Give nursing degree apprenticeships special treatment, education committee urges

The NHS will not meet its apprentice recruitment target unless nursing degree apprenticeships are given special treatment, an influential group of MPs has warned.

The education select committee’s report, ‘Nursing degree apprenticeships – in poor health’, based on its inquiry over the summer, was published today.

It highlighted a series of obstacles to the delivery of high numbers of nursing degree apprenticeships – including the greater off-the-job training requirement for nursing students, and the additional costs of apprentices’ salaries as well as ‘backfill’ for the time spent off-the-job.

The report recommends that the funding band for the level six standard should be kept at £27,000 – currently the highest funding band – or even increased in the future.

It also repeated the call, first made by chair Robert Halfon at a hearing in July, for greater flexibility in how the NHS is able to spend its levy funds.

“The idea that degree apprenticeships are a realistic route into the profession is currently a mirage,” he said.

“Ambitious targets are simply not going to be met.”

He accused the Department of Education of “a lack of imagination and foresight” for having failed to give “enough attention” to “adapting apprenticeships to meet the needs of the NHS”.

“Ministers must now recognise the uniqueness of the health service’s position and allow flexibility in the use of the apprenticeship levy so these apprenticeships can be made to work for both the employer and students,” Mr Halfon said.

Figures published last month by the DfE showed that the NHS was some way off meeting the 2.3 per cent public sector apprenticeship target.

It had 13,800 apprenticeship starts in 2017/18 – down from 19,820 two years previously – which represented 1.2 per cent of a total headcount of 1,194,614.

Nonetheless, skills minister Anne Milton said she was “particularly pleased” to see the NHS doing so well.

“I visited Leeds Teaching Hospital recently where I saw first-hand how apprenticeships have changed people’s lives and are helping to make sure the NHS can continue to get the skilled nurses they need,” she said at the time.

Nursing degree apprenticeships are currently set at the maximum funding band of £27,000, but NHS trusts have complained that even this does not cover the costs of the training.

The figure is around £10,000 less than a university delivering a full-time nursing degree would receive in fees, and “on a par” with the cost of delivering these traditional degrees.

“Any future reduction of the funding band must be assessed to ensure that providers can continue to deliver apprenticeships” and these assessments must be published, today’s report said.

It warned that there is currently “little incentive for the NHS to spend precious time and resource building nursing apprenticeships”.

The cost of delivering nursing apprenticeships was cited in the inquiry and in today’s report as one of the biggest barriers to their take-up.

Nursing apprentices are required to spend 50 per cent of their time in off-the-job training – much higher than the typical 20 per cent – and also can’t be included in staffing numbers until they are fully qualified.

These extra costs added up to around £35,000 per apprentice, per year, the report said.

It urged the government to “reconsider its position in not providing much needed flexibility in the apprenticeship levy for the NHS” and to allow it to use the fund to “cover the backfill costs of apprentices who are required by the Nursing and Midwifery Council to be supernumerary”.

The DfE has been approached for a comment.

Revealed: The next seven T-levels to be taught from 2021

The programmes to be taught in wave two of the government’s T-level roll-out will be announced by the education secretary today.

Qualifications in health, healthcare science, science, onsite construction, building services engineering, digital support and services and digital business services are to be taught from 2021.

Damian Hinds is also going to reveal that T-levels will be allocated UCAS tariff points, with each programme carrying the same points as three A-levels.

He is expected to make the announcements during a speech to business leaders about ending “snobbery” in technical education, in which he’ll also reveal plans for a new “generation” of higher technical qualifications.

“I want us to break down some of the false barriers we’ve erected between academic and technical routes,” he will say.

“I don’t see any reason why higher technical training shouldn’t be open to certain A-level students as long as they have the prerequisite knowledge and practical skill.

“Equally, I want T-level students, that want to, to be able to go to university to do relevant technical degrees.”

The Department for Education said that by awarding UCAS points to T-levels, young people, parents and employers will “know they are as stretching as their academic equivalents and will act as a stepping stone to progress to the next level whether that is a degree, higher level technical training or an apprenticeship”.

The first three T-levels, in education, construction and digital routes, will be taught by 50 training providers from 2020.

A new DfE action plan for the technical qualifications said: “As we move into the second year of the programme, the criteria to select providers for T-level delivery in 2021 has been developed to focus on larger providers, to increase the number of students taking T-levels in the second year of rollout.

“It also ensures that we are able to select a relatively small number of providers so we can continue providing the right level of support in the early stages of rollout.”

The DfE is aiming to select an additional 50 to 75 providers for 2021.

“We expect to announce which T-levels will be available from September 2022 next Autumn, and will continue to work closely with the institute to agree which T-levels will be ready for delivery,” today’s action plan said.

“We will also confirm at that time which providers will be able to deliver from 2022. We currently expect roll out to be significantly increased at this stage as T-levels become a more ‘main stream’ part of the qualifications offer.”

The full roll-out of the new technical qualifications will not happen until September 2023.

The IfA launched a consultation for the draft content of three of the seven new pathways in today’s announcement, in onsite construction, building services engineering and digital support and services, in October.

Interserve denies 5,000+ apprentices will go the way of Carillion

Even as the fallout from Carillion’s collapse engrossed the nation, another outsourcing giant which trains over 5,000 apprentices also had financial concerns highlighted.

Interserve, an international support services and construction group which runs a large UK training provider called Interserve Learning and Employment Ltd, employs over 80,000 staff worldwide and has an annual turnover of £3 billion.

But in September, the FTSE 250 contractor admitted that its annual profits were likely to halve after a £195 million loss from an energy to-waste contract. A second profit warning followed in October.

Fears about its financial health grew deeper after its rival Carillion suddenly went into liquidation in January, especially when a report by the Financial Times claimed that the Cabinet Office had established a special team of officials to closely monitor the situation.

The government moved swiftly to reassure people that Interserve will not be the next Carillion, but many fear the fall of another huge organisation with fingers in so many pies.

Interserve topped the list of the government’s strategic suppliers in 2017, according to data provider Tussell, winning £938 million of work across a range of areas including health, education and defence.

Interserve Learning and Employment was formerly called ESG and was bought from finance firm Ares Capital in a cash deal worth £25 million in December 2014.

It is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted and currently teaches over 5,000 apprentices. It was given £19 million from the ESFA in 2016/17 to deliver apprenticeships, as well as £2 million from the adult education budget.

The provider has around 700 employees and boasts that it is “one of the UK’s largest private sector providers of training and employment services”.

It also provides vocational training in three FE colleges in Saudi Arabia under the UK’s Colleges of Excellence programme and claims it supports over 65,000 people a year into work or training.

A spokesperson for the firm refused to speculate about what would happen to its learners if it collapsed, and claimed it is in no danger of doing so.

Recently announced government contracts include five-year facility management contracts for the Department for Work and Pensions (£227 million) and the Department for Transport (£190 million).

Other wins include a £500 million construction framework for Manchester city council, and a £140 million facilities management contract extension with the BBC.

Interserve confessed to net debts of about £513 million at the end of 2017, but in a trading update on January 10, its expected operating profit in 2018 was better than forecasted.

“Earlier this month we announced that we expect our 2017 performance to be in line with expectations outlined in October and that our transformation plan is expected to deliver £40-£50 million benefit by 2020,” a spokesperson said.

“This remains the case and we expect our 2018 operating profit to be ahead of current market expectations and we continue to have constructive discussions with lenders over
longer-term funding.

“We are keeping the Cabinet Office closely appraised of our progress as would be expected.”

A Cabinet Office spokesperson added: “We monitor the financial health of all of our strategic suppliers, including Interserve. We do not believe that any of our strategic suppliers
are in a comparable position to Carillion.”

Over ‘optimistic’ leaders drag council down to ‘inadequate’

A council has received the lowest possible rating for its adult and community learning provision after leadership and management was found to be ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted.

Despite being rated as ‘requires improvement’ in every other area, North East Lincolnshire Council has been left with an overall ‘inadequate’ grade after inspectors warned leaders had been “too slow in tackling areas for improvement” and “too optimistic” about the service.

The council’s Community Learning Service (CLS) received a grade three rating from Ofsted in February 2014, April 2015 and December 2016, and the latest report, published today, accused leaders and managers of failing to tackle weaknesses “that have persisted over the past five years and that were identified at three previous inspections”.

The service delivers adult and community learning provision to 729 learners in Grimsby, Cleethorpes and Immingham, but inspectors found that too many learners “do not achieve their qualifications because they do not attend their examinations”.

Leaders and managers were said to not use data “incisively enough to manage the performance of their staff”, while members of the improvement board were criticised for not sufficiently challenging reports about the service’s performance.

The report said attendance is “poor”, with just over half of learners attending their sessions on the main employability study programme in 2017/18. The pace of learning is “too slow” and progress made by learners is “insufficient”, but tutors were said to know their learners well and “provide good personal support”.

Ofsted also said that in 2017/18 around a quarter of learners returned to not being in education, training or employment after they left CLS.

Not enough learners on 16 to 19 programmes make the progress expected of them, and tutors for adult learning programmes do not do enough to “motivate and inspire learners”.

However, the report did say leaders had developed a curriculum that “serves the most disadvantaged members of the community”.

Some of the wards covered by North East Lincolnshire Council are among the most socially and economically disadvantaged in the country, and the report acknowledged that a high proportion of CLS’ users were looked-after children, unaccompanied asylum seekers, those recovering from mental health problems or unemployed.

“For many of these young people and adults, CLS offers their only option to continue with their education after having failed at school and other providers,” it said.

“Learners demonstrate a high level of respect for one another and for their tutors and support workers. Learners from a wide range of different backgrounds and with many challenges in their personal lives work together effectively in lessons. They support each other well.”

 Councillor Peter Wheatley, the cabinet member for skills, said progress had been made “in lots of areas” but the council “recognises the need for focus and pace in some key areas and as a result accepts the findings”.

“CLS is delivered to some of the most disadvantaged members of our community, and that can sometimes present its own difficulties in terms of attendance and progression options for the users,” he said.

“Whilst we accept the findings of the report, inevitably, we will always face some challenges in delivery.”

 

Shadow minister demands IfA hands over private levy overspend presentation

The Institute for Apprenticeships has been criticised for refusing to publicly share a presentation given to employers about a worrying imminent apprenticeship overspend.

Gordon Marsden, the shadow skills minister, described the latest example of a lack of transparency at the institute as “disappointing” and has said he will write to the government agency demanding its release.

FE Week revealed on Monday that the apprenticeships budget for England is set to be overspent by £0.5 billion this year, rising to £1.5 billion during 2021/22 – which has raised many concerns across the education sector.

The IfA is obviously getting closer to government and is catching the non-disclosure germ

It came after Robert Nitsch, the IfA’s chief operating officer, presented the figures during an event for employers held at Exeter College on Friday.

When FE Week learned of the presentation we asked for the full slide pack but the IfA has refused to release it.

A spokesperson for the institute said the decision to keep the presentation hidden was made because “the slides were produced specifically for the stakeholder engagement event and were not intended to be shared beyond this”.

After being informed of the secrecy, Mr Marsden (pictured) said: “It is certainly disappointing and slightly undermines what I imagine was the purpose of the exercise which was to reassure stakeholders and employers.

“The IfA is obviously getting closer to government and is catching the non-disclosure germ from the attorney general in parliament yesterday.

“I don’t have the ability to hold the IfA in contempt but I will be very happy to write to the institute about why this can’t be made more accessible.”

He added that it could be the case that it is the Department for Education who has told the institute not to share the full presentation, in which case he will “be writing fairly sharply to the minister”.

Robert Nitsch’s slide from Friday’s employer engagement event

This isn’t the first time the IfA has been criticised for not being transparent.

FE Week reported in August that the institute refused to publicly reveal the recommendations from its controversial funding band review of apprenticeship standards – despite sharing them with the employer groups involved.

The institute also heavily redacts the minutes of its board meetings on a regular basis.

The levy overspend problem – which comes despite the volume of starts dipping – is understood to be the result of higher per-start funding than first predicted, largely driven by the sharp rise in management apprenticeships with high prices.

As more and more people start on these expensive apprenticeships, the monthly on-programme costs quickly accumulate.

Mark Dawe, the chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, has demanded an “open debate on how the levy operates” following the revelation.

An example of redacted minutes from an IfA subcommittee board meeting

 

Reform higher apprenticeships, but beware of unintended consequences

Let’s not lump all higher apprenticeships together – some are genuinely about re-training and progression, says Iain MacKinnon

The government needs to sort this out, and fast. We cannot allow the apprenticeship reforms to be de-railed by employers upsetting the balance of the programme by spending so much of the levy on management apprenticeships.

But we also need to be careful: Anne Milton quite rightly said in her discussion with David Hughes (do watch it if you haven’t) that we need to be careful about unintended consequences. If we are committed to encouraging long-term structured training, and committed to progression, we ought not to restrict apprenticeship support to lower level programmes for the under 25s.

Let me explain.

Ask yourself what we’re trying to do here. The prize for government in setting apprenticeship policy is to use just enough leverage, no more, to get employers to do something that is good for the economy and good for our society, and which they wouldn’t have done anyway.

Government wants more employers to offer high quality, structured training programmes that give people an excellent foundation for career progression. That means investment, and however promising the returns, investment always means money up front. The government’s subsidy is meant to help get employers over that initial hurdle.

It’s early days, and let’s be fair, it’s hard to do – but it’s clear now that the government hasn’t got that balance right. It needs to sort this fast before it becomes a real problem.

Employers, acting rationally to secure their self-interest (at least as defined in the short-term) are using the government’s subsidy to put managers on management programmes – even worse, on MBAs – re-badged as apprenticeships. (There’s too much lazy talk about re-badging by people who’ve never sat in a trailblazer meeting, but much of this does deserve the label).

That’s a fail for government policy, even if those programmes are inherently valuable. In economic terms, it’s deadweight: this is the government paying companies to do what they would have done anyway. A waste of money.

By no means all higher level apprenticeships are like that

But by no means all higher level apprenticeships are like that. The norm in the maritime sector is that people have two-stage careers; it’s common to spend seven to ten years at sea, then you “come ashore” while still in your mid-20s, and have to start again.

The ideal, of course, is that you get proper re-training that builds on your sea-going skills, and a structured training programme that enables you to push on, but many don’t get it. The apprenticeship programme therefore gives us a great tool to get employers to provide structured career training for people who might not otherwise get that.

And it’s working. Because of the levy, we now have a national standard for marine pilots (at level 5), where we didn’t have a national standard before. And work is about to start on a standard for harbour masters (also at level 6), which again, we’ve never had before. (Ports, you may have noticed, are very much in the news these days, now that politicians have spotted that 95 per cent of our trade comes to us by sea). Numbers aren’t huge, but these are good wins for national policy.

So when Anne Milton said in her discussion with David Hughes that apprenticeships “have also got to be about progression”, I think she was talking about people like this.

People who train to be officers in the commercial shipping sector (i.e. managers) get an HND or a foundation degree when they do their initial three-year training programme. It’s great training (with, T-level planners please note, a full year’s training at sea as a mandatory element), but in no sense are they in the same category as a graduate manager ashore getting a chance to do a further degree.

The government needs to take control of the runaway train of management apprenticeships, and do so fast, but let’s please be careful not to damage other higher apprenticeships, which are very much in line with key policy objectives.

Ofsted understands the challenges for further education

From funding problems to T-levels and the apprenticeship levy, Ofsted seems to have a good handle on the main challenges for further education, says David Hughes

It was nice knowing, as I travelled to the annual presentation from the chief inspector of Ofsted, that I was going to hear reasoned, calm and evidence-based views on quality and improvement in education. And that’s what we got this year from Amanda Spielman, who has a great knack of setting out very clear, stark statements based on evidence, which tend to cut through all sorts of sacred cows and sensitivities.

Now, it’s not been a bad year for colleges in terms of the improving the picture on quality. Today’s annual state of the nation report from Ofsted revealed that 76% of further education colleges are rated at least good, a better picture than last year and rising fast.

It comes as no surprise because, despite clear evidence that funding is inadequate, colleges continue to be strong and robust, working to deliver solutions for more than two million people, including over 600,000 16- to 18-year-olds. Every college I visit has a great story to tell on the impact they are having, the students they are supporting and the employers they are working with.

So, with that improving picture all set out, where were the interesting observations this year?

For me there were a few. Perhaps top of the list is just how explicitly the chief inspector describes the negative impact of inadequate funding for colleges. She points out all the issues we have been campaigning on – how it makes governance and leadership so much harder, how teaching time and resources are being cut and how student choice, support and breadth of offer are worsening as colleges struggle to make ends meet.

It was a nice calm morning of sensible observations

I obviously will always agree with Amanda Spielman’s assertion that “the real-term cuts to FE and skills funding are affecting the sustainability and quality of FE provision. My strong view is that the government should use the forthcoming spending review to increase the base rate for 16 to 18 funding after inspections found a lack of cash has directly led to falling standards in FE”.

Beyond that, I liked the focus on apprenticeships that meet the letter of the rules, but perhaps fall foul of a softer and subtler test of meeting the spirit of the apprenticeship levy. I have said time and again how worried I am that management and degree apprenticeships for people in senior roles in big organisations, and for the highest achieving young people, don’t feel like a priority, when SMEs are being denied apprenticeship funding because of non-levy cash restrictions. It’s great to see Ofsted recognising that and asserting that attention needs to be paid to it.

I’m also struck at how much Ofsted recognises that further education is a rapidly changing policy environment. T-levels are set to come in place into place in 2020; the way apprenticeships are funded has changed since the introduction of the levy; and college mergers are becoming increasingly common. Dealing with all those changes can sometimes hinder leadership and management; taking away time that would be better spent improving quality.

Finally, I was pleased to see the focus on where our future leaders will emerge from. Over the last few months we’ve seen an increase in the spate of principal resignations and concerns from prospective future leaders about the risks of being a leader. The job of managing a college is a tough one as many principals will know all too well, especially with the tight funding constraints many of them are having to juggle. Cuts to their budgets, struggles over the recruitment and retention of staff, balancing college mergers – principals have a lot on their plate and proper planning is needed to mitigate the risks that come with this.

So all in all, it was a nice calm morning of sensible observations, which give us all food for thought as we strive to achieve a better education system that works for everyone, everywhere at all stages of life.

Skills minister will ‘look at whether it is right to continue to fund all apprenticeships’

The skills minister has said she will “look at whether it is right” for the government to “continue to fund all apprenticeships”.

Anne Milton made the remarks as part of a wide-ranging video interview with Association of Colleges’ boss David Hughes this afternoon, after she was unable to stay for questions at the association’s annual conference last month.

“We will need to look ahead, when the system is really running well – and I think we’re nearly at that stage – when we need to look at do we continue to fund apprenticeships for people who are already in work, people doing second degrees,” she said.

We now need to look at whether it is right to continue to fund all apprenticeships

“We now need to look at whether it is right to continue to fund all apprenticeships, particularly at the sort of levels that we’re talking about,” she said.

Ms Milton’s comments come just a day after FE Week exclusively revealed that the apprenticeships budget could be overspent by £0.5 billion this year alone – in large part because of the surge in people doing expensive management apprenticeships.

And Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman raised concerns about levy funds being spent on higher level apprenticeships at the expense of young people on lower levels, during today’s annual report launch.

“Levy funding is, in many cases, falling far short of the intended spirit of the policy. In some cases we’re seeing levy funding subsidising repackaged graduate schemes and MBAs that just don’t need it,” she said.

Ms Milton was responding to a question from Mr Hughes specifically about the points raised by Ms Spielman on “degree apprenticeships, apprenticeship for people who are already in work, people who are in decent jobs, doing an MBA”.

She acknowledged that such courses “cost a lot of money”.

We are now starting to look at the future of the apprenticeship levy

“We are now starting to look at the future of the apprenticeship levy. I think business might see that as a signal that we’re going to change it, and I think that’s extremely unlikely,” she said.

“I think in the first stages it was not unreasonable to have a very open system, taking money off business, as long as it’s an apprenticeship, 20 per cent off the job, lasts for more than a year, ticks all our boxes, you can do it,” she said.

The apprenticeships system “should be about that second, third, fourth chance” and “it’s also got to be about progression” – particularly in sectors where “people do a level two and stop there”.

“We want to increase their aspiration, that they could do a level three and critically a level four where we have traditionally been weak on in this country

“We’re looking at it all at the moment. I don’t want to set any hares running,” Ms Milton said.

Photo caption: Skills minister Anne Milton being interviewed by AoC chief executive David Hughes. The exchange above starts at 10 minutes into the video.

Revealed: The 30 apprenticeship standards included in IfA’s new funding band review

The funding bands for a further 30 apprenticeship standards have gone up for review today.

The new list (see table below), revealed by the Institute for Apprenticeships on its website, includes two standards currently set at £27,000 – the maximum upper limit, meaning their rates can only fall.

The institute expects the full review to be completed by “summer 2019”.

It follows the launch of the institute’s first funding band review in May which saw 31 apprenticeships, including many of the most popular again, revised at the request of the Department for Education.

The IfA said today that the reviews will “ensure value-for-money for employers and taxpayers; and consistency in the way older and newer standards are funded”.

“Our aim is to make sufficient funding for apprenticeships available to as many companies as possible,” he added.

“We understand the review might be a concern to employers which is why we are working collaboratively to ensure the review is carried out in an open and fair way, and as quickly as possible.”

The first funding band review is still ongoing and has proved controversial so far. Many employer groups are opposing large cuts that would render the apprenticeships “financially non-viable”.

The two apprenticeships in the new review with current funding rates of £27,000 are the level 3 gas engineering standard and the level 3 engineering design and draughtsperson standard.

Both band reviews come at a time when the IfA is warning of imminent apprenticeship over-spend.

Rate reviews got underway after the institute moved to having 30 funding bands – the maximum rate paid for from the levy – to choose from, up from the previous 15.

The new structure gives the institute more choice regarding the rate it applies to each standard.