Almost 2,000 fewer people started adult care apprenticeships last year despite “exceptional” funding boosts.
Two care standards were among 10 popular apprenticeships chosen for an emergency government review of funding in late 2022. Those in scope were in skills shortage occupations and priority sectors where costs of delivery were hardest hit by inflation.
Funding band increases of between £500 and £5,000 were finally implemented the following summer ahead of the 2023/24 academic year, but training providers warned at the time that the rises fell short of what was needed to make the courses affordable.
FE Week analysis of new 2023/24 provisional government data shows that six of the 10 apprenticeships saw their starts decline despite the funding increases (full table below).
Adult care worker apprenticeships suffered the steepest fall in terms of volume. The level 2 standard dropped from 7,460 to 6,286 and the level 3 lead standard slumped from 10,180 to 9,541. Both programmes had their funding bands increased from £3,000 to £4,000.
Level 2 large goods vehicle (LGV) driver C and E dropped by the largest proportion of 33 per cent, falling from 1,380 in 2022/23 to 931 after its funding band was boosted from £7,000 to £8,000.
Starts on the level 3 motor vehicle and maintenance technical (light vehicle) apprenticeship fell 18 per cent from 3,730 to 3,066. The funding band for this standard went up from £15,000 to £16,000.
The remaining apprenticeships that dropped in starts were heavy vehicle service and maintenance technician, which fell from 1,260 to 1,125 despite a £5,000 funding boost to £20,000, and the production chef standard which sank from 2,360 to 2,225.
An FE Week investigation in March found nearly 200 training providers had ceased delivery of adult care worker apprenticeships since 2019 and annual starts on the programmes had nosedived.
The Association of Employment and Learning Providers believes the data shows the “consequences of not having a fully responsive system”.
Deputy CEO and director of policy Simon Ashworth said: “This means we see vital delivery capacity lost and high-quality providers leaving the market unnecessarily and through no fault of their own. Skills England must learn these lessons so that the skills system evolves into something that is more responsive to both demand and supply factors – not just on funding, but also on content and wider currency.”
He added that the challenge of having to successfully pass English and maths functional skills was another aspect affecting starts.
“From our own research, we know that as DfE tighten their focus through provider accountability, tough decisions are then made by providers in terms of who gets recruited onto programmes such as adult care.”
Apprenticeship funding bands are said to be the government’s best estimate of the typical cost of training and assessment.
Reviews of the bands usually happen as part of revisions to apprenticeship content, which can be a lengthy process. The exceptional funding band review removed the need for content to be reviewed so that monetary decisions could be accelerated.
Twenty apprenticeships were originally chosen for the emergency review but only 10 ended up benefitting from it after the employer-led trailblazer groups for half of those in scope opted out.
Of the four apprenticeships in the review that had their starts increase, the level 2 engineering operative standard rose by the largest proportion of 19 per cent, shooting up from 1,500 to 1,790.
The level 3 senior chef production apprenticeship boiled up from 600 to 675, while the level 3 chef de partie standard rose from 240 to 251 and the level 2 commis chef simmered from 1,610 to 1,620.
A spokesperson from the Department for Education said: “We are committed to supporting high-quality delivery of apprenticeships. Spending on the apprenticeship programme is demand-led and employers can choose which apprenticeships they offer, how many and when.
“These increases have provided real benefit to providers and to support continued high-quality provision.”
Adult care – a critical sector that is crying out for quality staff and the recognition it rightly deserves for their vital role in modern society.
Yet a provider can draw down twice as much funding for someone who cares for golf greens.
Someone, somewhere, has this completely morally wrong.
Im not sure why anyone is suprised that numbers have dropped.
The fact that it needed a “emergency review” to look at the funding rate tells its own story. Thing is that TPs are not stupid. If its becoming increasingly impossible to deliver programs in the funding available, with the increases in costs TPs are facing, why would they continue to deliver programs where costs are barely, if at all, covered?
I would bet that the drop in the number of starts would mirror the percentage of TPs exiting the market in the reviewed standards
Why would anyone expect the cost of delivery to remain the same over the years, especially when that period covered double-digit inflation levels? Add to this the changing and increasing inspection demands, the pricing review mechanisms are not fit for purpose, they simple dont keep up. They are protracted, complicated and reliant upon organisations doing the work pro bono and remaining active for 5,6, 7 plus years
It also screams to me that Trailblazer groups had too little interaction with TPs when prices were set. Having been asked to provide prices in to TB groups, the templates didn’t cover all that was needed to deliver programmes, the timelines to submit prices was exceptionally tight against which were often, new delivery models back in 2017, indeed no one had delivered standards back then and to be honest, I dont believe most realised how different they are