Levy flexibility will help us meet employer needs

The apprenticeship levy was introduced to encourage employers to invest in the next generation of skilled workers. But in the face of reformed apprenticeship standards its flexibility has decreased, making adaptation to employers’ needs more difficult.

Combined with the complexity of apprenticeship administration, this puts many employers off using their levy.

In instances where the levy is used, it may be to upskill already highly qualified professionals rather than giving opportunities to new workers.

At The City of Liverpool College we’ve had to pivot and work creatively to meet these challenges.

We’ve worked with employers to create bespoke apprenticeship training courses which use existing standards but add additional training where required. This has included giving gas engineers and plumbers heat pump system training in our Vaillant green skills workshop, and training bricklayers in modern methods of construction in partnership with CITB and ABC Training.

We utilise other standards with enough transferrable skills and relevance as we make an inflexible system work for employers, often at our own cost as an expensive extra.

We also recognise that some employers need modularised training.

To counter this, we’ve created a programme of short courses funded via a mixture of adult skills funds, boot camps or at full cost.

These help employers upskill their workforce, particularly in areas like green skills and retrofit where we have learned that the skills that fit into the green agenda are not always those that we anticipated. Consequently, funding opportunities can be more difficult than they should be.

Overdue change

Expanding the range of foundational apprenticeships will introduce greater flexibility into the system and be a welcome move for training providers. But it may not go far enough for all employers.

The proposal that the levy be ring-fenced with half for apprenticeships and half for other forms of training, although fraught with danger for apprenticeships, could address some of the upskilling gaps that we as an education provider have encountered.

If parts of the levy were opened up for wider training, this could provide realistic levels of funding for courses which currently struggle significantly, such as engineering and welding, as large infrastructure projects with a green angle loom on the horizon.

At present, adult skills funding rates often do not reach the point at which such courses become viable.

Driving green skills agenda

The City of Liverpool College is currently one of only three FE colleges offering complex refrigeration and air conditioning apprenticeships and training programmes.

We work with Alstom UK, helping them upskill their engineers to refurbish air conditioning units on trains rather than replacing them, which drastically reduces carbon footprint.

We have also worked with Marshall Fleet Solutions to develop a shorter standard focused on mobile refrigeration units.

Whilst we can offer the full apprenticeship to any employer, we often cannot offer funded access to the shorter training courses.

Even if the levy is opened up to adult skills funding, this will not help in those sectors for which funding is too low to make courses viable. This means smaller and medium sized enterprises cannot take advantage of these training opportunities in the same way that larger employers with more resources can.

If the levy is opened up, it needs to be done in such a way that the system will not be abused and opportunity is widened for all.

The funding should be directed towards training which is currently beyond the reach of the SMEs that are the country’s backbone.

SMEs are being left behind by the way standards currently work. They do not have the capacity to absorb the additional costs of an apprentice learning on a programme that is not quite the right fit, or have the time to invest in creating an entirely new programme.

If the government wants to meet its green skills targets, it doesn’t need to win over huge companies. It needs to get onside the smaller, local companies that we call when the boiler breaks down.

How we’ll drive apprenticeship growth

National Apprenticeship Week is upon us – an important moment to celebrate apprentices and their positive impact on communities, businesses and the wider economy.

We want to remind potential apprentices and their employers that apprenticeships drive opportunity and growth, providing paid work and sought-after skills that lead to great careers.

But behind the spotlight shone on apprentices this week, the government is driving reforms to make apprenticeships work better for everyone.

We recognise that employers want more flexibility in designing apprenticeships to suit their industry. That’s why we’ve decided to reduce the minimum duration of an apprenticeship from 12 to eight months.

This flexibility will mean apprentices can complete their training more quickly, for example, where candidates have prior learning in their field or that industry typically trains other people up in less than 12 months.

This will help to grow the economy, allowing these workers to complete their training to the same high standard, but at a quicker pace.

Three trailblazer apprenticeships in key shortage occupations will enable us to pioneer shorter apprenticeships, with green energy, healthcare, and film and TV production becoming some of the first to welcome apprentices on these accelerated courses from August.

We are committed to working with others on how this can help them too. This change will break down barriers to opportunity, quickly bringing more skilled workers into the labour market to drive growth.

We are also removing barriers which can prevent apprentices from completing in critical sectors like construction. Employers will now be able to decide whether adult learners over 19 will need to complete up to a level 2 English and maths qualification in order to pass the apprenticeship.

This could mean as many as 10,000 more apprentices a year will be able to complete their apprenticeship, in high-demand sectors such as healthcare, social care and construction.

Skills England is our new national body to oversee and simplify skills training over the next decade. One of its first orders of business is to identify apprenticeships best served by a reduced duration, prioritising key shortage occupations as per the industrial strategy.

The secretary of state has just announced that Phil Smith CBE will chair Skills England, with Sir David Bell serving as vice chair.

Smith brings gold standard industry expertise as former chief executive and chair of Cisco UK and Ireland, and Sir David is a recognised education leader, formerly DfE permanent secretary and now vice chancellor of the University of Sunderland. Both will be instrumental in bringing together key partners to meet the nation’s skills needs.  

We’ve also listened to employers and apprentices’ insights on other aspects of the programme. This includes end-point assessments and how they could better test professional readiness.

Following feedback, assessment plans will now be shorter and more flexible, focusing on the ‘must haves’ for occupational competency and also allowing providers to deliver assessments in some cases without compromising quality.

The sector tells us this will remove unnecessary duplication with on-programme assessment, and allow some flexibility in their delivery.

To make sure there is parity and rigour across the board, we will ask Skills England to review end-point assessments for each apprenticeship standard from April onwards.

On the other side of the coin, we are simplifying payment processes for apprenticeship training providers and will no longer require them to replicate their data entry to receive funding for apprenticeship training delivered. As a result, providers will no longer encounter data mismatches, eliminating the problems they cause such as delayed payments and increased admin errors.

This National Apprenticeship Week, while we celebrate the successes of today’s apprentices, employers and providers, we are getting on with cutting red tape in the system we inherited. By doing so, we will boost uptake and, ultimately, drive the economic growth that this country needs.

Industrial strategy fails without extra electricians and plumbers

Electricians and plumbers are the linchpins of the UK’s infrastructure, housebuilding and net-zero goals set out in the draft industrial strategy.

Their expertise is essential for meeting the government’s targets for clean energy, sustainable housing and modern transport networks.

Without a secure, high-quality pipeline of professionals into these fields, it simply won’t happen.

Apprenticeships remain the gold standard pathway, ensuring a highly-skilled workforce capable of working in these safety-critical occupations. The government must maintain its commitment to these apprenticeships, including through independent training providers (ITPs).

To even start building the workforce needed to realise the industrial strategy’s ambitions some key considerations must be made.

Shortages threaten ambitions

Despite rising demand for skilled electricians and plumbers, the pipeline of new workers remains inadequate. According to Office for National Statistics data, since 2018 the electrical workforce has reduced by 19.6 per cent, from 277,000 to 222,800 by mid-2024.

Without decisive action, JTL projections indicate the workforce will decline by a further 15 per cent to 188,480 by 2038.

This threatens the UK’s housebuilding targets, infrastructure projects and energy transition goals. Increased apprenticeship starts and completion rates would reverse this decline.

Funding disparities

JTL is one of the country’s largest work-based learning providers, training more apprentices than anyone else in the building services engineering sector (including a third of electricians and 12 per cent of plumbers), so we know the pivotal role ITPs play in the skills ecosystem.

Key to this is ensuring training meets rigorous safety and competency standards. However, the current system for funding, including for capital, favours FE colleges.

Despite rising costs, funding for electrical apprenticeships has not risen since 2019. The funding model needs revision to reflect the true cost and complexity of delivering industry-standard training.

There is consistent demand for apprenticeships from young people, but the system does not have capacity to train them. ITPs are excluded from capital funding and many other support measures – we need equitable access.

Despite rising demand the pipeline remains inadequate

Then there is the applicability of some levy reform proposals – foundation apprenticeships and shorter-duration apprenticeships. The value of a foundation apprenticeship is evident for some sectors, such as retail or health, but doesn’t suit the building services engineering sector.

While short apprenticeships may have a role in the upskilling of already qualified workers (complementing the experienced worker route), they would not be appropriate substitutes for the full apprenticeship.

The nature of safety-critical roles like electricians and plumbers demands thorough training to ensure competency and safety. Offering short courses as fast-track routes into these jobs risks undermining workforce quality and, therefore, public safety.

Ultimately, we must guard against unintended consequences of levy reforms which would reduce support for high-skilled apprenticeships which are essential to meet national productivity demands. 

Balancing devolution with national aims

Finally, the complex policy landscape requires careful coordination between national and local bodies.

While devolution allows regions to better tailor training initiatives to local needs, and we see mayoral combined authorities successfully spending their adult education budgets, a lack of cohesion risks fragmented delivery.

National priorities – such as the rollout of electric vehicle charging infrastructure and sustainable heating systems – require central government oversight to ensure resources are targeted consistently and efficiently.

Additionally, some regions supply skilled workers elsewhere. This is particularly true of the inherently mobile electrical workforce, including apprentices, who cross regional boundaries regularly.

Achieving the right balance between regional flexibility and national alignment is key.

The government must prioritise long-term investment in high-quality apprenticeships, including through ITPs, and foster better coordination between national and regional bodies.

Only through a well-funded, cohesive approach can the UK build a resilient workforce capable of meeting industrial strategy goals.

Industry collaboration and better pay boost apprenticeships

If the UK is serious about solving skills shortages, supporting young people into employment and upskilling to meet demands in emerging sectors, apprenticeships must be at the centre of employer growth strategies.

For education providers, that means tackling outdated perceptions, ensuring apprentices earn competitive wages and strengthening employer partnerships.

Yet, enrolment in apprenticeships has declined 30 per cent since 2017. So why are they still underutilised?

A case of miseducation

Many employers know apprenticeships are a fantastic choice for their business. But apprenticeships can be difficult to navigate, and there is work to be done to ensure businesses of all sizes understand how they can access apprenticeships and the support available to them.

Plus, while some young people love the idea of earning and learning, there is often a misconception amongst parents or the public that apprenticeships are a second-tier option with limited career potential.

This is a huge frustration when we know the apprenticeships we run across NCG offer a wide range of knowledge, behaviours and transferable skills that equip learners with industry-recognised qualifications linked directly to employer demand and can lead to rewarding careers.

So, what can we do about it? Newcastle College has planned ambitious business numbers for 2025-26 alongside the introduction of six new apprenticeship standards to support growth.

Apprenticeships are uniquely effective because they are designed with employers from the outset, where they evolve in real time to meet employer, sector, and regional needs. 

Innovation constantly reshapes job requirements, and apprenticeships adapt accordingly. This agility is essential to support developments across industries.

Working with employers

The Persimmon Homes Academy at Newcastle College is an example of how, by working directly with employers, apprenticeships in construction provide an immediate talent pipeline, addressing persistent shortages in the industry.

The academy, launched in partnership with the college in 2024, provides bricklaying, joinery and roofing apprenticeships, ensuring that learners receive industry-standard training from the outset. With the direct support of Persimmon’s regional apprentice manager, apprentices gain hands-on experience and structured career progression within the company.

This kind of collaboration should be the norm, not the exception. If more industries adopted similar models, skills shortages in key sectors could be significantly reduced.

Employers often require specific skills that may not yet be incorporated into traditional provision, which can lead to a disconnect. To overcome this, Newcastle College has adopted a flexible, industry-responsive approach.

By closely collaborating with employers like Persimmon Homes, the college ensures apprenticeship programmes are continually updated to reflect the latest industry trends and standards.

This proactive approach not only bridges the skills gap but also builds stronger relationships between education providers and employers, ensuring apprentices are equipped with the skills employers need.

Pay competitive salaries

For apprenticeships to remain a viable alternative to full-time study, wages must reflect the value apprentices bring to businesses.

Currently, the national apprenticeship minimum wage is just £6.40 per hour – significantly lower than the real living wage. While some sectors, such as engineering and construction, can offer incremental pay rises, others, like hospitality and hairdressing, often have no choice but to adhere to the apprenticeship minimum wage, making recruitment a challenge.

Employers who invest in apprentices with structured pay progression see higher retention rates and a more motivated workforce.

Apprenticeships must not only be seen as a training route but as a financially attractive career choice. Government incentives should encourage and help businesses to pay apprentices fairly and reflect the long-term value they bring.

Rethinking apprenticeships in FE

Over the next two years we are keen to introduce new “dark green apprenticeships”, potentially in the digital and energy sectors, ensuring that sustainability is embedded into training at every level.

FE institutions and businesses must push for greater government support in funding, promotion, and a streamlining of bureaucracy. Without significant reform, we risk missing the opportunity to equip the next generation with the skills they – and the economy – urgently need.

Beyond National Apprenticeship Week, we have to keep shouting about apprenticeships and ensure they get the recognition they deserve.

Ofsted’s new inspection framework: progress or more pressure?

We finally have the long-awaited outline of the new Ofsted inspection framework for implementation in November.

Opinions will be split on whether it is going to cause more work for providers and inspectors, is different enough to what we have now, and focuses on the right things.

And we must be careful not to jump the gun as the new inspection methodology is out for consultation and pilot inspections of FE and skills providers start this week, so further changes may be made.

So, what are the major game changers?

No overall effectiveness grade

This is the big headline change, which Ofsted states has been driven by feedback from us all during its ‘Big Listen’ consultation.

The nuanced evaluation descriptors for each of four parts of a provision type might be useful if handled correctly, but will those descriptors be that far apart anyway? Surely a ‘strong’ curriculum must result in similarly strong teaching/training, achievement and participation and development, otherwise it isn’t ‘strong’?

There are some interesting questions here too about what happens to providers that are ‘causing concern’ regarding all, or most, of the areas. What will that mean for their continued existence and ability to tender for contracts?

The evaluation scale – ‘strong’ and ‘exemplary’

I’m in favour of differentiating between the current ‘outstanding’ and ‘good’ as so many providers are not quite the former but better than the latter, which is the hole that ‘strong’ will presumably fill.

Some readers will remember the old and extremely useful ‘very good’ grade used by the adult learning Inspectorate. The fact that any ‘exemplary’ judgements now have to go before a panel to approve them should be interesting and might lead, one would think, to inspectors being wary before handing them out.

No more deep dives I think is a backwards step

No more deep dives

This suggests we are moving further away again from giving the customer an accurate view of a curriculum area at the ‘coal face’ which I think is a backwards step.

The idea that the areas to be focused on will be determined in part by leaders’ improvement priorities is an interesting idea given that many providers’ self-assessment reports, sadly, are principally still written for external audiences. And what exactly is starting from the standpoint that the provision is ‘secure’ actually going to entail? 

Achievement

It’s already clear that achievement rates are going to carry greater weighting and this might ring alarm bells for some apprenticeship providers with continuing high levels of withdrawals, and employability providers with little evidence of successful job interviews and outcomes.

Given the plethora of external factors impacting negatively on apprenticeship achievement rates over the last 10 years, not least the pandemic and the move to apprenticeship standards from frameworks, the easing back of the weighting put on performance data in the current Ofsted framework has perhaps been fortunate for all concerned.

I hope not to have a return, however, to the days when provider ‘grades’ were almost predetermined by the inspectorate based on their overall achievement rate against national averages.

Inclusion

Whilst colleges will probably be very comfortable with this being a headline evaluation area given the very good work they already do in the high-needs arena under the current framework, this may send ripples of concern through the training/employer provider/local authority sectors where the arrangements to support and fund learners with additional learning needs have tended to be less clearly delineated and refined.

Longer notice periods

Although not officially part of the new framework, there is little doubt I think that revised notice periods for notification of inspection are in the pipeline.

These have already been implemented for colleges and larger training and employer providers which now get five or six days’ notice.

However, the extension is likely to be less drastic for other providers, perhaps moving the current two working days to three or four days.

On balance, I suspect most providers will value this, especially those with lots of different types of courses and/or learners located around the country which have a lot to organise pre-inspection.

23 sixth form colleges vote to strike in NASUWT ballot

Teachers in 23 sixth form colleges who are members of the NASUWT union have voted for strike action – in a ballot that “confusingly” included academised sixth forms.

The union is also controversially refusing to reveal the names of the colleges that have voted to strike.

It comes a week after members of the National Education Union called off their proposed further strikes, having already hit the picket lines for eight days, after deciding to consult on a pay deal of 4.3 per cent for 2024/25 put forward by the Sixth Form Colleges Association (SFCA).

The disputes stem from ministers’ decision last summer to hand schools and sixth form colleges that have converted to academy status a slice of £1.2 billion to help cover a 5.5 per cent salary boost for teachers.

The funding was not extended to the 40 sixth form colleges that have decided to not academise. It meant there would be an unequal pay rise for standalone sixth form college teachers and their colleagues who work in academised sixth form colleges in 2024/25.

The SFCA secured an extra £50 million from government in December to be released this academic year, following threat of a judicial review, to help fund pay rises in standalone sixth form colleges. This increased their pay offer from 2 per cent to 4.3 per cent.

NASUWT launched its strike ballot in January. The union’s general secretary Patrick Roach (pictured) claimed at the time that standalone sixth form college employers have spent the past months “advancing spurious arguments to justify not passing on an acceptable pay award to their teachers”.

Despite the fact that academised sixth form colleges were already implementing a 5.5 per cent pay rise for their teachers for the full 2024/25 academic year, NASUWT also balloted academised sixth form colleges. 

It is not clear why the union chose to do this.

A press release from the union stated: “As a result of the NASUWT’s decision to ballot members working in sixth form college academies, the employers have confirmed that a 5.5 per cent pay award backdated to September 2024 will now be paid to all teachers. Once the pay awards are implemented, the NASUWT’s disputes in individual sixth form college academies will be resolved.”

A ‘confusing and disappointing move’

The union claimed that 23 sixth form colleges voted in support of strike action and/or action short of strike action, with a turnout of 56 per cent.

Bill Watkin, chief executive of the SFCA, said this is a “confusing and disappointing move from NASUWT”.

He told FE Week: “They appear to have balloted members in 16 to 19 academies even though teachers in these institutions will receive the 5.5 per cent pay award NASUWT is seeking. 

“They have not provided a list of the 23 institutions that have voted in support of strike action so we are unclear if any are 16 to 19 academies and will therefore not be affected but it appears that teachers voted not to strike in nearly three quarters of the institutions balloted. And they have completely ignored the role of the government in this dispute.

“Sixth form colleges cannot make the same pay award as 16 to 19 academies unless they receive the same funding to support a pay award. Rather than penalising students that have already experienced eight days of disruption as a result of this dispute, NASUWT should be working with us to secure the additional funding required from the government. This is a divisive and poorly timed development given that sixth form colleges are in the process of implementing the pay offer for 2024/25.”

Roach said: “All sixth form college employers have the flexibility to use their existing funds, reserves and additional funding allocations due in April this year to deliver the 5.5 per cent backdated award in full. There is simply no excuse and no justification for any teacher to be denied a fair and equitable pay award.

“We are today giving notice to college employers that they can avoid industrial action where they agree to provide teachers with the 5.5 per cent backdated pay award to which they are entitled.”

IfATE abolition laws pass the Lords

New laws abolishing the government’s technical education quango and handing ministers power over the approval of apprenticeships have cleared the House of Lords. 

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions) Bill passed its third reading in the House of Lords this afternoon, meaning it now goes to the House of Commons before becoming law. 

Opposition MPs are expected to challenge the government’s approach to the independence of Skills England, and new powers given to ministers to approve apprenticeship standards and assessment plans.

Opposition Lords successfully amended the bill to delay the closure of IfATE. The government’s plan was for the bill to come into force, and therefore abolish IfATE, at a time of the secretary of state’s choosing. 

However, Conservative shadow education minister Baroness Barran and crossbench peer Baroness Alison Wolf successfully passed amendment that would delay the bill coming into force to one year after Skills England is created. Barran argued this was needed to give time for Skills England to focus on its more strategic objectives without being “swamped” by IfATE’s more technical responsibilities. 

It is likely the government will use their majority in the House of Commons to change the bill back to how it was. 

Baroness Barran

Speaking in the House of Lords this afternoon, Barran said: “We hope very much that the government will think hard about our amendment to delay the abolition of IfATE to give Skills England the time to set itself up for success, and that the bill will be accepted in its current form in the other place [the House of Commons] so that, in the nicest possible way, we don’t see the bill again in your Lordships house.”

No delay to Skills England

Skills minister Baroness Jacqui Smith said she would “engage” with Lords about their concerns on the delay. 

She said: “I must be clear that delay which this house has considered would create additional uncertainty for employers and learners and for IfATE staff, undermining the ongoing preparation for their transfer [to Skills England].

“Crucially, a delay to the full formation of Skills England would limit progress on tackling skills gaps to drive growth and promote opportunity, and this is my prime concern.”

Smith amended the bill herself last week to reassure peers concerned over the use of powers given to the secretary of state to unilaterally approve standards and apprenticeship assessment plans.

The bill was formally introduced in the House of Commons yesterday and will have its first debate among MPs on Tuesday, February 25.

From IfATE to Skills England via DfE: What you need to know

Functional skills qualifications have never been essential

The ability to communicate in the most commonly-used language where you live and the ability to understand quantities and use numbers are vital skills for life.

In other words, English (here in the UK) and maths.

Stephen Evans and I agree, emphatically on this (as we do on many other things).

But does this mean English and maths functional skills qualifications should be compulsory for the completion of an apprenticeship programme?

Equally emphatically – no. And I’m delighted that the government has started to change this, initially, as announced this week, by removing the requirement for apprentices aged 19 or above.

Five key reasons why:

1) Written tests, however ‘functional’ in intent, are a crude method for assessing real-world language and numeracy capabilities. They are, after all, only functional when used and evidenced in the real world, outside of a test centre and away from a test paper (by the way, I am as sceptical about English and maths GCSEs as markers of competence as I am about functional skills exams)

2) Truly functional skills are best included in their respective standard: if you can’t calculate how many bricks you need, how much hair dye to mix or understand the dispensing instructions on a medicine then you won’t be a competent bricklayer, hairdresser or care professional; should Skills England check and strengthen these in all standards? Absolutely.

3) If English and maths qualifications (as opposed to the skills themselves) were so essential, then we should insist on all other qualifications having them as an exit requirement as well. Why is it only apprenticeships? A-levels, T Levels, even PhDs do not need them as standard – is that because we assume people already have English and maths? Or do we (despite our best protestations) still ultimately cling to a belief that academic qualifications are still ‘best’ and that vocationally competent apprentices should nonetheless have to do something academic as well?

4) Perhaps in an ideal world, in which there was lots of spare money and tonnes of teachers available, we would insist on everyone getting not just their apprenticeship but English and maths too. We are not in an ideal world though, and at the moment, where the choice is between having no apprenticeship and no functional skills or having an apprenticeship and no functional skills, I choose the second of these. In this choice, the person has a job, even a career, is motivated and is almost certainly accruing English and maths skills as a by-product of all the other benefits. The other alternative means they have none of these things (but we have maintained our academic standards!)

5) If you have struggled with English and/or maths for 11 years at school, then it is likely that you don’t have the full range of pathways ahead of you. Certainly, there will be plenty of people lining up to tell you how difficult you are going to find it. So how cruel is it that, just at the point when you are finding your vocation in life and where formal English and maths qualifications, for the first time, don’t matter so much – people then deliberately insist on you having to stick with the very source of your classroom misery, formal English and Maths? No wonder it is putting off learners and employers from apprenticeships in their droves.

Finally, English and maths are vital skills that all should have. But they are not the only ones: empathy, problem solving, conceptualising and clarifying instructions, self-awareness, self-evaluation, digital skills and many others are just as important. I would like to see us collectively engage on how we best inculcate these essential skills for life (the strapline of National Apprenticeship Week, after all) as much as I would like to see us hone our approach to language and numeracy skills. The government has been really sensible in this first step, and – as the overwhelming reactions to my posts about this on social media suggest – will have made a massive difference to the life chances of thousands.

Making the case for functional skills in apprenticeships  

Functional skills within apprenticeships are one of the most talked about issues for DfE to consider and after much debate, the government has finally announced that functional skills will no longer be a requirement for apprentices over 19. While we await further details, it’s important that we bear in mind just how important functional skills are, not just for apprenticeships but for community and ‘growth’.

Employers need workers with strong literacy and numeracy skills for tasks like administration, communication, problem-solving and financial management. In an increasingly data driven world we need to understand what data is telling us but also be able to present it effectively and imaginatively. A skilled multi-faceted workforce boosts productivity and innovation, driving economic growth whilst low literacy and numeracy levels contribute to unemployment and lower wages for individuals with fewer chances for advancement.  

 Good literacy skills help individuals access and understand information, improving learning and societal outcomes, whilst numeracy is essential for managing finances, budgeting, and making informed decisions on credit, mortgages and student loans.   

We know there are gaps in literacy and numeracy attainment that contribute to inequality across different groups. Education is the leveller in this, creating opportunities for personal and community advancement and affecting other areas of life such as positive health and actions.  

 Within our daily lives literacy is needed for reading medical instructions, legal documents, and public information. Numeracy helps us with understanding bills, calculating discounts, and managing time effectively. We know that poor literacy and numeracy can lead to financial struggles, health risks, and difficulty accessing services.  

 Studies show a strong link between low literacy levels and crime whilst improving literacy and numeracy can help prevent reoffending by offering the chance for education with a hope of leading to employment. The new prisons minister, James Timpson understands this, and Open Awards was pleased to advocate for apprenticeships beginning in prisons alongside education programmes focusing on functional skills to seek to rehabilitate offenders.  

  Within England 18 per cent of adults have “very poor literacy skills” and government data indicates 49 per cent have numeracy skills at or below primary school children. Whilst we’ve seen an increase in attainment of children, we still have a task ahead with adults, an issue that stubbornly continues and under the proposed reforms is unlikely to improve. Functional Skills with their practical approach play an important role in addressing this. More investment is needed to encourage their uptake within employers, communities and individuals.  

 Indeed, the 2004 Leitch review of skills recommended that 95 per cent of adults achieve functional literacy and numeracy, highlighting the shared responsibility among individuals, employers, and the government in achieving this.  

Functional skills are crucial in improving literacy and numeracy because they provide practical, real-world applications of English and Maths, helping develop essential life and workplace skills. They help people read and understand bills, contracts, and medical information, manage finances, calculate budgets, and understand interest rates. Importantly they enable communications in work and social settings.   

Functional skills qualifications focus on problem-solving and critical thinking rather than just academic knowledge and serve as an alternative to GCSEs, helping people who struggled with traditional exams gain qualifications. Key industries like healthcare, construction, and retail require strong literacy and numeracy for tasks like report writing, safety procedures, and financial transactions. They provide a second chance for those who didn’t achieve a pass in GCSEs. Importantly, universities and colleges accept them as equivalent to GCSEs for certain courses.  

 Functional skills qualifications allow individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds or with English as a second language to improve their prospects, promoting inclusivity, especially for those with learning difficulties or alternative learning styles. Improving confidence in people’s literacy and numeracy empowers them to engage more in society, whether in civic duties, parenting, or managing personal affairs.  

 Let’s celebrate functional skills for their breadth and practical applications – and focus on how they best support apprenticeships, education and employment.