultant, said: “There is little evidence of employer contributions in cash or kind.

“If employers want to ‘own’ skills they should pay their share, not seek to redirect taxpayers’ money to cover their own costs.”

The minimum fee could involve a variable but standard level of funding contribution, set by government, which colleges and training providers would have to collect from employers for any new apprentice aged 19 and above.

The fee could also be collected from the employer after the college or training provider has drawn down funding from its Skills Funding Agency (SFA) allocation.

Nick Linford, managing editor of FE Week, says it is “implausible” to expect that high quality training could be delivered without charging the employer.

Speaking at an evidence session held by the Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Select Committee for their inquiry into apprenticeships last week, he said: “I think the only way to go, really, is down the route of minimum fees.

“If the government expects to get high quality the only way is for the employer to contribute and I think the government plays a huge role in changing the culture of employers to put their hand in their pocket and pay for it.

“Employers will expect a lot more when they pay for it and you know they’ll want it and use it well when they’re paying for it.”

Martin Doel, chief executive of the Association of Colleges (AoC) added during an earlier evidence session: “We need to get to grips with the employer contribution.”

Minimum employer fees were addressed in the “Independent review of fees and co-funding in Further Education in England” carried out by Christopher Banks CBE in July 2010.

“Any failure to collect the minimum fee would be reported and could lead to “clawback” of funding by the Government in an annual reconciliation process,” it states.

“In this way, the minimum fee approach would act as a stronger fees target system, where there is a real penalty for colleges and training providers, in terms of losing funding through clawback, if they fail to bring in the minimum fee.”

The Lsect survey also showed that of those who expressed a view about the issue, 40 per cent had reservations about introducing a minimum employer fee.

Breda Leyne, learning and development consultant at Cogito Development Projects, said: “Although I agree employers might value something they have paid for better in truth the need now is to get young people into some kind of work environment and that might need to have employers incentivised.”

The survey also asked professionals what they thought of the 12 month minimum duration introduced for apprentices aged 16 to 18.

Almost 90 per cent of respondents who had a view said the prescribed length of time was a “quite good” or “very good” idea, while just over 10 per cent thought it was a bad idea.

The survey also asked respondents what they thought of the rapid increase in apprentices aged 25 and above.

Of those who had a view, 54 per cent said they were not supportive of the growth in adult apprenticeships.

Click here for a more in-depth look at the survey results.

A new flexible provision to deliver programmes tackling localised skills needs has been introduced in the FE sector.

The Innovation Code, which formed part of the commitments featured within New Challenges, New Chances, is now live.

Although the Code has been widely well received, sector membership bodies have told FE Week that they hoped it would go further.

As set out by the Skills Funding Agency, it features six learning aims, which can be used to develop and deliver provision, in conjunction with local business and employers, which addresses current or future skills needs.

It comes following recommendations in Baroness Sharp’s report, issued in November, on colleges in their communities, A Dynamic Nucleus.

Association of Colleges’ (AoC) director of policy, Joy Mercer, said: “While the innovation code was one of the recommendations of Baroness Sharp’s report A Dynamic Nucleus, AoC and members of the commission had a wider vision.

“It was hoped the project would allow colleges to meet a whole range of needs in the community, for example working with people who face mental health problems, or rough sleepers who may be otherwise excluded.”

But, Mrs Mercer added: “However, this is a move in the right direction. This new system gives the flexibility to meet employment and skills needs in the community by developing a qualification after, rather than before, the learning begins.

“So, in this climate, it will be beneficial for students and colleges who are doing their best to meet the needs of their economy in the locality.

“We see this as the first step toward colleges being able to respond to the needs of the communities within which they already play a crucial role.”

Providers seeking to use the Code must be on the Agency’s Register of Training Organisations and the provision needs to be delivered within their existing allocation; there is no additional funding for using the Code.
However, there is no formal application process, nor do providers need to seek permission to use the Code.

According to the Agency, the Code can be applied for up to 12 months and providers will need to work with an Ofqual-recognised awarding organisation, so the provision can be migrated onto the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF).

The 157 Group, although supportive of the Code, has questioned the funding mechanism.

A spokesperson said: “157 Group is fully supportive of any freedoms and flexibilities implemented to enable innovation to flourish within the sector. “However, it is unfortunate that funding can only be given under the Code for qualifications that can be linked to the QCF.”

David Hughes, chief executive of National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE), said the Code will show how useful it can be to jobseekers.

He said: “We know there are colleges and providers already wanting to use this new flexibility.

“I was with a college recently who wanted to provide essential learning that local people needed to help them get jobs locally.

“We know that without the Code these people wouldn’t have been able to access the learning they needed to get those jobs.”