The first signs of yet another adult education budget (AEB) underspend have appeared, after the Greater London Authority revealed delivery is “lower than expected”.
Agenda papers for a board meeting in February shows they are already taking action by moving unused funds to a budget for later in the year.
GLA officials have proposed to mayor Sadiq Khan that they shift £7 million, out of a £190 million AEB for the first eight months, to be made available in the last four months of the academic year.
The Education and Skills Funding Agency has previously used the same “re-profiling” tactic, taking advantage of the academic and financial years being based on different dates, when it was experiencing an underspend in-year.
The GLA’s agenda paper said that where performance is “lower than expected”, they are “working with providers to review performance issues and related actions, and to identify whether allocations or contracts need to be adjusted to reflect the level of AEB delivery”.
They also note that there is a “risk that underspends are recovered by the Secretary of State in circumstances where the Secretary of State considers funds have not sufficiently been committed to be spent”.
FE Week understands AEB underspends for 2019/20 are also being experienced in other devolved areas, as well as in the national budget that is administered by the Education and Skills Funding Agency.
Previous analysis by this newspaper found that more than 400 colleges and training providers between them failed to deliver £73 million of AEB funding in 2016/17. Similar underspends have been felt in other academic years since then.
Brenda Mcleish, chief executive of the Learning Curve Group – a training provider that was unsuccessful in obtaining devolved AEB contracts in a number of areas this year, told FE Week: “We are hearing about the potential of in-year underspend in a number of devolved areas.
“Any non-utilisation of funds would be disappointing given that the combined authorities claimed to have undertaken such extensive procurement exercises when selecting providers who could deliver the profiles allocated to them.”
She said that her provider received a “significant volume of enquiries” from learners wanting to access training in devolved areas but these are people “we are unable to help due to the fact we do not have funding in a number of devolved areas.”
She continued: “To discover that money is not being used when we, and other providers in a similar situation, have this level of interest would be hugely disappointing and letting down those most in need of support.”
Brenda McLeish
Sector leaders have previously claimed the fault of not delivering their allocations lies with “restrictive” rules and low funding rates, rather than providers.
Another issue was added following the introduction of FE loans for learners aged 19 to 23 in 2016/17, which meant that courses that used to be funded through the AEB were no longer included.
Underspend for the 2018/19 year cannot be calculated yet as the final allocations and spending figures are not due for publication by the Department for Education for another month.
A spokesperson for the Mayor of London said: “The GLA has forecast expenditure to deliver the AEB for the 2019/20 academic year and we proactively monitor providers’ performance to ensure funding is allocated as effectively as possible.
“This includes funding potential growth for over-performing AEB procured providers to maximise delivery over the full academic year, which would be agreed in May.”
The spokesperson added that officials will continue to review delivery in line with the performance management approach set out in the GLA’s funding rules.
And the agenda papers for the February meeting said: “Importantly, understanding the delivery spend, identifying any underspends associated with under delivery and proposing options to utilise such funds in a prompt manner will improve the reputation of the mayor in successfully managing the AEB.”
Apprenticeships and skills minister and Chichester MP Gillian Keegan could be a win-win for the Conservative Party. She hails from the country’s ‘most Labour seat’, was a 16-year-old shop floor apprentice, and has a masters-level business intellect.
Gillian Keegan, the new apprenticeships and skills minister minister, strikes you as the sort of MP that the Conservatives need more of. Her life story could be an advert both for apprenticeships – being the “only degree-level apprentice in the House of Commons” – and the appeal of conservative values to the “red wall” working-class background she’s from. We meet at FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference, almost three years since the Chichester MP first won her seat in parliament. She’s sitting very safely, with 58 per cent of the vote in the December election. But this most southern of cities, which has returned a Conservative MP since the 1800s (except a brief flirt with a Liberal in the 1920s), puts Keegan almost a five-hour drive away from where she grew up, in Knowsley near Liverpool.
She describes her childhood home as “the most Labour seat in the whole country” and she’s right – the MP there won more votes than any other from the party at the most recent election. Keegan appears proud of her political independence of mind from the inheritances of her childhood, explaining her experiences with a matter-of-fact, concise tone of voice that matches it. If she hadn’t been brokering international business deals for the last 30 years, one feels she’d have made an excellent no-nonsense college principal.
‘I’ve done a PhD in patience’
“As my mother said, ‘the Conservative vote left when you left home,’” Keegan concedes, without laughing. However when asked if voting Conservative since age 19 made her unpopular, she follows up with a chuckle: “I’m popular so I can get over the fact I’m a Conservative.”
It must have been quite an inheritance to overcome. Her grandfather was a miner, her nan worked in a biscuit factory, her father was an office manager who wasn’t paid very much and lived in a caravan during the week, and her mother did secretarial work. It’s clear their daughter showed an unusual resilience to the difficult circumstances around her. She was the only pupil to get 10 O-levels at her comprehensive secondary school, having rejected the expectation that girls do only sewing and home economics and instead also studying engineering and technical drawing with her favourite teacher, Mr Ashcroft.
When she entered the workplace aged 16 she was the only girl in the group of trainees at Delco Electronics, a subsidiary group of General Motors that made in-car electronics. None of the boys went on, like she did, to complete the employer-sponsored degree at Liverpool John Moores University. Perhaps the fact school enabled her to take a route out explains why Keegan “loved school” – although it’s not exactly clear how much there was to love.
“They actually closed my school down two years after I left. Some kids did A-levels, but you were never going to get a decent grade, you were never going to get to university. The provision of education was so poor you had to find another way around.” It gives Keegan a very real understanding of the lack of opportunity in areas like hers. “I’ve done many things with many of the world’s brightest people. But all the people I met at that Knowsley comprehensive school were as bright as anyone I’ve ever met since.” She adds: “We would be classed as people who would have to go down a vocational route, because they weren’t bright. But we were bright. We just didn’t get the opportunity to show we were bright.”
Gillian Keegan in her new Department for Education office
It was while working in the car factory for General Motors that Keegan’s political views began to emerge – she was unimpressed by the trade unions trying to battle the company’s decisions. “It was the 1980s and there was a lot of sort of highly unionised behaviour in the car factory, which is actually what made me a Conservative.” She calls these the “bad sort of unions who would be out because they wanted to preserve working practices, not because they wanted to move to where the company wanted to be.” Her views solidified as she took a job in London for NatWest and soon began international business in earnest, heading to Tokyo for weeks on end to negotiate contracts. Some of these were about the contactless card payments we take for granted today.
After a stint with MasterCard, Keegan moved to Madrid for a company called Amadeus, learnt to speak Spanish and bought a flat there, which she still has. While at the company she was part of an initial public offer, or IPO, where the private business is sold on the stock market – meaning Keegan will have got a big financial reward, or, as she puts it, “the financial freedom to think of other careers”. But despite all this, Keegan notes that a sense of misfit can linger on. Aged 40, she did a Sloan Fellowship, which is like an MBA, at the London Business School, “because you always feel you haven’t got the qualifications to match your intellect, if you had to go about it a different way. I wanted to prove to myself I could do a masters.” Just a couple of years later, she was an MP.
The almost rags-to-riches story puts Keegan in a powerful position to advocate for apprenticeships, and also for social mobility from a pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps experience. She names the dyslexic businesswoman, Jo Malone, creator of the luxury scent brand, as someone she deeply admires for beating the odds. She also makes a great point about the unique value of a rotational apprenticeship such as hers at General Motors. “By the end of it, pretty much myself and the other apprentices were the only people apart from the CEO and the CFO who actually understood how the whole thing worked, because most people when they get into a large multinational business do not get to go around the whole thing.”
She adds: “Even if you go on a graduate programme you very seldom get to see it, because you’re normally assigned to a department or assigned to specific roles.” Her passion for apprenticeships impressed former skills minister Anne Milton, who had already talent-spotted Keegan before she was an MP and put her in touch with Women2Win, an initiative co-founded by Theresa May to encourage Conservative women to stand for office. Now, she further urged Keegan to become an MP ambassador for apprentices, and Keegan eventually also became co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on apprenticeships. Today, with the post of a dedicated apprenticeships and skills minister having gone unfilled since Milton resigned over a no-deal Brexit in July, Keegan finds herself taking up the reigns in her mentor’s old office.
‘I get ideas by chatting with people’
Which brings us to the question of how she will fare in that office. It’s a turbulent time in the Conservative party, with the chancellor already having resigned, bullying allegations engulfing the home secretary and ministerial aides disappearing left, right and centre. One thing worth noting is that several of Keegan’s natural political allies are gone. Justine Greening, respected both in and out of the party, first met Keegan at a party for London Business School graduates in 2017.
“I didn’t know what she was then but she was something important. And I plucked up the courage and went to speak to her and she then helped me on my journey […] to become an MP.” Keegan says she’s done a “PhD in patience” by becoming an MP – working with volunteers and coming to terms with the fact that parliament does not work like a super slick international business – something mentors like Milton and Greening have helped her understand. She laughs as she claims she’s designed her “own apprenticeship in being an MP”, with stints on the public accounts committee, as a parliamentary private secretary to the Treasury, home secretary and Department for Health, as well as posts with the Ministry of Defence. Like Greening, Keegan seems good at listening. “I’m a people person. I get ideas by chatting with people.”
But both Greening and Milton are now gone – unable to match their own values with the direction of the Conservative Party. Keegan backed Rory Stewart for the leadership, but he too has quit. Many commentators have said some of the party’s best moderate talent has left the backbenches.
But Keegan says she exemplifies an important truth about people from backgrounds like hers. “I’m sure the people in many of those areas of the ‘red wall’ that became the ‘blue wall’ are people who are very similar in terms of values, outlook and opportunity to where I grew up. And I’ve always thought, if you took the brand away, and you just looked at the values and what you could achieve, I’ve always thought most of them would vote Conservative […] And actually, as it turns out […] now 30 years on, they have.”
Yet there is some undeniable data. Further education has been badly hit by falls in college funding under the Conservatives. And whilst the apprenticeship budget has risen with the introduction of the levy, rates could be slashed by over 40 per cent.
As someone from a struggling area of the country, who knows deeply the value of apprenticeships, Gillian Keegan is the kind of MP the cabinet should nurture, listen to and promote.
She must ensure the party sticks to its 2019 manifesto commitments to properly invest in further education. Meanwhile, the cabinet would do well to support her to make sure she does not go the way of Stewart, Milton and Greening.
A review into the “uniquely narrow and short” technical courses in England has been called for ahead of the introduction of T-levels this September.
The Education Policy Institute think tank (EPI) made the recommendation in an international comparison of technical education funding systems, published today, which said this country’s 16 to 19 curriculum “remains an outlier for its narrow breadth, both for academic and technical pathways”.
This approach “may be depriving students of valuable skills”, it added.
While welcoming T-levels’ increased teaching hours, the “substantial” 315-hour industry placement and how they “will bring England closer to technical provision in high performing countries”, the report also says the curriculum “looks narrower” than similar qualifications in other countries.
The new flagship courses will not address the differences in curricular breadth between England and countries like Norway and Germany beyond securing basic levels of literacy and numeracy, the report says.
As T-levels will last for half as long as technical qualifications in other countries, this “probably stands in the way” of broadening the curriculum.
EPI’s research was funded by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, which is working on preparations for T-levels and is co-running professional development for the qualifications with the Education and Training Foundation.
“The views expressed in this report are those of the authors, and do not reflect those of the foundation,” the report stresses.
The government, the report proposes, ought to commission an independent review to consider if the breadth of 16 to 19 courses is properly providing the basic and technical skills “young people need for the labour market and for progression to further study”.
If this means providers have to increase provision, the government “must” match this with appropriate funding rates. The report found funding support for students fell by 71 per cent in real terms between 2010/11 and 2018/19.
The joint general secretary of the National Education Union Kevin Courtney said the government “must learn from this challenging report” and 16 to 19 students need “sustainable funding” and “real support” for living, learning and travelling costs.
The Association of School and College Leaders’ post-16 and colleges’ specialist Kevin Gilmartin urged the Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak to address the “desperate need” for additional government funding for the sector in the Budget on March 11.
The countries the EPI compared England against were found to offer a broader curriculum, for example technical students in Norway spend more of classroom time studying subjects like English, maths, PE, natural sciences, and social sciences than their vocational specialisation. Technical students in Austria take courses on entrepreneurship, digital skills, communication skills and, in many cases, up to three foreign languages.
In Germany’s dual-system, students attend a vocational school up to two days a week and apart from theoretical and practical knowledge for their apprenticeship, they also take general subjects like economics and social sciences.
Germany’s system was thrown into the spotlight after education secretary Gavin Williamson pledged the UK to overtaking Germany in technical education opportunities by 2029.
However, the report did note the breadth of curriculum in other countries varies dependent on factors like qualification level and whether it is a classroom-based programme or apprenticeship training.
David Robinson, report author and director of post-16 and skills at the EPI, said: “If it wishes to draw level with countries like Germany, the government must give further consideration to properly funding technical education, in order to sustain quality.
“We must also ask serious questions about the structure of our upper secondary programmes, which are uniquely narrow and short by international standards. The breadth of the curriculum and length of technical courses should be reviewed.”
A Department for Education spokesperson said: “The secretary of state has been clear that boosting further education is at the heart of his vision for a world class education system.
“We are investing significantly to level up skills and opportunity across the country. In addition to our £3 billion National Skills fund, we have announced a £400m increase to 16 to 19 funding for 2020-2021, creating longer, higher-quality technical apprenticeships.
“Alongside this, our traineeship programme is a great way for young people to develop the skills and confidence they need to progress on to employment, or a high quality apprenticeship.”
The chief executive of the government’s apprenticeship quango has defended the decision to reject a business administration standard at level 2 – claiming it would “undermine” efforts to create a “well-regarded” programme.
Last week FE Week revealed how Jennifer Coupland had shattered hopes for the apprenticeship after she turned down a final plea from employers.
Addressing delegates on the second day of the sixth Annual Apprenticeship Conference this afternoon, the new Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education boss tackled criticism of the decision head on.
She made clear it was “nothing to do with being averse to level 2”, but simply that the proposal did not meet the required length or quality of an apprenticeship standard.
And when quizzed on why she would not entertain another proposal for the standard, Coupland said she wants to be “blunt” and not give the employers “false hope”.
Here’s what she said during her speech in full:
“I know that one of the big stories last week in the world of apprenticeships and in the conference room this morning was the institute’s decision not to endorse a level 2 business administration proposal.
“I want to talk briefly about why we made that decision. Firstly, take-up on the new level 3 business administration standard has more than doubled since it launched in 2017. That shows there is a great route into skilled employment in an administrative role via an apprenticeship and appetite from providers, apprentices and employers for that.
“And as Doug Richard said in the Richard Review, apprenticeships should not be the only skill show in town, there should be a place for other forms of vocational training and pre-employment provision, and great classroom-based technical routes too.
“We have an opportunity now to really build a high-quality, well-regarded apprenticeship programme and the more we stretch the definition of an apprenticeship the more we undermine attempts to finally achieve that.
“So when we do hand out the apprenticeship label it must be an indicator of a high-quality training programme. It must be for training for skilled occupations that require at least a year of sustained and substantial training to become competent in the role.
“The proposal for a level 2 business administration standard did not meet those tests and that is why we did not back it.
“To be really clear, this is nothing to do with being averse to level 2. There are plenty of level 2 qualifications that meet those tests. Since our establishment the institute has approved over 80 new standards at level 2 across a huge variety of fields.
“We have level 2 apprenticeships for plasterers, for scaffolders, for bricklayers, for sewing machinists, for beauticians, health care support workers, hospitality team members, hair professionals, culinary chefs, and even fish mongers, and that is just a few.
“More than half a million people across the country have now received much better skills training because of this new and more rigorous employer-led approach to setting standards for apprentices.
“To count as an apprenticeship an occupation must take at least a year to learn, there must be scope for a minimum 20 per cent off-the-job training. It is a high bar set by both us and employers themselves, and the reality is that sometimes proposals for new apprenticeships won’t reach it.”
The winners of the Annual Apprenticeship Awards 2020 have been crowned at a glittering ceremony in Birmingham tonight.
More than 500 sector leaders, staff and apprentices gathered to find out the results of the awards, which are run by FE Week and the Association of Employment and Learning Providers.
Forty-four organisations and individuals had been shortlisted in 22 categories after more than 350 entries were submitted by colleges, training providers and employers.
New apprenticeship and skills minister Gillian Keegan was in attendance to celebrate the winners.
Taking home the provider of the year award was Leeds College of Building.
Judges said it was “clear” from their application and evidence that they “were enthusiastically dedicated to helping apprentices achieve their full potential, and absolutely committed to steering the next generation of innovators”.
Employer of the year was awarded to Hays Travel, which took over Thomas Cook this year.
“Hays Travel is a true believer and champion of apprenticeships,” the judges said. “It was evident from their application that apprenticeships are embedded within their organisations culture and thus valued and supported by stakeholders.”
This year’s special recognition awards were handed to former skills minister Anne Milton, and her former opposite number Gordon Marsden.
And apprenticeships expert and veteran Beej Kaczmarczyk received the lifetime achievement award.
Shane Mann, managing director of FE Week’s publisher Lsect, said: “We were delighted to award Beej with the lifetime achievement award. Beej has given so much to education throughout his career.
“He is also one of the great characters of the FE sector, regularly putting the ‘fun’ into funding analysis and has a magic way of entertaining those who he supports and informs on sometimes the driest of subjects.
“As he nears his retirement, and the possibility of finally realising his aim of getting in more golf, it is perfect timing, and massively well-deserved.”
Mann added: “Tonight we also recognise the contribution made by two former MPs, Anne Milton and Gordon Marsden. As front bench MPs for government and opposition they made significant contributions to the apprenticeships sector in the UK and globally.
“Regardless of whether you agree with their political decisions and positions, it is undeniable that they placed enormous energy into improving the apprenticeship sector. They are both worthy recipients of this year’s awards.”
AELP chief executive Mark Dawe said: “We’ve had another fabulous evening celebrating all that is best about apprenticeships and the hard working people who offer bright futures to learners who embark on our flagship skills programme.
“Congratulations to a great set of winners and it’s really pleasing that Gillian Keegan has been here with us to hear about these wonderful success stories.”
Look out for more coverage in FE Week’s AAC supplement later this week.
Here are the 2020 award winners in full:
Route Apprenticeship Provider of the Year
Agriculture, Environmental & Animal Care
British Racing School
Business & Administration
Derby Business College Limited
Care Services
Lifetime Training
Catering & Hospitality Apprenticeship
Lifetime Training
Construction
Skills Group
Digital – Sponsored by BCS
Manchester Metropolitan University
Education & Childcare
Aspiration Training Ltd
Engineering & Manufacturing
Abingdon and Witney College
Hair & Beauty – Sponsored by VTCT
Truro and Penwith College
Health & Science
Performance Through People
Legal, Finance & Accounting
Paragon Skills
Sales, Marketing, Procurement
Remit Group
Transport & Logistics
Performance Through People
National Awards:
Promoting Apprenticeships campaign
Newcastle & Stafford Colleges Group
SEND Apprenticeship Champion Award – sponsored by CognAssist
Eastleigh College
Apprenticeship Diversity Award
WhiteHat
Outstanding contribution to the development of apprenticeships (employer) Sponsored by City & Guilds ILM
Little Inspirations Ltd
Outstanding contribution to the development of apprenticeships (individual) Sponsored by City & Guilds ILM
Jane Hadfield, Health Education England
Outstanding contribution to the development of apprenticeships (provider) Sponsored by City & Guilds ILM
South Devon College
Apprentice Employer of the Year
Hays Travel
Apprenticeship Provider of the year | sponsored by BKSB
Ofsted will withhold publication of inspection reports until it has resolved complaints about them under a new redress system proposed by the inspectorate.
A consultation launched today proposes that formal complaints raised by providers within two working days of receiving their final report will effectively delay publication of the report until the complaint is dealt with.
Under the current system, providers have to submit formal complaints within 10 days of an issue of concern, but Ofsted does not normally withhold publication of reports while it considers complaints.
Today the watchdog admitted the current approach has led to it having to take action after it has published a report “when a complaint investigation highlights an error in the inspection process”.
“As a result, we are proposing to consider and respond to formal complaints from inspected providers before we publish their inspection report, if these complaints are submitted promptly,” the watchdog said in its consultation documents.
“So that the publication of a report is not overly delayed, if an inspected provider wants to raise a formal complaint, they will need to submit this within two working days of them being issued with their final report. If an inspected provider submits a formal complaint within this period, we will withhold publication of the inspection report until we have considered and responded to the complaint.”
However, complaints will not “normally” be considered outside of this deadline, because the submission will be deemed to be ‘out of time’, Ofsted said.
The consultation also proposes that providers will receive five working days to review their draft report and submit concerns about issues of “factual accuracy and the inspection process”. At the moment, they only receive one, but some other types of provider get longer.
The extended period “will allow all inspected providers the same opportunity to raise any issues of factual inaccuracy in their draft report, or to comment on any aspect of the inspection process”.
“We will consider all submitted comments before we issue the final inspection report to a provider.”
Ofsted also wants to introduce “greater consistency” in post-inspection arrangements.
A new timeline will mean that all providers “should expect to see their draft report within 18 working days of the end of their inspection”, and Ofsted will aim to issue all final reports to providers “within 30 working days of the end of the inspection”.
The current system of internal reviews, which are the last step for those not satisfied with the way their complaint has been handled, will be retained.
A long-term vision for apprenticeships, the report from the Independent Apprenticeship Policy Group, sponsored by Pearson, was launched at the Annual Apprenticeship Conference today. Its independent Chair, Neil Carmichael, tells us more about the group, their intentions, and the key outcomes of the work.
Apprenticeships have long been a bedrock of our education and employment landscape. And I would argue we have a successful system. That said, could it provide individuals and our economy with even greater value? The exploration of that question was at the heart of the Independent Apprenticeship Policy Group (IAPG).
The Group, thanks to the support of Pearson, brought together 15 experts from across the world of apprenticeships, including employers, providers, assessment organisations and the learner voice. In 2018 I chaired the Commission on Sustainable Learning exploring how the broader education and skills system needs to evolve to meet future skills needs. Given their importance, we wanted now to focus on apprenticeships as a vital element of this country’s skills system.
We set out to provide a clear and independent overview of the challenges facing the apprenticeship system in this country, and to generate practical solutions. We focussed on three key themes:
1. Building a sustainable apprenticeship system
2. Supporting individuals to access and succeed
3. Measuring success to inform future investment
Firstly, a successful system is one that is sustainable and fit for the long term.
Investment in apprenticeship spending should remain employer-led. This needs to be within a structure of incentives set by government, and agreed with employers, creating a system that reflects the broader needs of our economy.
And as patterns of economic growth and skills shortages vary considerably across the regions of England the provision of training programmes should be able to adapt to local and regional circumstances.
We also highlight the contribution of small and medium enterprises and the importance of engaging them and ensuring the system helps them grow and thrive.
Secondly, we want the system to evolve to unlock the talent of more individuals to help them access and achieve.
Apprenticeships need to be properly signposted, valued and accessible, and we must invest more in one of our key resources – young people.
A consistent theme expressed to the IAPG was that the employer’s role needed to be clearer, and better supported. And we made a particular point of recommending that we must invest in apprenticeships in the key sectors that will be crucial to our future success. It is worth noting that last week IfATE published a consultation on setting funding bands which shows their thinking is going in the same direction.
Assessment needs to be fit-for-purpose, assessing exactly what learners, and businesses, need to succeed. In achieving this, softer skills and competencies, and highly technical skills, could be usefully tested as part of the programme, and before the end-point assessment.
In particular, the Group felt that to maintain high and consistent standards, one regulator, possibly Ofqual, needs to have overall responsibility for External Quality Assurance (EQA). I was pleased to see, last week, the publication of the IfATE consultation on a system where EQA is delivered by either Ofqual or, for integrated degree apprenticeships, the Office for Students (OfS).
Although much of the political focus is understandably on the recruitment of apprentices, progression should be a central feature of apprenticeships policy. Individuals need to be put at the heart of how progression is understood. The definition of progression needs to be a broad one and take account of what progression might look like for the individual.
Finally, apprenticeships are widely acknowledged to play a key part meeting skills needs and are critical to driving productivity gains within our economy. Finding a way to best measure productivity gains will help inform future investment and policy decisions.
The report was truly collaborative, bringing together a broad spectrum of experiences and ideas from across apprenticeships. Its authority rests on the vast expertise of the Group’s members. And every individual involved was clear about their support for apprenticeships, and their commitment to the success of the system. This commitment was key.
The potential value of apprenticeships to unlock talent and to contribute to the economy is significant. They already support thousands of individuals and employers to flourish, but we know they can achieve even more. The IAPG’s report and recommendations
builds on what is already working and suggests where we can make progress. With everyone agreeing with the value of apprenticeships, further and future success should be within our grasp.
Apprenticeship funding should be targeted at skills which fit the UK’s industrial strategy to combat growing pressures on the levy budget.
That is according to the Independent Apprenticeship Policy Group (IAPG), which was chaired by former education select committee head Neil Carmichael and set up by education giant Pearson to create a long-term vision for apprenticeships.
The report, being launched this morning on the final day of FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference, states that whilst the apprenticeship budget now available through the levy provides a “significant boost” to employer investment in training, the “current budget available is not enough to support the demands being made on the system”.
The IAPG believes that decisions on apprenticeship spend should “remain employer-led”, but they should be “within a structure of incentives set by government, and agreed between government and employers”.
Prioritising sectors identified in the 2017 Industrial Strategy, which targeted investment at maths, digital and technical skills, “is important to avoid situations in which the courses being provided are adding little, if anything, to the skills base of the economy”.
Their call comes after Ofsted’s 2019 annual report criticised a high take-up of management and health courses in the system as a “mismatch” with the strategy, calling for this to be “urgently” addressed.
Careers education is another focus of the IAPG report, which calls for a review of the government’s careers strategy, the role of the Careers and Enterprise Company, as well as the Baker Clause.
The clause put into law that schools must invite providers in to tell pupils about technical qualifications and apprenticeships, and “a positive working relationship between apprenticeship providers and their local schools and colleges is a key element of growing the apprenticeship system,” the report says.
But evidence has shown the IAPG that where employers and providers “are keen to engage young people in apprenticeships, they often encounter barriers to achieving this”.
Lord Agnew wrote to headteachers earlier this month in his then-capacity as minister for the FE market to remind them of their legal duties under the clause. The education select committee has previously accused schools of “flouting” their obligations under the clause.
The committee’s chair Robert Halfon accused the Careers and Enterprise Company of being “ludicrously wasteful” with public money in January, after his committee pulled the company up on spending £200,000 on holding two conferences, instead of seeking private sponsorship.
The IAPG also states that “adequate” investment needs to be made available for small-to-medium enterprises, preferably through extra government funding, to ensure “we support the skills needs and help boost the productivity of non-levy paying employers”.
An AELP survey released in January found up to 40,000 SMEs were being turned away by training providers which are either close to having, or have, used up their levy allocation for training apprentices from non-levy payers.
At a debate in Parliament last week, AELP chief executive Mark Dawe said the non-levy system needed an extra £1.5 billion so SMEs could start investing in apprenticeships again.
On funding levels, the report also says funds to deliver individual apprenticeships “should not be set so low to reduce the quality of training or dissuade employers from recruiting apprentices”.
“Recent cuts to funding bands have particularly affected standards in sectors with acute labour shortages,” like social care.
“Uncertainty over funding” could “significantly” reduce the number of opportunities available to learners and has already, along with the aforementioned non-levy funding constraints, forced providers to reduce or cease activity”, according to the report.
Apprenticeship provider Professional Training Solutions told FE Week last May it would stop recruiting for the care sector after the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education decided not to increase the standards’ funding levels, which were leaving the provider running courses at a loss.
The IAPG recommends the funding bands and investment to support apprentices meet maths and English requirements, should be set at a “sustainable level”.
Ofsted’s chief inspector is “concerned” that the rise in higher level apprenticeships is “partly” to blame for the decline in starts for young people at the lower levels.
Addressing delegates at the Annual Apprenticeship Conference (AAC) this afternoon, Amanda Spielman said it was “worrying” that starts at level 2 in 2018/19 were 45 per cent down on 2016/17.
Meanwhile, higher level apprenticeships are “up – massively up – and they have doubled from 16/17 to 18/19, admittedly from a low base”.
She then stated: “We’re concerned that this many new apprenticeships at level 4 or higher is partly why those at level 2 and 3 aren’t coming through. It’s certainly the case that apprenticeship programmes now have an older demographic.
“It is important we increase the numbers of level 2 and 3, as well as increasing the number of young apprentices, as this helps with levelling the playing field.”
He said he would “rather see funding helping to kick-start careers or level up skills and opportunities”.
The Ofsted boss echoed Williamson sentiment this morning, saying “we need to level the playing field”.
“For some people, this ladder [of opportunity] is broken; in fact, some of the lower rungs are missing. For so many young people, this is their entry level into the workplace. Getting the basics right is vital. Going into some occupations at level 4 without a grounding in the basics can set some people up to fail.
“I’m concerned about level 2 apprenticeships more broadly.”
She noted how the higher-level apprenticeships are “overwhelmingly in the fields of business administration” and “we are concerned about the trend in big, levy-contributing organisations to offer apprenticeships to existing staff, many of whom will have worked there for a while”.
“This effectively turns apprenticeships into a staff development programme. They may well be mitigating skill gaps in management and team leadership, and this may be an initial response to spending the levy, but I would hope that this doesn’t become the norm. If the levy develops mainly to help those who are already in work, it doesn’t help those at the bottom of the ladder.”
Spielman also reiterated concerns first raised in Ofsted’s 2018 annual report, which warned the levy was being spent on apprenticeships it called “rebadged” graduate schemes.
“We know that relabelling existing programmes as apprenticeships to allow them to be paid for by the levy fund is a practice that is sucking money into one place at the expense of another,” she said today.
“We’ve seen very different funding allocations for different sectors. I am concerned that in some instances levy funding is not being used as the policy designers expected.”
The shadow skills minister, Emma Hardy, went even further in her speech at AAC this morning, calling for an end to full funding for adults enrolling on a degree apprenticeship.
Concerns over the rise of higher level apprenticeships at the expense of low level opportunities, such as for the level 2 in business administration, is set to be discussed further on day two AAC when Jennifer Coupland, the new chief executive of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education, will deliver her first public address to the sector.
