Apprenticeships a potted recent history and up-date.

Transcription

1 Apprenticeships a potted recent history and up-date. Why is everything changing? In 2010 Conservative Business Minister John Hayes announced that they would scrap Train to Gain, a Flagship Labour initiative, as it was giving money to highly profitable companies to train their staff when they are already willing to pick up the bill. 100s of Training Providers were using Train to Gain to deliver NVQs free to employers/employees. The budget was transferred to Apprenticeships and meaningful adult learning at work. The Coalition Government made great play in 2011 of a 1 billion investment creating 450,000 apprenticeships up 63% on the year. However, the Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) Select Committee were concerned ref the use of funds and highlighted the case of Elmfield Training that had a Government grant of 37 million to deliver apprenticeships (including to Morrisons) and made a profit of 12 million with the CEO taking a dividend of 3 million. In Feb 2011 The Guardian ran an article Apprenticeship Schemes are Failing our Young - noting that beneath the Government positive stats and statements huge numbers of the apprentices were already in jobs and retrospectively registered as apprentices, were over 25 years old, or even over 60 years old (over 60 registrations up 878% in one year). In Feb 2012 BBC Panorama aired The Great Apprenticeship Scandal. One point being made that 1 in 10 of Apprentices in England were working for Morrisons and often on very short programmes. This unleashed a whole series of articles and exposes in the press highlighting poor practice and claimed misuse of taxpayer monies. The Government adopted the view that in some cases the scheme was being abused and was (anyway) not fit-for-purpose (having been told by many businesses that apprenticeships weren t creating work ready employees). Also that the system was being driven from the wrong end with in many cases Training Providers seeking out sources of funding then approaching employers with the offer of free training so the system potentially resulting in some employees who didn t need or value the training being trained (and funded), and no incentive to drive value for money. So, the Coalition Government asked Doug Richard (ex-dragon and founder of The School for Start-ups) to undertake a review of Apprenticeships, and his report was published in November Key findings being: Apprenticeships should focus on new jobs or role changes.

2 The assessment should be at the end of the apprenticeship and focus on what the apprentice can do i.e. the outcome of the training rather than proof of individual awards achieved along the way. The end assessment should be trusted and independent The whole thing should be based on an agreed industry standard defined by employers Purchasing power should be shifted to employers. In March 2013 the BIS Minister Mathew Hancock published the Coalition Government response accepting pretty much all of the Richards recommendations and requiring a full shake-up of the existing system and apprenticeships. Basically saying that: Existing apprenticeships would run until 2016/17 after which they would be stopped. Employers must be at the heart of apprenticeship development and would need to collaborate to create new job standards (a simple 2 page standard describing what skills, knowledge and competence are required to achieve mastery of a specific occupation and to operate confidently in the sector). Government would require inclusion of English and Maths within apprenticeships. There would be an emphasis on synoptic end point assessment. To support the transition Government would operate a Trailblazer process where groups of employers could combine to represent their sector and be supported to create the new standard. No funding available for the process. Apprenticeships would need to be a minimum of 12 months duration to ensure quality. is the-future-of-apprenticeships-in-england-next-steps-from-the-richard-review.pdf Where are we at now? In the intervening 2 years several rounds of Trailblazers have been granted and the first new standards are just about now in operation (see table on page 5). Much has been learnt along the way and many tweaks have been made on-the-hoof as the practicalities of real life have met the intent and detail of the recommendations. As we stand today the Maths & English bit is a little vague with (I believe) some sectors arguing a point successfully and either having the prescribed level reduced or even requirement removed. The general process and requirement now appears to be: Something within a sector needs to trigger a representative group of employers to get together and agree the need for there to be a fit-for-purpose apprenticeship standard to support in-sector employee development for say 2017 (if there isn t to be a gap). The employer group can operate under the radar and do as much pre-trailblazer work as it likes in preparation but the standard(s) can only be granted via the Trailblazer process.

3 To be able to approach BIS and apply for Trailblazer status the Group are required by BIS: o to appoint an Employer Chair (must be overtly employer led) o to prove the membership represent a reasonable cross section of the sector including SMEs and micro businesses. And the BIS process will seek to establish that: o the job type standard being proposed is unique and doesn t duplicate or overlap an existing standard or standard under production. If it does the group will be asked to join with the existing initiative/group. o is substantial is there enough learning in any standard, and the steps between multiple standards, to justify an apprenticeship. o is worthwhile will generate enough take-up to justify the effort. The Emerging Model A general model seems to be emerging as a sensible way forward and understood by BIS. Once the group is granted Trailblazer status the timescales can be quite demanding so some employer groups choose to pump prime the process by drafting best guess versions of the documents described below in advance then tweaking them and building on them as the view of BIS and The Skills Funding Agency (SFA) are received via the Trailblazer process. 1. Map an overview of job/role types within the sector noting where in reality actual numbers of employed people cluster. The number of clusters will help to illuminate the potential number of training programmes required to support people to move from one cluster to another. If the jump is big enough that can be an apprenticeships. 2. Outline what knowledge skills and behaviours would be required generically to work within the sector. Then differentiate this to match the job types within each cluster. 3. Map the likely training intervention that would be required to support someone to move form an entry point (say 16yr old school leaver) and attain mastery in their next visible cluster job, and then to move on from cluster 1 to 2 etc. This provides a notional course. 4. Cost the notional courses as if purchased on the open market (BIS presume that this open market will drive costs down and create efficiencies). This will inform negotiations with BIS and SFA ref the funding rate (cap) to apply for the apprenticeships. In theory that is then the end of the Trailblazer process, but most employer groups (and increasingly BIS) are realising that the story shouldn t finish there and there is still work to do to: Produce training materials and guidance to aid employers Inform sector employers of the existence of the new standard and Apprenticeships.

4 Oversee the standards and ensure they remain fit-for-purpose i.e. some sort of governance. To police the awarding of apprenticeships to protect quality and integrity. Some Trailblazer groups are choosing to partner with a sector body to propose and manage an employer led governance model to cover all of the above. The Hospitality, Catering and Travel Trailblazer groups (producing 8 apprenticeships I think) have for example decided to appoint People1st (the Sector Skills Council for that area) to act as the operating agent while a group of employers act as a Managing Council (acting as Trustees in effect). In this model People1st will make their income via a skim from registration fees with anticipated apprenticeship numbers being into the 10s of thousands. Funding bands and caps: Note there is some confusion now ref the logic of an employer contribution since the announcement of an Apprenticeship Levy. The working assumption of the group I am involved in discussions with BIS with is that for large employers who are captured by the levy there will be no employer contribution. The definition of large is as yet undecided but we are guided to plan for it to be in the region of 250 employees and for the levy (tax) to be approx. 0.5% of annual payroll.

5 The table below shows the original first round Trailblazers that have been granted and approved and the funding caps allocated to them. Mark Lavington PGL Manager HR External Partnerships Sept 2015