Apprenticeships

APP 49

Written evidence submitted by Gateshead Council

1. Introduction

1.1 The following is a submission of evidence to the BIS Select Committee inquiry into Apprenticeships by Gateshead Council and the Gateshead Apprenticeship Partnership. The partnership comprises strategic partners in Gateshead including Gateshead Council, Gateshead Collective (a group of 9 local training providers), Local Connexions and National Apprenticeship Service. The partnership has developed an Apprenticeship Plan, which articulates the commitment and approach to achieve economic and skills priorities, as set out in our Sustainable Community Strategy - Vision 2030. The Apprenticeship Plan for Gateshead 2011-2014 identifies our aims to:

· Increase the number of apprenticeships available in Gateshead

· Increase the number of Gateshead residents accessing apprenticeships.

2. Summary of key points

· Apprenticeships are a priority area to develop as a progression route to learning, employment and to enable sustainable economic growth

· A locally led approach allows for a strategic focus on priority sectors, leading to economic development for the benefit of local employers and residents

· The focus of apprenticeships should be adding value and achieving outcomes

· Better and more co-ordinated support from Government Departments will enable local areas to fulfil their strategic leadership role

· Apprenticeships are a key opportunity to reduce youth unemployment across the priority age range 19–24. Funding and support to enable this should be appropriate and consistent across different age groups

· Apprenticeship preparation should be valued and resourced to maximise the value and experience of apprenticeships

· There is a need to ensure high quality apprenticeships for sustainable employment and economic growth that is of benefit to learners and employers

· A focus on higher level skills will support economic development and growth

· Better support for employers should incentivise and remove barriers to recruiting apprentices, particularly SMEs.

3. 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 Department for Education)

3.1 The National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) has been successful in raising the profile of apprenticeships with employers. This has been achieved by directly contacting employers. Likewise with young people, we find that they are generally aware of NAS and its function as well the National Apprenticeship Vacancy Matching (NAVMs) website.

3.2 The Gateshead Apprenticeship Partnership has a strong relationship with NAS and the commitment and support of local NAS staff has been very good. However, there are some concerns with NAS which the partnership feel could be addressed.

3.3 The capacity of NAS teams has become increasingly stretched. NAS staff cover a broad geographical area and the necessary local knowledge is often limited. Gateshead Apprenticeship Partnership has prioritised developing a ‘Single Offer’, which captures and communicates all of the information relevant for employers to engage with apprentices in Gateshead. The ability of NAS to support the bespoke offer could be strengthened.

3.4 Given the strategic lead Gateshead Council and partners have taken on apprenticeships, greater local discretion on funding priorities is sought.

3.5 There is some lack of clarity as to NAS’s role, which includes procurement, quality control, assurance and marketing.

3.6 The council and NAS could work together to target employers, either by sector or geographical area. Evidence suggests that where there has been success in growing levels of employer engagement and apprenticeship numbers, it has not always focused on those sectors of most strategic importance.

3.7 Policy tensions sometimes exist between BIS and DfE, which could impact on the success of the apprenticeship agenda. In Gateshead we have built one of the largest and most successful Young Apprenticeship (YA) programmes in the country. The programme is a 14-16 programme managed through DfE. The Wolf report suggested this programme was an expensive work experience alternative. There is clearly some variable quality in YA delivery across the country. In Gateshead we have strong evidence that this programme, particularly in certain priority sectors has played a key role in improving the take-up of apprenticeships, increased the awareness of, and respect for the apprenticeship offer amongst schools, young people and parents, and increased the value local employers place on apprenticeships and what young people can offer their business. These are all elements that BIS would support in the priority to drive up demand for apprenticeships, however DfE removed the funding for the programme.

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

4.1 The extra funding for apprenticeships is very much necessary. This additional funding should only be used to support delivery that is of proven quality and which is agreed to be of strategic importance by local partnerships. Discretion to flex available funding to local priorities is sought. Priority areas at which funding should be targeted are:

4.2 Young unemployed (particularly 19-24 NEET )

Providing education/training providers with an increased percentage of funding would allow them to support these learners into sustained employment and through out their learning programmes. Funds should be targeted at economically deprived areas and those with high levels of youth unemployment. Priority target groups such as care leavers could also benefit.

4.3 Employers

There would be real value in providing financial support to employers for the in-house training and mentorship requir ed by young people on the job. Apprenticeships have a much better success/retention rate if the young people have high levels of support at work. A dditional financial support would give recognition to employers an d also compensate investment in the apprentice in terms of costs/time/staff input etc. This would also enable employers to develop skills in line with business need, and support business growth by focusing on niche sectors and higher level skills as appropriate.

Directing funding such as the £1,500 incentive payments as part of the Youth Charter through employers could enable private sector support for addressing the priority to reduce youth unemployment.

4.4 Apprenticeship awareness and preparation (Young Apprenticeship Programme)

The Gateshead Apprenticeship Partnership believes there is a strong case for funding to support a structured training programme which is on-the-job and focuses around either a business or community based project. This would also support localism and compliment the objectives of the ‘Youth Contract’. These training programmes could be bespoke depending on the particular cohort, however each could ensure that more young people gain the necessary skills and experience to be job ready and access apprenticeship opportunities. The programme could build on the best practice developed within the Young Apprenticeship programme but broaden the target group to offer high quality work placements and internships for young people who are:

· seeking to become Apprentices, but who are unable to secure full-time positions and are engaged in other training as a ‘holding’ position. This is typically an issue with some 16-18 year olds in Gateshead

· young people (16 to 24) who are disengaged from employment and training

· 14-16 year olds who are interested in an Apprenticeship route and would like to engage on a more meaningful vocational experience with a more intensive, high quality work placement.

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

5.1 The Gateshead Apprenticeship P artnership believes that on the whole the quality of apprenticeships has vastly improved. However, the delivery across providers is n ot standardised or consistent. Good providers are delivering excellent apprenticeship programmes which are a solid and useful foundation for young people and their employers. However, it is clear that some providers are simply delivering the bare minimum and are less concerned with future careers or ambitions of their learners. Apprenticeship programmes and the current frameworks are of a high quality if delivered effectively and with the learner at the heart of the delivery model.

5.2 We also believe there is a need for a broader perception of quality beyond narrow success rates. For example, in terms of growth in strategic priority areas there is a mis-match between frameworks in sectors with high growth and those which are local and regional priorities. There has been significant growth in a pprenticeship numbers in retail and commercial enterprises, business admin and law. In Gateshead, there is a lot of growth in Warehousing & Storage, and Customer Service. This growth may genuinely reflect learner demand, however they are not key strategic priority sectors with high GVA.

5.3 There is still an issue that much of the 16-18 growth locally is being fuelled by fast - track models with completion of a full framework in sometimes less than 6 months and no real employment outcome. Young people who are completing these pro grammes, struggling to find employment then looking to retrain in other areas are finding funding an issue as they have already completed an apprenticeship and used up their entitlement.

5.4 Much of overall growth in a pprenticeship numbers in Gateshead has been through an increase in adult apprenticeships. For example, 25+ starts have increased by over 3.5 times in Gateshead in the past year. This m ay be welcomed at one level, but much of this growth is actually a displacement effect from those who would otherwise have enrolled for Train to Gain. Again the quality of this delivery is variable with some providers delivering primarily an ass essment based model that is providing qualifications for skills employees already have. In terms of quality for the employer this is not genuinely upskill ing or retrain ing the employee and adds little value to the productivity of the business .

5.5 For some providers , adult apprentices are seen a s quick win because they are already in employment so there is an opportunity there for considerable growth. Combine with a low cost assessment based model and the potential revenue is increased for the provid ers, but quality of experience for the employee and employer is questionable.

5.6 Advanced (Level 3) Apprenticeships are an excellent progression opportunity that can prov ide learners with a route into University. This is consistent with Gateshead’s priorities to increase higher level skills.

5.7 To realise the full value of apprenticeship training for employers and learners, training should be tailored to individual need. Apprenticeship training can be too rigid for some employers, particularly SMEs. Bitesize, modular apprenticeships, similar to degrees, could enable learners to build up credits from a range of modules to complete a full and bespoke apprenticeship.

6. 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?

6.1 Wages are often the stumbling block for employers to recruit apprentices, and the Gateshead Apprenticeship Partnership supports the introduction of apprenticeship bonuses. It is believed they will play a role in encouraging more SMEs to take on apprentices.

6.2 A simplified procedure for employers would be useful, as at present there is a myriad of funding available, including through NAS, SFA, Young People’s Learning Agency and Jobcentre Plus.

6.3 Bonuses should be targeted depending on local need and priorities. For example, local and regional priority sectors, or small companies who are operating in particularly challenging circumstances.

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

7.1 50% funding with an expected employer contribution of 50% for a 19-24 year old is a huge challenge. Employers will look at costs and if providers are offering full funding for a 16-18 year old learner they are likely to take this option. The training provider is also more likely to promote the 16-18 option.

7.2 To many employers, a 19-24 year old is a more valuable employee because they are more mature. However, they still require time, and training because they have limited practical experience and skills. Also, there is huge issue concerning unemployment amongst 19-24 year olds and this funding arrangement is likely to hinder attempts to encourage employers to recruit more in this age range.

7.3 There has been a big cultural shift in recent years in which employers do not expect to pay for certain types of training. It is likely to take a few more years for employers to once again come to terms with paying. This is especially the case with older employees following the Train to Gain programme.

7.4 There is evidence of a shift emerging with some providers reporting that more employer contributions are coming in. However, this varies across sectors and is mainly from existing customers who buy into and have seen the benefits of workforce development. Even so, their ability to increase the number of apprentices will be affected by cost implications. It will be far more of a challenge to persuade new employers to support apprenticeships if they have not already seen the value of training. The contribution is therefore likely to create a barrier to growth in employer engagement in apprenticeships.

7.5 The challenges of youth employment incorporate the broader cohort of 16-24 year olds. The approach to funding should therefore be more consistent for all people in this age group.

8. Further information and representation to the Committee

8.1 Gateshead Council and the Gateshead Apprenticeship Partnership are happy to provide further information on any of the points raised, and would welcome the opportunity to present the Select Committee if required.

6 February 2012