Apprenticeships

APP 122

Written evidence submitted by KM Training Ltd

How successful has the National Apprenticeship Service been since it was created in April 2009? Has it helped bridge the gap between the two funding Departments? (BIS and DfE)

· Average, very often questions can't be answered, if regulations have changed, I had an example where I waited 3 months for a reply. That was the worst case. Sometimes the information has been out of date very soon after I had telephoned about it and I continued with the advice I had been given only to find out the situation had changed. No one called me to follow this up and advice me.

- Is the extra funding promised by the Coalition Government necessary for apprenticeships? How can this funding best be spent?

· I don't see any extra funding materialising. I have sent a message to Nick Clegg suggesting that Access to Apprenticeship programmes be made more available to young people and take out the 13 week waiting period which is pointless. 

- Are apprenticeships of a high enough quality to benefit apprentices and their employers? Should there be more Level 3 apprenticeships?

· I run a city centre hairdressing learning provider and the market for our apprentices is competitive because they can operate as stylists when they complete as compare with many college leavers who, in my experience, require retraining.  However, the good quality provision has its downside too. e.g. We have opened a specific training academy  which can accommodate those learners who are older and wish to fast track. The academy allows us to training them for 30+ hours a week in a real salon environment supported by e-learning. This has been a very successful formula reducing our training programmes from  two to one years and less if the learners have completed a Foundation Learning Programme with us.  Now I read that all apprenticeship programmes are going to be treated the same and have to be, from August, a minimum of a year rather than be based on the GLH factor which we can evidence quite clearly. This is inflexible and will 18+ learners defer people from retraining and up-skilling. The focus needs to remain with evidencing the GLH.

· In relation to Advanced Apprentices- Many of the potential learners I would have marketed this course to in the competitive market I operate in would have been to self-employed stylists. Under the new regulations from July 11, as hairdressing is not accepted as an exceptional work sector, all apprentices have to be employed and thus I am unable to recruit sufficient Advanced Apprentices in my sector to cost effectively deliver an AA programme. This is bad for the industry. 

· Key skills should remain instead of Functional Skills for all work based apprenticeships  as Functional Skills are not related to a work based programme of learning in any way shape or form.

- Apprenticeship bonuses – how should they function? Will they encourage the involvement of more small and medium sized businesses to take on apprentices? If not what will?

· Yes, this would attract interest. Paid incrementally per unit achievement.

- Is the current funding arrangement for training of apprentices of 100% for 16-18 year olds and 50% for 19-24 year-olds appropriate?

· No, 19+ learners are in danger of being discriminated against due to their age as currently, many are coming to the same job market as 16-18 years old, with the same profile, often no work experience and less motivation....but less funding! Doesn't make sense. 

Dr. Teresa Mullin

KM Training Ltd

10 February 2012