Train to Gain
As part of its strategy for skills in England in
2005, the Government announced the introduction of a National
Employer Training Programme known as Train to Gain.[189]
Its aims are to raise skills
levels to help the UK respond to increasing global competition
and to help improve social inclusion. Train to Gain offers
training and assessment designed for employers and delivered to
suit their operational needs, often in the workplace. Business
support services, including an advice service on training provision,
are provided for employers through a skills brokerage service.
A particular target for Train to Gain is that of "hard
to reach" employers.[190]
The Departmental Report said that, since it had gone national
in August 2006, the Train to Gain programme "has already
made huge progress. Over 82,000 employers are now engaged with
the programme (75 per cent of whom were classified as 'hard to
reach')".[191]
The forecast expenditure on Train to Gain in 2007-08 was
£331 million and the budget for Train to Gain in
2008-09 is £657 million rising to £1,023 million in
2010-11.[192]
There has been criticism of Train to Gain.
In September 2008 David Collins, President of the Association
of Colleges, wrote:
Train to Gain was never going to be an unqualified
success. Skills development rather than full-level qualifications
was what employers wanted, and the scheme's lack of flexibility
meant a limited take-up was inevitable.
Surrounded by bureaucracy, beset by a brokerage system
that never worked, and without any real employer enthusiasm, it
was impossible for the "demand-led" system to deliver
on the scale anticipated. This wouldn't have been a problem were
new money involved. But no. Train to Gain funding came from reductions
elsewhere in the [further education] budget—most of it by
removing previously funded qualifications that were in demand
from adults. The net result has been the reverse of what was intended.
Far fewer people now obtain relevant skills or qualifications
than before.[193]
We are not in this Report examining the operation
of the Train to Gain programme. But we found in scrutinising
DIUS's financial management a resonance to these criticisms. In
2007-08 and in 2008-09, as we have noted in chapter 4, DIUS was
able to transfer unused resources from the provision for further
education and skills. During our inquiry we noted three occasions
on which underspends on further education and skills arose.
c) DIUS's audited accounts for 2007-08 showed
that DIUS spent £284 million less on its grant to the LSC
in 2007-8 than planned. The accounts also showed that it spent
£128 million more on higher education support for students
in 2007-08 than was in its estimate (£1,889 million compared
to £2,017 million).[194]
DIUS explained:
ii) The DIUS 2007-08 Resource Accounts reported
an underspend in 2007-08 of £172 million on the Further Education
and Skills budget. The Accounts also show an overspend on Higher
Education expenditure of £128 million. A transfer of £116
million was therefore made from Further Education and Skills to
Higher Education in 2007-08 to address the overspend.
iii) Of the £116 million transferred, £67
million was temporarily made available from Further Education
and Skills to Higher Education. This relates to payment made to
students for the third academic term (these payments were made
within the 2007-08 Financial Year as a result of Easter falling
earlier than usual). The remaining £49 million was a permanent
transfer from Further Education and Skills to Higher Education
in 2007-08.
The budget for these payments has now been allocated
to Higher Education within the 2008-09 Financial Year and the
£67 million has been reallocated to Further Education and
Skills budgets.[195]
The second occasion also arose in 2007-08. DIUS explained
that in response to emerging underspends in 2007-08, the Learning
and Skills Council (LSC) made payments in 2007-08 to meet commitments
that would normally have fallen in 2008-09. This reduced the required
spend on some LSC budgets in 2008-09, allowing the flexibility
to invest £115 million in additional further education and
skills priorities in 2008-09 including, DIUS said:
- Our leadership and management
offer in Train to Gain for small and medium sized businesses.
- Enabling adult learning providers such as WEA
to continue to offer provision that contributes to the wider adult
learning offer.
- Supporting adult learners to gain employability
skills.
- Ensuring the continued roll out of National Skills
Academies.
- Funding pathfinder Networking Projects designed
to unlock the talent of the FE workforce to drive business innovation
through knowledge transfer.
- Supporting an additional 1,200 adult apprenticeships
in the best training companies as announced through WorkSkills
in June this year.
- Expanding Level 3 pilots focused on removing
barriers to training.[196]
The third occasion was in 2008-09. On 21 October
2008 the Secretary of State announced that small businesses would
be the focus of £350 million of Government funds to help
them train their staff. While in this case the resources remained
within further education and skills, it appears that there was
flexibility or spare resources within the further education and
skills programmes to switch to and meet a need not previously
planned within the budget.[197]
The changes in the budgets for further
education and Train to Gain in particular have led us to
the view that take-up of the programme may not have been as high
as the Government expected. We found some corroboration in the
recent Ofsted report, The impact of Train to Gain on skills
in employment, which recommended that DIUS:
- explore other mechanisms for
providing incentives to employers to drive employer demand for
training;
- develop and implement strategies for increasing
the number of people who are trained and competent to develop
skills for life in adults; and
- develop and implement strategies for increasing
uptake in skills for life training with employers.[198]
It appears that a significant part
of the provision for further education and skills, and for Train
to Gain in particular, in 2007-08 and 2008-09 has not
been spent and has been used to meet both temporary and permanent
shortfalls in other DIUS programmes. We would be concerned if
a central flagship policy of the Government's skills programme—Train
to Gain—were persistently raided. We recommend that
in responding to this Report DIUS provide a full account of financial
transactions to, and from, (including any change in the definition
of training used) the budget for Train to Gain in 2007-08
and 2008-09 and that future departmental reports set out, and
account for, Train to Gain separately. The accounts should
also provide a commentary explaining the reasons for transfers
to, and from, the budget for the programme indicating separately
temporary "loans" to, and repaid from, other DIUS programmes
and permanent transfers from the Train to Gain budget to
other programmes.
181 
