The Department for Education is waiting for the Treasury to let them announce a start date for when the 10 per cent employer co-investment will be halved, FE Week can reveal.

In his Budget speech in October, chancellor Philip Hammond announced that the contribution non-levy paying companies pay towards apprenticeship training would fall to 5 per cent.

Following this, the Treasury told FE Week the start date for the new policy would be April 2019, but quickly backtracked claiming this was a “misunderstanding”.

“Further details will be set out soon, including dates,” the spokesperson added.

More than four month later, no start date has been forthcoming leaving the sector frustrated, and concerns are growing that small businesses may be putting off taking on apprentices until the change is made.

In an interview with FE Week editor Nick Linford this week, apprenticeships and skills minister Anne Milton expressed her equal “frustration” at the delay, and said the Department for Education is waiting on the Treasury.

“I would love to make an announcement now,” she said.

“Sadly, with much of one’s life in government, one waits for her majesty’s Treasury to say when you can do these things. And so we are always to same instance in Treasury’s hands.”

Milton added: “I share frustrations of people who are trying to deliver apprenticeships, train apprentices and plan their business. Government is always quite slow to make decision on these things so I completely understand the frustrations and I share them.”

When asked why it was holding up the announcement almost five months after the Budget, the Treasury would only say: “We will be announcing the date in due course.”

The chancellor Philip Hammond is due to deliver his Spring Statement next Wednesday, where he will give an update on the country’s economic situation since October’s fiscal event. It is not clear if an announcement will be made then.

The decision to cut SME’s contribution by half was made as part of a “£695 million package to support apprenticeships”, and will only apply to new starters when the change comes into effect.

However, it is unclear if the contribution will also apply to levy-paying employers when their levy pot is empty.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers had been heavily campaigning to scrap the rule altogether as it believes it puts SMEs off apprenticeships, and is the reason why starts have fallen so much since the introduction of the levy.

But Milton has argued that “a contribution from somebody is important, because it requires their buy-in to what they’re getting into”.

Adults earning less than the national living wage and who live outside of Mayoral combined authorities with devolution deals will continue to benefit from fully funded training next year.

Prior to 2018/19, adults had to have been on benefits to receive full funding for education courses.

Last year, the Department for Education launched a trial enabling providers in receipt of ESFA funded adult education budget to fully fund learners who are employed and in receipt of a low wage and cannot contribute towards the cost of co-funding fees.

The DfE confirmed today, in its publication of the draft AEB funding rules for 2019/20, that this trial will continue next year.

It pointed out that the low-wage threshold has been increased from £15,725.50 to £16,009.50 – so anyone in employment earning less than this amount will benefit.

“The trial will help to increase AEB participation and lift social mobility barriers to learning for those who would not otherwise engage due to course fees being unaffordable,” today’s announcement said.

Current AEB fee remission rules focus on providing full funding for eligible unemployed adults – such as those on benefits – young people aged 19 to 23 with skills below level two, and adults aged 19 and over who do not have English and maths up to level two.

Currently, individuals who do not fall into one of these categories may have to contribute up to 50 per cent towards the cost of their learning.

The new full funding eligibility criteria include those that are “eligible for co-funding for provision, up to and including level two” and “earn less than £16,009.50 annual gross salary”.

To confirm learner eligibility providers must have “seen evidence of the learner’s gross annual wages in these circumstances, for example, this could be a wage slip or Universal Credit statement, within three months of the learner’s learning start date, or a current employment contract, which states gross monthly/annual wages”.

They must also “enter the ILR monitoring code (363) for every eligible learner they fully fund through this trial, this is imperative as we will use data collected to inform future adult funding policy development”.

From September, the AEB is being devolved to six combined authorities – in Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, the West of England, the West Midlands, Tees Valley, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough – as well as the Greater London Authority.

As a result, the extension of the trial “only applies to individuals resident in areas of England outside of the MCAs/GLA areas undertaking ESFA funded AEB learning,” the DfE said.

The MCAs and GLA will publish their own funding rules “that will apply to providers in receipt of devolved AEB funding”.

Last year, the GLA said adults in the capital who earn less than the London living wage of £19,890 will have their training fully funded from 2019/20.

Its published funding rules confirm this: “You may fully fund learners who are ‘employed’ and would normally be co-funded [if they] earn less than the London Living Wage as an annual gross salary on the date of the learner’s learning start date.

“Learners will be deemed to earn less than the London Living Wage as an annual gross salary if they earn less than the hourly London Living Wage at that point in time, multiplied by 37.5 (hours per week), multiplied by 52 (weeks per year).

“Based on the 2017/18 London Living Wage, this would be £19,890, but AEB Procured providers will need to check the updated rates each year.”

Today’s National Audit Office report into apprenticeships is a “shame” because it only reflects on the past and doesn’t account for policy that will make a difference in the future, the apprenticeships minister has said.

Anne Milton spoke with FE Week’s editor Nick Linford this morning during a visit to the University of East London where she met with apprentices to hear how the programme is helping their careers, in the middle of National Apprenticeship Week.

The interview also came just hours after the NAO published its apprenticeship progress report, which raised various concerns including a “risk” that the programme is not financially sustainable after the average cost of training an apprentice hit double what the government predicted.

But Milton didn’t find the report to be of great value.

“It is always a shame when these reports come out because I think they have an important part to play in the development of government policy but by their very nature they are looking back rather than forward,” she said.

“I read the NAO report in quite a lot of detail and I don’t think it accounts for the changes that we are clearly seeing. I’ve seen all through apprenticeship week the changes that we are going to be able to measure six months from now.

“It doesn’t always, I think, give an accurate picture of what we are going to be seeing in six months’ time.”

You can read the main findings from the NAO’s report here.

Today’s event at the UEL was used by the minister to celebrate the university’s apprentices, who are training in sectors ranging from nursing and teaching to civil engineering and digital and technology solutions.

Lauren, an apprentice nursing associate with UEL, told FE Week the apprenticeship is helping her progress in her position from a healthcare assistant to a nursing associate at Queen’s Hospital in Essex.

“The reason why I’m doing this is because it will help me progress further in my career path to become a registered nurse,” she said.

“I won’t be left with any debt and I can pay my bills as well, it’s helping me live and it’s absolutely wonderful I can do this as a mature student.”

 

William is also at UEL, training to be a civil engineer.

“I’m doing a six year course working at Blue Engineering working on live projects,” he told FE Week.

“The benefit is not only being in no debt but also getting paid full time and learning on the job.”

Read the full ‘Editor Asks’ interview in the next edition of FE Week this Friday.

Main picture caption: Skills minister Anne Milton (centre left) with nursing associate apprentices and Jane Perry, UEL’s director of strategy and external engagement (right)

National Audit Office criticism of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education standards approvals process has been rejected by its chief executive.

In an exclusive interview with FE Week, Sir Gerry Berragan ruled out prioritising the development of particular standards, those that “could add the most value”, when clearing the backlog.

There are currently 254 apprenticeship standards in development, according to the IfATE website.

But those in priority sectors that are likely to have significant demand, such as the level three early year educator for nursery nurses and childminders, have joined the queue with other standards in development like the level three for gunsmiths and level three assistant puppet maker.

The NAO report said: “The department and the institute have not seen it as their role to prioritise any particular standards, meaning that those introduced first were not necessarily for apprenticeships that could add the most value.”

When asked if this was something being considered, Sir Gerry ruled it out on the grounds it was “immensely difficult” and they were never asked by the Department for Education to even consider it.

“This goes back to our statutory requirements, we respond to their needs and develop new standards,” he told FE Week.

“Ultimately we are responding to employer demand. It was never asked of us to approve standards on that basis and nor would it be appropriate for us to do so.

“It is immensely difficult because when you look at the industrial strategy and sector plans and speak with sector employers all of them have huge priorities, they all have competing demands and they will all tell you they are the most important to get approved. It is quite difficult to prioritise on that basis.

“Given the task we had was to improve the number of standards available we really got on with those that are closer to being ready and get them over the line and that is how we got results, 400 standards ahead of time.”

Read the full interview with Sir Gerry on Friday in the next edition of FE Week.

The Education and Skills Funding Agency has asked employers and providers for feedback on the way it provides apprenticeship funding rules information.

The agency called volunteers to take part in a survey which aims to make sure its funding rules are “clearer, easier to use” as well to learn more about its users.

It follows recent mystery no-notice audits carried out by the agency as well as separate research by the Department for Education into whether apprenticeship delivery is being adjusted to account for apprentices’ prior learning.

A number of providers told FE Week last month they were given two days’ notice to hand over up to 100 apprentice files by ESFA staff. After two days working through the files, they left without taking away any of the material.

It is believed these searches have been prompted by concerns at the unpublished results of the qualification achievement rates for 2017/18, as well as its investigation into disgraced apprenticeship firm Aspire Achieve Advance (3aaa).

Meanwhile, the DfE has also asked suppliers to research if and how employers and providers are adapting training and the associated costs to take into account the prior learning of apprentices.

Today, the ESFA called employers, employer-providers and training to contribute to its research, which will add to the “insight to the user feedback we have already gathered”.

Respondents are being asked to disclose if their organisation is currently paying the apprenticeship levy, how many times they have consulted the funding rules in the past twelve months and if the information available in its website is understandable.

They are also encouraged to provide further comments on how the agency could improve their experience.

The survey is open until March 14.

DfE’s research into high prices for apprentices with prior learning is due to start in the week commencing April 1. The final report will be issued on August 30.

The launch of ESFA’s survey also follow National Audit Office’s report which said the ESFA has ‘limited assurance the 20 per cent off-the-job-training rule is being complied with, and that it “does not yet have an effective way of identifying where apprentices are routinely receiving less training than they should”.

On the same day the National Audit Office revealed the government has “limited assurance” the 20 per cent off-the-job-training rule is being complied with, Ofsted has accused a provider of failing to ensure the entitlement is being met.

Meg Hillier MP and chair of the public accounts committee also hit out today saying it was “concerning” that the “Education and Skills Education can’t be sure that apprentices are spending enough time on off-the-job training”.

Ofsted’s findings mean the provider, Catalyst Learning and Development Limited, will be banned from starting any new apprentices until achieving at least a grade three in a full inspection, in accordance with ESFA intervention rules.

These apprentices are not on track to complete within their original planned timescales

In its first monitoring visit to the Enfield-based provider, the regulator rated Catalyst’s apprenticeship provision ‘insufficient’ across the board.

Inspectors found that leaders have not ensured all employers “understand and apply the commitment required for off-the-job training for apprentices”.

As a result, this entitlement is not being met for “too many apprentices”.

The controversial rule requires all apprentices to spend the equivalent of one day a week on activities relating to their course but which are different from their normal working duties.

According to Ofsted, managers at Catalyst are failing to monitor closely the hours apprentices have to study off-the-job, relying instead on apprentices’ own records, which are “often incorrect”.

“In a few cases, employers do not allow apprentices the full entitlement. As a consequence, these apprentices are not on track to complete within their original planned timescales.”

Ofsted now carries out monitoring visits to all new apprenticeship providers funded with £5 million injection from the Department for Education.

But the chief inspector, Amanda Spielman, told FE Week in January that she “can’t turn Ofsted into a police force, I’m not resourced and I don’t have the skills; and I do not think it will be a helpful thing to turn Ofsted into an investigation service, turning up to try and find any possible way integrity has been damaged”.

And an investigation by this newspaper revealed earlier this year that apprenticeships failing to comply with this provision will be “ineligible and all funding would be recovered”.

But an FE Week survey in March last year found that the sector considered the off-the-job training rule to be the single biggest barrier to apprenticeship recruitment. It is considered to be a particular issue for smaller companies who claim they can’t afford to let apprentices spend a fifth of their time away from work.

Catalyst, which specialises in commercial programmes in leadership and management, gained a contract to provide apprenticeships and started training in September 2017. It currently has 98 apprentices, all over the age of 18 years.

During last month’s monitoring visit, inspectors also found the provider does not take account of prior learning of apprentices.

While staff assess apprentices’ prior knowledge, skills and behaviours accurately using personality profiling methods at the start of the programme, they do not use this information to adjust the content and duration of an individual’s programme.

This means experienced managers are being forced to complete all the modules of a leadership and management diploma over the same length of time as less experienced apprentices, resulting in “many making slow progress, given their prior knowledge and skills”.

Ofsted also said leaders and managers do not routinely check how many planned reviews and coaching sessions take place, nor do they track apprentices’ attendance at monthly training sessions. As a result, they “do not identify quickly enough when apprentices fall behind”.

Leaders and managers at Catalyst were accused of not creating a culture of safeguarding apprentices, placing instead much of the responsibility on employers.

However, the regulator said a new management database to improve communications is now in place and is starting to have a positive impact, and welcomed directors’ “strong vision and ambition to provide high-quality apprenticeship training”.

“They have an extensive track record in commercial training and have been very effective in attracting high profile, levy-paying employers to the apprenticeship programme. The apprenticeship standards match the professional development needs of employers very well.”

Coaches and trainers were also found to have “considerable experience” and to be “occupationally competent”.

Catalyst declined to comment.

Nearly 80 of the UK’s most skilled young people are battling it out in a five-day competition this week that will decide if they get to represent the nation at WorldSkills Kazan 2019.

The squad of apprentices and learners have travelled to colleges all over the country for the team selection event.

The 40 best performers from across 36 skills will win a spot at the next WorldSkills competition in Kazan, Russia in August.

Dubbed as the ‘Olympics of skills’, WorldSkills brings together learners from around the globe, who compete in tests of their technical skills in areas such as landscape gardening, electrical installation, beauty therapy and jewellery.

FE Week went along to one of the Team UK selection events in Nottingham to see how the competitors are faring, and was joined by the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s director of employer engagement and the UK’s new official delegate, Sue Husband.

“I’m always impressed by these competitions, seeing all those individuals putting themselves out there,” she said.

“I’d find it quite challenging not just competing against colleagues from college and other colleges, but against people from as far as Russia. The standard of the work they are delivering is so impressive.”

All the competitors at World Skills Kazan 2019 will have to complete 22 hours of competition over four days.

For most of the competitors, the projects they will have to complete in Russia will be released before they get there; but when they arrive at Kazan, 30 per cent of the project will be changed.

Some competitions, such as cooking, have completely blind tests.

Beforehand though, the competitors have to go through a boot camp at Loughborough University, where they are trained by 2012 Olympian Peter Bakare and John Walton, who was part of the training team for Team GB.

Competitors are taught how to diet, exercise and sleep to get them in prime condition and then each morning in Kazan, the competitors will have to be up at 6.30 for Yoga and stretching.

Someone who knows what it’s like to prepare for the competition is Daryl Head, who won silver for the UK in the car painting competition at the 2017 competition in Abu Dhabi, and is now a judge of the UK team selection.

“It was pretty intense,” he told FE Week. “There was a strict plan we were following.”

Asked how he brought his technical skills up to a competition level, he said: “Repetition. Find out what you’re weak at and work on those areas.”

The training manager for the painting team, Richard Wheeler, said of the 2019 candidates: “Over the period of 18 months, I have been training these guys up in frequent intervals. They will obviously go away, practice, and their skill set will get better.”

There are two people competing for a place on the UK team and Wheeler said it would be difficult to choose between them.

“It’s going to come down to their interpersonal skills, time management problem-solving and how they deal with pressure.”

The two car painting competitors, and the rest of the candidates, will find out if they have made the UK team going to Kazan at Loughborough University on Sunday.

The 45th WorldSkills event will take place from August 22 to 27.

At the last WorldSkills, which took place two years ago in Abu Dhabi, saw Team UK retain its top-10 position, after our competitors bagged one gold, three silvers, three bronzes, and 13 medallions of excellence.

FE Week is proud to be the official media partner for WorldSkills UK and Team UK. FE Week will bring you all the latest developments in the lead up to WorldSkills 2019 and will be onsite in Kazan to bring rolling coverage of Team UK’s progress.

There is “clear risk” that the apprenticeship programme is not financially sustainable after the average cost of training an apprentice hit double what the government predicted, the National Audit Office has warned.

The concerning message came in a critical report published today, which said the Department for Education should assess making controversial decisions about reducing the level of public funding for certain types of apprenticeship.

In December, the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education estimated that the apprenticeships budget for England could be overspent by £0.5 billion this year, rising to £1.5 billion during 2021/22.

Spending on the programme could rise to more than £3bn once frameworks are withdrawn

The problem – which comes despite the volume of starts dipping – is the result of higher per-start funding than first predicted, largely driven by the sharp rise in management apprenticeships with high prices, which FE Week was first to warn of in 2016.

Today’s National Audit Office (NAO) report confirms that employers are developing and choosing more expensive apprenticeship standards at higher levels than was expected, which is “absorbing” the public funding.

“The department has calculated that the average cost of training an apprentice on a standard at the end of 2017-18 was around £9,000 – approximately double the cost allowed for when budgets were set in 2015,” it said.

“The department projects that, even if starts remain at current levels, spending on the programme could rise to more than £3 billion once frameworks are withdrawn and all apprenticeships are on standards.”

The NAO said the DfE “recognises” there are ways in which it could seek to control spending if necessary. However, these are “likely to be unpopular and could damage confidence in the programme”.

Options, according to the report, could include: capping the spending of levy‑paying employers; limiting the number of apprenticeships available for non‑levy paying employers; and lowering the funding bands, as the DfE has already started doing through its controversial funding band reviews.

Last month, FE Week revealed that the non-levy funding for providers to train apprentices from small businesses had already started to run dry and some were having to turn apprentices away, but the government has no cash left in the system to ease the situation.

In December, Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman raised concerns about graduate scheme rebadging, where levy funds are being spent on higher level apprenticeships at the expense of young people on lower levels.

Just days later, during an interview with Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes, skills minister Anne Milton said she would “look at whether it is right” for the government to “continue to fund all apprenticeships”.

Today’s NAO report again warned that levy-paying employers are replacing their professional development programmes – for example, graduate training schemes in accountancy or advanced courses in management – with apprenticeships.

“In such cases, there is a risk that the additional value of the apprenticeship to the economy may not be proportionate to the amount of government funding,” it said.

“There are risks that the programme is subsidising training that would have happened without government funding.”

The report concludes: “Given these concerns, the department has some way to go before it can demonstrate that the programme is achieving value for money and that resources are being used to best effect.”

Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said his organisation has been warning for two years that higher level apprenticeships offered by the levy payers would “consume the levy to a much greater degree than the government anticipated but no notice was taken”.

He added that the NAO’s overspend figures “confirm why a separate budget is needed for SMEs’ apprenticeships”.

Meg Hillier MP, chair of the influential Public Accounts Committee, said she will hold a hearing on March 25 to quiz the DfE’s permanent secretary, Jonathan Slater, on the apprenticeships programme following the NAO’s report.

Milton said: “The apprenticeship programme gives employers the opportunity to provide new and existing staff with a range of opportunities to gain skills in the workplace and makes sure we have long term investment in apprenticeships.

“The number of people starting training on our new employer designed standards is rising year on year and we will continue to work with employers to help them develop their apprenticeship programmes. Apprenticeships enable people to get a great job and career, and give employers the skilled workforce they need.”

Nearly half of all colleges and schools with sixth forms have had to reduce student mental health and careers support this year due to crippling 16 to 19 government funding cuts.

The concerning finding, revealed in a new funding impact survey of 278 schools and colleges by the Sixth Form Colleges Association, is a substantial increase on what was reported last year and comes despite the government making both areas key political priorities to improve on.

The survey also found that over three quarters of respondents do not believe the amount of funding they will receive next year will be sufficient to provide the support required by disadvantaged students.

We will not be able to provide any more mental health and tutorial support

The SFCA’s research was conducted on behalf of the twelve organisations behind the Raise the Rate campaign, which is calling for the base rate for all 16 to 18 year old students to be increased from to £4,760 in the upcoming spending review, after being stuck at £4,000 for the last five years.

The association said the chancellor’s spending review is “make or break” for sixth form education.

FE Week spoke to two colleges struggling with the financial constraints to find out how they are being impacted on the ground.

Mike Hill, principal of Carmel College in Merseyside, explained that he has been forced to cut the college’s careers department and foundation learning department for students with learning difficulties down from a five-day offer to just four days.

“It has also been really difficult for us to offer permanent contract to staff in the learning support teams because funding is changing not only each year but also within the year, which means we are constantly having to let people go,” he said.

“We now have to wait for students to appear, work out the funding and reappoint people. It has been really, really challenging.”

He added: “We are almost unable to offer any extracurricular support unless students are being funded externally. Offering students anything beyond their subjects has almost come to a halt now in colleges like ours.”

Limor Feingold, director of finance at Brockenhurst College, told FE Week that his college’s funding for disadvantaged students support is set to be been reduced by £180,000, or 40 per cent, next year.

“This means we will not be able to provide any more mental health support and tutorial support than we already do even though our student numbers might be growing,” he said.

Feingold added that the college has been forced to cut wellbeing support services costs and career advice by £80,000 to meet its budget requirements this year.

The SFCA survey said the extent of cuts to student support services has been “more noticeable” overall than in the previous academic year.

It found that the number of schools and colleges that have reduced mental health support has leapt from 32 per cent to 48 per cent, employability skills from 25 per cent to 41 per cent and careers guidance from 28 per cent to 41 per cent.

A previous FE Week investigation found that colleges are increasingly sending students with serious mental health issues to accident and emergency, due to lack of other options as a result of substantial reductions in funding in other years.

Today’s funding impact survey also found that 81 per cent of schools and colleges are teaching students in larger class sizes, 68 per cent moved from a four subject A-level offer as standard to three, and 46 per cent have reduced delivery hours of individual courses.

Bill Watkin, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association said: “Today’s report makes it absolutely clear that the government must increase the funding rate for sixth form students in this year’s spending review. And this increase must go well beyond meeting the rising costs faced by schools and colleges.

“If we are to keep key subjects on the timetable, offer a wide range of extra-curricular experiences, and provide the essential support activities that our young people need and deserve, the government must raise the rate to at least £4,760 per student, per year.”