Memorandum 52
Submission from the Alliance of Sector
Skills Councils
1.1 The Alliance thoroughly supports Lord
Leitch's recommendation that government funding prioritise "economically
valuable skills", achieved through a delivery system which
is driven by demand, as opposed to what providers choose to offer.
Lord Leitch also made clear that the skills system must have a
sectoral approach in order to deliver economically valuable skills.
He endorsed Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) as the key organisations
to deliver this sectoral approach.
1.2 Since the publication of the Leitch
report there has been significant movement towards a demand-led
system. However there are areas where more needs to be done, or
where change needs to proceed faster. A better connection between
the sectoral approach and the geographical approaches will help
the UK meet the Leitch targets.
1.3 SSCs need to be given a consistent role
which is understood and recognised by all partners.
1.4 SSCs have produced evidence-based strategies
to meet sectoral skills needs (Sector Skills Agreements—SSAs),
and qualifications needs (Sector Qualifications Strategies—SQS).
These strategies have the support of employers and must be central
to implementing a demand-led approach.
1.5 There is a need for a strategic interface
between SSCs and Regional Development Agencies (RDAs): leaving
25 SSCs to negotiate independently with 9 RDAS is a recipe for
confusion. This strategic interface needs to include an agreed
approach to the use of Labour Market Intelligence (LMI) so that
SSC research properly informs the work of RDAs and vice versa.
We accept that the regional approach to economic development will
lead to competition between regions, but it is important that
this does not prevent a joined up approach to skills at the national
level.
1.6 There are currently too many consultative
and planning bodies at the regional level and below, and the development
of Employment and Skills Boards (ESBs) threatens to make the confusion
worse. This proliferation is inefficient and is likely to lead
to employer "consultation fatigue". The UK Commission
for Employment and Skills (UKCES) needs to take an overview of
the system and licence ESBs to ensure accountability for delivery
at the local level.
1.7 Train to Gain brokers typically need
to develop their understanding of sectoral learning needs and
opportunities. Learning and Skills Council's (LSC) Plan for
Growth committed it to a new compact with each SSC to tailor
Train to Gain to meet individual employer needs. The sector compact
approach is valuable and must be pursued vigorously if Train to
Gain is to meet its potential.
1.8 Although there are advantages to making
local authorities responsible for 14-19 education and training,
it is crucial that sectoral standards should continue to be set
at a national rather than local level.
1.9 SSC LMI should influence decision-making
on skills at the regional level and in some instances at sub-regional
level. However, stakeholders need to be mindful of the practical
and resource constraints that affect SSCs' ability to provide
reliable quantitative data at sub-national level. Nonetheless
SSCs have valuable insights to offer, based on engagement with
employers, even when fully robust quantitative data is not available
for a given geographic area.
1.10 Local Authorities should provide SSCs
with good quality data about the courses chosen by young people,
and their employment outcomes. There needs to be a central repository
for this intelligence and SSCs need to be consulted over the specification
for collecting it.
1.11 The Alliance is concerned that many
Diploma Delivery Consortia have not yet secured sufficient employer
involvement to make Diploma delivery a success.
1.12 All 14—19 qualifications should
be brought under the umbrella of Diplomas to achieve an all-encompassing
high school diploma, as recommended by Tomlinson. The sooner this
is announced the more likely Diplomas are to succeed.
1.13 Leitch recommended that Further Education
(FE) funding be fully demand-led by 2010. The Government is moving
in a demand-led direction, but is moving slowly in order not to
destabilise FE colleges and it is not clear when a fully demand-led
system will be in place. More rapid change is necessary.
1.14 Currently, government funding is tied
to whole qualifications, which often do not match specific skills
needs, and the vast majority of SSCs consider this puts learners
and employers off further training. The Qualifications and Credit
Framework (QCF) will allow learners to take modules which are
specifically relevant and, in time, build these towards a whole
qualification. The QCF needs to be supported by a funding policy
which allows support for part qualifications and the introduction
of this funding policy should not wait for its full roll out.
1.15 We are concerned that the ambitious
expansion target risks diluting the quality of apprenticeship
delivery. The volume of apprenticeships should be driven by employer
demand.
1.16 The move towards an increasingly demand-led
system requires a step-change improvement in the quality of Information,
Advice and Guidance (IAG) offered to potential students, whether
at 14, 18, or as a lifelong learner. Currently many people are
studying in areas where they stand little chance of employment,
whilst there are skills shortages in other areas. SSCs' LMI is
key to meeting this requirement.
1.17 SSCs capacity is stretched in performing
their current roles. Many of the recently announced changes will
require more from SSCs, and SSC funding needs to be reconsidered
for the new context.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) are employer-led
organisations which speak for employers in their sector on skills
and training issues. They are licensed by the Secretary of State
for Innovation, Universities and Skills, in consultation with
Ministers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
2.2 This response is submitted on behalf
of the Alliance of Sector Skills Councils (the Alliance). The
Alliance is a UK-wide organisation and a legally-constituted collective,
which will drive forward the employer-led skills agenda. Together,
the 25 SSCs form the members of the Alliance. On the 1st April
2008 SSCs formally took over the responsibility for their own
collective action from the Sector Skills Development Agency, which
closed on 31st March.
2.3 All 25 SSCs were consulted in the preparation
of this response and the views they expressed were taken into
account. However Government Skills chose not to comment on this
inquiry as it does not make comments on Government policy.
2.4 All comments in this response should
be taken to refer to England only unless it is explicitly stated
otherwise.
2.5 This paper takes into account Raising
Expectations, published since the launch of the inquiry, as
well as addressing the current situation and other proposed developments
and the current situation.
3. REGIONAL SKILLS
DELIVERY
3.1 The connection between regional structures
and the sectoral approach is crucial to the success of skills
delivery. We expect that the UK Commission for Employment and
Skills (UKCES) will make recommendations on how these can be improved.
3.2 Recently, the Regional Development Agencies
(RDAs) have shown a greater willingness to engage with sectoral
skills issues; but in the past the picture has been patchy.
3.3 Many SSCs represent employers with establishments
across the UK and in some cases across the world. Many of these
larger employers cannot understand why government support for
skills should vary region to region.
3.4 Currently each RDA chooses a limited
range of economic sectors to prioritise. SSCs who are on the priority
list often build good working relationships with the RDA. But
in each region the majority of sectors will not be a priority
and will effectively be "shut out". This approach risks
the disillusionment of employers who are not part of a favoured
sector and makes it harder for SSCs to engage employers.
3.5 An example of an unintentional consequence
of the regional strategy adopted in England for the distribution
of European Union (EU) funds is as follows:
— The EU allocates various funding
streams with various objectives, and these funds have a list of
potential industries the funding should support.
— The English share is devolved to
RDAs who set their criteria according to their objectives within
the EU framework.
— Anyone who meets the criteria can
bid for these funds in a competitive process, but with employers
in some eligible sectors spread evenly across England they do
not have the critical mass to become an RDA priority. As a result
these employers do not get any support from an EU programme which
was aimed at them.
3.6 The process of selecting priorities
adds to the concern. Priorities are selected based on an RDA's
vision of a successful future for the region. They are plan-led,
not demand-led. Regional skills funding must be demand-led in
order to meet Lord Leitch's ambitions.
3.7 Therefore there is a need for a strategic
interface between SSCs and RDAs; leaving 25 SSCs to negotiate
independently with nine RDAs is a recipe for confusion. This strategic
interface must include an agreed approach to the use of Labour
Market Intelligence (LMI) and Sector Skills Agreements (SSAs)
so that SSC intelligence properly informs the work of RDAs. We
accept that the regional approach will lead to competition between
RDAs, but this cannot be allowed to prevent a joined up national
approach to skills.
3.8 It would be helpful if the regions had
a developed and consistent approach to cross sector skills like
employability and literacy, language and numeracy. SSCs are well
placed to advise on these issues.
3.9 There are currently too many consultative
and planning bodies at the regional level and below, and the development
of Employment and Skills Boards (ESBs) threatens to make the confusion
worse. This proliferation is inefficient and is likely to lead
to employer "consultation fatigue". UKCES needs to take
an overview of the system and licence consultative bodies in the
same way that SSCs are licensed.
3.10 The Raising Expectations paper
envisages that the commissioning of 14-19 education will be influenced
by the combined regional plan, prepared by the RDA. It is important
that this commissioning is influenced by evidence of sectoral
skills needs rather than RDAs vision for the future.
4. BROKERAGE
4.1 The Train to Gain brokerage service
is the Government's primary method of developing a demand-led
Further Education (FE) system and directing employers to appropriate
skills. The Alliance is fully supportive of the principle behind
Train to Gain, but there are areas of its operation that require
improvement as the Learning and Skills Councils (LSC) recognised
in Plan for Growth (December 2007).
4.2 The Plan committed government to "a
new compact with each SSC which will tailor Train to Gain to and
meet individual employer needs". This will be necessary in
order to ensure that brokers visiting companies have a firm understanding
of the skills needs of individual sectors and the training courses
and qualifications that are available. The sector compact approach
is valuable and must be pursued vigorously if Train to Gain is
to meet its potential.
4.3 By April 2009, Train to Gain is due
to fully merge with Business Link, the RDA-run business support
service. The Alliance supports the principle of bringing business
and skills support together because business support often generates
training needs. However it is crucial that these changes do not
adversely affect progress on the sector compacts. It is important
that the merged organisation operates a demand-led model and that
an unreformed RDA plan-led agenda does not impinge on the brokerage
offer.
5. NEW ARRANGEMENTS
FOR 14—19 EDUCATION
5.1 SSCs welcome the new role for local
authorities because international experience demonstrates that
the local level is best for matching skills training and employer
needs.
5.2 However, it is crucial that sectoral
standards should continue to be set at national level. A proliferation
of sectoral standards at regional and local levels would create
confusion.
5.3 Local Authorities will need expert input
from employers to assess the quality of vocational provision,
in terms of the qualification delivery and content.
5.4 The unification of funding for 14-19
year olds fits neatly with the intention to raise the education
and training leaving age to 18.
5.5 The Raising Expectations paper
proposes that FE funding for under 19-year-olds will go through
local authorities. It is important that this does not lead to
FE colleges losing the freedoms they have gained in recent years.
The proposed funding regime also creates new challenges for FE
colleges because funding for young people will come from a different
agency to core funding for the college.
5.6 Planning at sub-regional level has the
potential to provide greater coherence. However, the Young People's
Learning Agency will need to ensure a strategic approach is taken
and local interests are effectively mediated.
5.7 SSC LMI should influence key decisions
at regional level and in some instances at sub-regional level.
However, stakeholders need to be mindful of the practical and
resource constraints that affect SSCs' ability to provide reliable
quantitative data at sub-national level. Nonetheless, SSCs have
valuable insights to offer, based on engagement with employers,
even when fully robust quantitative data is not available for
a given geographic area.
5.8 The Raising Expectations paper
envisages a central role for the regional plan in influencing
the commissioning of courses for 14-19 year olds. It is important
the commissioning is based on evidence of sectoral skills needs
rather than RDA prioritisation.
5.9 In order for SSCs to further develop
LMI and skills solutions they require access to good quality data
about the courses chosen by young people, and their employment
outcomes. Past experience shows that it has been difficult to
get this data from the LSC. There needs to be a central repository
for this intelligence and SSCs need to be consulted over the specification
for collecting it.
5.10 Employer engagement should primarily
be through SSCs; careful consideration should be given when creating
employer boards at regional and sub-regional level. Uncontrolled
proliferation of these bodies creates unnecessary duplication
and risks employer "consultation fatigue".
5.11 The Raising Expectations paper
suggests that Local Authorities will commission education and
training provision on the basis of the profile of demand from
14-19 year-olds. This approach depends on 14 year-olds being offered
greater amounts of, and higher quality, Information Advice and
Guidance (IAG) than at present. A clear message from SSCs is that
young people often do not make informed and realistic choices
about career options and appropriate courses. This leads to a
huge over-supply in some occupational areas that are superficially
attractive to young people. Nonetheless, employers encounter skills
shortages for these occupations because many courses lack the
necessary technical content.
5.12 SSCs can support high-quality IAG by
providing up-to-date and accurate information on careers within
their sector. SSCs disseminate this information through training
courses for careers advisers and careers websites.
5.13 It is important that young people are
offered IAG which is free from bias towards academic subjects.
Therefore the role of schools in delivering IAG must be carefully
considered.
6. FURTHER EDUCATION
(FE)
6.1 Leitch recommended that FE funding be
fully demand-led by 2010. Government is moving in a demand-led
direction, but is moving slowly in order not to destabilise FE
colleges, and it is not clear when a fully demand-led system will
be in place. More rapid change is necessary to meet Leitch's ambitions
and to retain the engagement of employers.
6.2 SSAs outline employers skills needs
by sector. There are significant gaps in the ability of FE colleges
to meet these needs both nationally and in specific areas. A faster
move towards a demand-led system will incentivise colleges to
meet these needs.
6.3 National Skills Academies, where in
place, will provide funding to support capacity development and
help FE meet employers skills needs. Funding in this area will
also be necessary for sectors without Academies.
7. HIGHER EDUCATION
(HE)
7.1 HE in England offers world-class teaching,
and research, but there is room for improvement in businesses
skills needs and engaging employers.
7.2 HE must also more effectively meet the
needs of non-traditional learners, who may be in employment. This
may require work-based learning and accreditation, short courses,
e-learning, accreditation of prior learning and credit-based learning.
7.3 Government is currently developing HE's
businesses-responsiveness by increasing the amount of funding
which is demand-led. The Alliance supports this shift and calls
for it to be accelerated.
7.4 Increasing the amount of funding going
through Train to Gain would increase the amount which was demand-led.
However Train to Gain is in need of further development. (see
section 4)
7.5 The Higher Education Funding Council
for England (HEFCE) scheme to co-fund HE places with employers
is a positive step in a demand-led direction. The proposal in
Higher Education at Work to expand this scheme, and for
SSCs to be co-purchasers of provision in HE is welcomed by the
Alliance.
7.6 The Alliance welcomes the Higher Level
Skills Pathfinders as a step towards HE meeting employer needs.
7.7 The Higher Education Innovation Fund
will support increased flexibility in the delivery of support
to employers.
7.8 HE courses vary widely in the degree
to which they develop skills valued by employers, but potential
students are often not aware of this. Potential HE students need
better IAG with a clear understanding of the economically valuable
skills that employers demand. IAG must also raise awareness of
the different jobs available in sectors that HE entrants may be
unaware of.
7.9 Some SSCs also plan to organise industry
endorsement of courses to help potential students choose wisely.
In the longer term the employer perspective needs to be strengthened
in terms of HE quality assurance arrangements.
7.10 HE is much better at engaging larger
business than smaller businesses, which are crucial to the health
of the UK economy, and this is an area that needs developing.
7.11 In order for businesses to have an
incentive to collaborate with HE, institutions need to allow businesses
to part-own the resulting Intellectual Property.
8. COLLABORATION
BETWEEN FE AND
HE
8.1 FE and HE are increasingly working together,
and this is to be encouraged because it contributes to flexible
options for learners and allows progression to the next level
of qualification.
8.2 Bringing the funding regimes for FE
and HE closer together would assist joint working.
8.3 The funding changes proposed in Raising
Expectations could make joint working more difficult, because
FE under 18 will be funded separately from FE over 18.
8.4 Some institutions in HE and FE are forming
regional groupings. This is a positive step and will make it easier
for regional partners and SSCs to engage with HE/FE. A good example
of collaboration is the Creative and Digital Industries Consortia
in the North West. Regional University Associations can perform
a useful role in mediating between SSCs and universities.
8.5 HE/FE co-operation on Foundation Degrees
also contributes to meeting employer needs. The lifelong learning
offer of FE and HE should as far as possible be accredited through
Foundation Degrees and, where possible, professional bodies should
be engaged with the process as a validation route to career progression.
9. QUALIFICATIONS
9.1 Through the UK Vocational Qualifications
Reform Programme, SSCs are currently reforming and updating vocational
qualifications, on behalf of, and in conjunction with employers
in their sector. This is a central recommendation of the Leitch
report. As part of this reform programme SSCs are developing Sector
Qualification Strategies for each country of the UK. This reform
is essential if employer up-take of vocational qualifications
is to be increased.
9.2 SSCs are also playing a central role
in the development of Diplomas, working with employers to ensure
that they provide the skills required to work successfully in
the relevant sectors and offer an exciting introduction to it.
9.3 If SSCs are to meet employers' need
for economically valuable skills they need to be able to influence
the full range of qualifications.
9.4 Flexibility in assessment frameworks
is required to allow employers to make use of work-based expertise.
This will require a culture change from some awarding bodies,
but is essential to secure significant take up of qualifications.
9.5 The Alliance supports the development
of the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF), which will allow
employers to select only the relevant modules and build these
towards a relevant qualification. However, qualifications must
be designed so that they still form a viable whole, and ensure
that key skills are not missed out.
9.6 The developing European credit framework
will allow the transfer of qualifications across member nations.
The Alliance supports this as it will aid mobility of labour within
Europe.
10. DIPLOMAS
10.1 England has suffered for decades from
an unhelpful division between academic and vocational education
and lower esteem for vocational education. Diplomas have the potential
to change this. It is therefore very important that they are successful.
10.2 To date, SSCs' role has been to inform
the development of the content of Diplomas. The Alliance is concerned
that many diploma delivery consortia do not yet have secured sufficient
employer involvement to make Diploma delivery a success.
10.3 Diploma Development Partnerships should
in the future be resourced to ensure that consortia are ready
to deliver the more technical elements of the Diploma.
10.4 Greater recognition and support from
HE Institutions for Diplomas as entry routes to HE is also required.
10.5 Account needs to be taken of the fact
that security, safety and legal issues will limit the ability
to provide work placements for young people in a number of sectors,
such as the care sector.
10.6 Diplomas will allow young people to
specialise at a young age. This will make good quality IAG imperative.
IAG will need to cover relevant job roles and progression routes
from the Diploma. SSC LMI will be crucial to delivering good quality
IAG.
10.7 All 14-19 qualifications should be
brought under the umbrella of Diplomas to achieve an all encompassing
high school diploma, as recommended by Tomlinson. The sooner this
is announced the more likely Diplomas are to succeed.
11. APPRENTICESHIPS
11.1 The Alliance welcomes the Government's
focus on apprenticeships, with its aim of economically-relevant
skills leading to productive employment.
11.2 However, the Alliance would prefer
apprenticeships to be expanded to meet employer demand, not to
achieve government targets. We are concerned that the ambitious
expansion target risks diluting the quality of apprenticeship
delivery.
11.3 The Government is committed to an apprenticeship
entitlement. This means that if demand for a particular apprenticeship
outstrips supply, Programme Led Apprenticeships may be used to
fill the gap (Programme Led Apprenticeships are apprenticeships
without an employer).
11.4 The Alliance believes that Programme
Led Apprenticeships should be subject to strict conditions so
that they do not undermine the apprenticeships brand. Employers
in each sector, through their SSC, should be able to choose whether
Programme Led Apprenticeships are relevant to their needs. Programme
Led Apprenticeships should be approved by SSCs and have clear
links to apprenticeships with employed status.
11.5 Funding levels for adult apprenticeships
are currently lower than those for young people. This is a problem
for many employers who wish to upskill older staff. Making the
funding levels equal would support Leitch's aim of upskilling
the current adult workforce. Simplifying the apprenticeship offer
would encourage employers to engage with it.
11.6 Apprenticeships are difficult for Small
and Medium-size Enterprises to take on, and flexibility is required
to support them in this. Allowing Group Training Associations
to host apprenticeships is a potential solution.
11.7 There is great demand from employers
for higher level apprenticeships, particularly at Level 3. The
Alliance therefore calls for greater funding in this area.
11.8 Apprenticeships at Level 4 should be
explored where the normal entry level for the sector is Level
4. This could raise the status and esteem of apprenticeships whilst
meeting specific needs in the labour market.
11.9 The quality of the IAG received is
important to Apprenticeships.
11.10 The relationship between SSCs and
the new National Apprenticeship Service will be central to the
success of the apprenticeship programme, particularly with regard
to employer engagement. It is crucial that SSCs are given high-quality
data returns from the new National Apprenticeship Service. This
should be broken down by sector according to specifications that
meet SSC needs. It should also report activity within each sector,
even where the apprenticeship framework lies outside the sector.
11.11 Security and legal issues will limit
the ability to provide apprenticeships in some sectors, such as
the care sector.
11.12 National Skills Academies, in the
sector that have them, should contribute to the take up of apprenticeships.
12. SKILLS ACCOUNTS
12.1 The Alliance welcomes the principle
of encouraging employee self-motivated skills development. It
is important to ensure that users are fully informed over their
career choices and their implications. Unionlearn has an important
role to play here due to its presence in the workplace.
April 2008
| 
