Apprenticeships 4 England response

Response A consultation on funding reform for

apprenticeships in England

2

Page Content

3. Introduction Lindsay McCurdy CEO Apprenticeships 4 England

4. Respondents demographic

5. Question 1 – key outcomes and data

Would businesses be prepared to pay more for apprenticeship training in return for greater influence over its content and delivery?

7. Question 2 – key outcomes and data What would be the impact and of greater co-investment on businesses’ decision to recruit and train Apprentices? And on how businesses deliver apprenticeship training and deal with providers?

9. Question 3 – key outcomes and data What are the advantages and disadvantages of placing government funding in the hands of employers, rather than paying it directly to training providers?

10. Question 4 – key outcomes and data Would businesses be willing to negotiate the price of training with providers, and what would help them do this?

12. Question 5 – key outcomes and data Would the funding principles outlined here raise the quality of training, and its relevance and responsiveness to business needs?

13. Question 6 – key outcomes and data

What would be the impact of these funding proposals on the experience and future prospects of apprentices?

14. Question 7 – Direct Payment Model - key outcomes and data What are the advantages of providing government support for apprenticeships in this way?

16. Question 9 – PAYE Payment Model - key outcomes and data What are the advantages of providing government support for apprenticeships in this way?

18. Question 11 – Provider Payment Model - key outcomes and data What are the advantages of providing government support for apprenticeships in this way?

20. Question 13 - key outcomes and data All things considered which is your preferred model and why?

21. Question 14 – Direct Payment Model - key outcomes and data What should the government take into account when making the transition from current system to the preferred model?

23. Question 15 – key outcomes and data What impact would your adopted model – and other models – have on businesses engagement with and approach to apprenticeship training?

25. Summary of key outcomes (Includes summary response to question 8,10,12) How should this system be designed to ensure it is easy to engage with for employers and training providers?

3

Introduction Since its launch interest in Apprenticeships 4 England has grown significantly, and with over 15,000 organisations and individuals who have joined its on-line community on LinkedIn, Apprenticeships 4 England is proud of its diversity. We have input from all stakeholder groups, large and small, public, private and third sector, provider and employer, government agencies and employer representative bodies as well as individuals with a keen interest in supporting and promoting quality of opportunity in meaningful and successful apprenticeship training. As this report evidences, across our community we have organisations and individuals who will each reflect on the opportunities and challenges that directly relate to their own area of need and work, however, all without exception are committed to promoting the highest standards in apprenticeship provision and all working with Apprenticeships 4 England to inform and influence with ‘ONE’ voice, the future shape of the apprenticeship agenda. Prior to seeking the views of Apprenticeships 4 England stakeholders, I and the majority of the on-line community had not only been following and engaged in the wide ranging debate about funding reform since the launch of this consultation in July 2013, we had also engaged fully in and supported the consultation on ‘Future of Apprenticeships in England: Richard review next steps’ that ran from March to May earlier this year. We were therefore cogniscant of the differing viewpoints raised as part of the on-going and extensive multi-sector dialogue, and as such we were able to frame a set of questions focusing on the recurring themes emanating from these critical conversations. This consultation therefore has not only provided us with the views of key interest groups and individuals aligned with the Apprenticeships 4 England ambition, allowing us to respond to the 15 questions within the consultation, but we have been able to understand more fully and evidence the differing views of a diverse collective, and underpin our responses with comparative data. Whilst Apprenticeships 4 England is a specific interest group, we unlike many other specific interest groups that have led on their own consultative process in order to respond to this consultation, are totally focused in supporting the development and implementation of a model that works for all stakeholders In assuming a position on each of the three separate funding models proposed and the principles that form them, we have collected and collated a plethora of data, and whilst we recognise that we cannot reflect all of the feedback received within this document, we are committed to sharing our fuller findings so that we may fully participate in the influencing and shaping of policy decisions that affect apprenticeship training and business/provider collaboration. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the respondents and collaborators within Apprenticeships 4 England for their contribution to this response, and I look forward to engaging in further dialogue with you to ensure we are with ‘ONE’ voice a significant part of the future apprenticeship landscape. Lindsay McCurdy

Lindsay McCurdy CEO Apprenticeships 4 England

4

Of the 744 respondents, 524 provided a response to the request for their description as a respondent to this consultation. • Businesses totaled 21.56% (113) of the

known respondents with SMEs contributing to 76% (86) of all businesses that are identified.

• Providers (inc. colleges) comprised 36.45% (191) of the known respondents.

• Individuals were the third largest cohort represented with 17.18% (90) identifiable respondents

Responses were received from representatives from 14 of the 15 named categories (with the exception of Legal representative), and within the status of ‘other’ representation included: • Sector Skills Councils • Universities • HR Advisors • Community Interest Groups • Training Provider Networks • Consultants • Independent Assessors

Respondents Demographic

Respondents location and area of operation

5

Question 1: Would businesses be prepared to pay more for Apprenticeship training in return for greater influence over its content and delivery?

29%

39%

32% 39%

40%

21% 27%

45%

28%

Responses (All)

Responses (All businesses)

Responses (All providers)

29%

39%

32%

Responses (Other than businesses

and providers)

1a. Would businesses be prepared to pay more?

1b. Would you as a businesses be prepared to pay more? (Businesses only)

At 29%, just under a third of all respondents believe that businesses would be prepared to pay more for apprenticeship training. Business only respondents are more positive, with 39% stating their willingness to pay more, with 12% fewer providers believing this will actually be the case. However, business opinion is divided, with 52% of large businesses positively responding, against only 38% of medium size businesses. Willingness to pay more sharply declines in small businesses with only 21% responding that they would be prepared to pay more. Micro business responses indicate a 41% willingness to pay more. For all respondents, a process that minimises the bureaucratic burden will be the largest motivator in businesses willingness to pay more with 61% citing this as the key factor. This is a unanimous position for small businesses with 100% seeking to secure a reduction in bureaucratic burden imposed upon them. However, securing greater influence in the content of apprenticeship programmes is also key with 58% of businesses seeking to secure greater flexibility in apprenticeship training programming and content if they pay more. 72% of all respondents support the notion that 16-18 apprenticeships should remain fully funded by government. There is a recognition from the majority of respondents that adult apprenticeship training should not be fully funded with only 28% and 17% believing fully funded provision should apply to 19-24 and 25+ apprenticeship training respectively, and they therefore accept that business co-investment (at various rates) will be required.

Large Medium Small Micro

Yes No Don’t Know

Yes No Don’t Know

Response comparison by business size

Response comparison by respondent category

6

1c. What would influence a businesses decision to pay more?

Greater flexibility in their own determination of the content of apprenticeship programmes allowing them to dictate requirments suitable for their organisation

Increased influence / control over the mode of attendance and / or delivery location

An ability to utilise some of their own specialist staff to support some / all input

An ability to procure training from multiple sources recognising training provider specialisms

A process that minimises the bureaucratic burden on them

Other

All responses Business responses by

business size


1d. What value of the training costs would businesses’ be prepared to pay if the conditions were met?

Nil, it should be a fully funded programme

Up to 25% of a nationally agreed fixed rate

Between 25% and 50% of a nationally agreed fixed rate

Between 50% and 75% of a nationally agreed fixed rate

Up to 100% of a nationally agreed fixed rate

A fee negotiated with the training provider on a case by case basis

Other

All responses

16-18 apps 19-24 apps 25+ app

All business responses

16-18 apps 19-24 apps 25+ apps

All provider responses

16-18 apps 19-24 apps 25+ apps

7

Question 2: What would be the impact of greater co-investment on businesses’ decisions to recruit and train Apprentices? And on how businesses deliver

apprenticeship training and deal with training providers

2a. What will be the impact on recruitment?

Overall, the number of respondents believing that a greater requirement on business to co-investment, beyond the current levels, will cause a reduction in overall levels of apprenticeship recruitment is high at 41%; however there is stark contrast in this assumption between businesses, providers and others. Only 28% of business respondents believe a reduction will occur, against a 49% reduction response for the same question from providers and 41% from others. Businesses are more positive than providers and others about the requirement for greater co-investment leading to an increase in apprenticeship recruitment with 50% of businesses overall expecting an increase in apprenticeship recruitment as a result. It should noted that that there is an assumption that growth will be focused within the 16-18 cohort, the age group in which the overall majority of respondents believe apprenticeships should remain fully funded. In the assumption from businesses of greater co-investment leading to growth, medium and small sized businesses being more positive than large and micro businesses. There is an expectation overall that greater business co-investment will contribute to more flexible arrangements for off-the job training and a greater utilisation of in-company staff to support leadership and delivery of apprenticeship training. This very much underpins an expectation for recognition of ‘in-kind’ contributions from businesses. Taking all factors into account, small and micro businesses are more concerned than large and medium size businesses that a greater requirement for co-investment will impact negatively in their relationships with providers.

Impact All respondents Businesses only Providers only Other than

businesses and providers

Increase in recruitment 37% 50% 34% 32% Decrease in recruitment 41% 28% 49% 41% No change to recruitment 16% 19% 14% 16% Other 6% 3% 3% 11%

2b. What will be the recruitment impact on different size companies?


Impact

Increase in recruitment Decrease in recruitment No change to recruitment Other

8

2c. What will be the impact of greater business co-investment in other strands?

Increase in 16-18 apps Decrease in 16-18 apps Consistent recruitment but with less 16-18 and more 19+ No change Other

16-18-apprenticeship recruitment

Businesses will invest to achieve required level of attainment for job role Businesses will invest to achieve levels of attainment that exceed requirement for job role No change to current practices or plans Other

Continuation of training beyond minimum requirement

Continuation with current arrangements Expectation of more flexible arrangements Reduced off the job training Increased off the job training Other

Arrangements for off the job training

Greater utilisation and recognition (in financial terms) of in-company expertise to support leadership / delivery Reduction in the use of in-company staff and greater reliance on training provider No change to current practices or plans Other

Utilisation of business in-house expertise

A preference for single source (provider) provision Dealing with and procuring training from multiple providers (specialisms) Dealing with a lead provider who delivers full content and / or outsources Other

Choice of training provider

Positive impact Some positive impact No impact Negative impact Other Large Medium Small Micro

Overall impact on business relationships with providers

9

Question 3: What are the advantages and disadvantages of placing government funding in the hands of employers, rather than paying it directly to training

providers?

3a. What are the advantages?

Businesses recognise the key advantages as achieving greater ownership and control over apprenticeship training, improving quality of provision and securing increased flexibility in the content of apprenticeship training. The employer perspective on advantages is generally more positive that that of providers and others. Providers and others are more concerned than businesses about the disadvantages associated with placing government funding in the hands of employers, as they believe this is likely to create an increase in the bureaucracy in finance and audit processes and over complicate the inspection process, more so when more than one provider is delivering a framework. Clearly the providers knowledge and experience of current audit and inspection regimes has contributed to increased concern. There is a fairly consistent concern from within all groups that a disadvantage may well be the development of a cost driven model where the primary factor for provider choice is price.

3b. What are the disadvantages?

3c. How did different groups respond to 3a and 3b?

Greater employer ownership in the design, delivery and assessment

Raise quality of provision through use of multiple

providers

Increase flexibility in apprenticeship

content and unit selection

Increase the number of

businesses that recruit apprentices

Reduce the overall cost of training

Other

All responses

1. Not Applicable 2. Unlikely / minimal advantage 3 4 5 6. Highly likely / significant advantage

Reduction in the number of

businesses that will recruit apprentices

Increased bureaucracy in the

financial agreement and audit processes

Overcomplicated inspection

arrangements where more than one

provider is engaged

A departure from National Standards

and the development of

local criteria

A cost driven model where the primary factor for provider

choice is price

Other

1. Not Applicable 2. Unlikely / minimal disadvantage 3 4 5 6. Highly likely / significant disadvantage

All responses

Businesses only Providers only Other than businesses & providers

Advantages Advantages Advantages

Disadvantages Disadvantages Disadvantages

10

Question 4: Would businesses be willing to negotiate the price of training with providers, and what would help them do this?

Overall, 74% of respondents expressed a willingness to negotiate price. The vast majority of business respondents (85%) are positive about a willingness to negotiate the price of training. However, whilst Large, medium and micro businesses (93%, 100%, 83% respectively) are strongly committed to the principles of negotiation, small businesses are less inclined to do so, with only 61% evidencing willingness. 69% of providers believe that business would be willing to negotiate. Across all respondents, there are high levels of support for the development of national guidelines and recommended prices, further supported by publication of ‘actual’ prices levied by providers, and access to provider performance data (by sector). Brokerages and call centres are less favorably endorsed. Responses also evidence an expectation for appropriate levels of authorisation in those tasked with negotiating price. In a slight contrast to large and medium businesses, small and micro businesses expressed a higher level of support for maintaining the current arrangements, with this very much reflecting the views of providers and others.

4a. Would businesses be willing to negotiate the price?

1. All respondents 2. Businesses only 3. Providers only

Yes No Don’t Know

1 74% 8% 18%

2 85% 5% 10%

3 69% 12% 19%

4b. How did different size businesses respond to question 4?

Yes No Don’t Know


4c. Who should have authority for negotiating the price?

Executive HR Finance Training Immediate Other Senior Manager Manager Manager Manger Manager (ops)

Executive Business Finance Curriculum Assessor Other Senior Manager Manager Manager Verifier Manager

Businesses Providers

11

4d. What support or provision would support businesses in negotiating price?

National guidelines and recommended prices

Database of ‘actual’ prices from providers

Performance data for each provider

Local, regional, national brokerage

Access to a call centre for advice and guidance

Maintaining the current arrangement with the majority of funding paid directly to the provider

Other

4e. How do employers and providers differ in their requirements?

All responses (weighted average) 0 = Not supportive. 6 = Very supportive

Business responses

Provider responses

(weighted average) 0 = Not supportive. 6 = Very supportive

4e. How do different size businesses differ in their requirements?

National guidelines and recommendations

Database of ‘actual’ process from providers

Local, regional, national brokerage

Performance data for each training provider

Access to call centre for advice and guidance

Maintaining current arrangements (payment to provider)


12

Question 5: Would the funding principles outlined here raise the quality of training, and its relevance and responsiveness to business needs?

There was strong endorsement the funding principles of ‘the employer is the customer’ with over 90% of all respondents partially or fully agreeing. Just over 80% either partially or fully agree with the principle that the employer should co-invest, however the distinction between partially and fully agree reflects the willingness (or not) to co-invest for different age groups. Overall 40% of respondents believe that the principles if implemented collectively will raise standards, with a higher proportion of respondents at 49% believing that the implementation of the principles will increase the relevance and responsiveness of training to business needs The funding principles that are less favorably endorsed are those relating to price, the removal of a government set pricing structure (again reflective of the age categories), and those principles linked to synoptic end assessment. Only 23% of all respondents fully agree that synoptic end assessments would raise standards.

5a. Do you agree with the funding principles as outlined?

The employer is the customer

The employer should co-invest in the cost of training

Through co-investment the employer will have a stronger incentive to demand high quality training

Government does not set the price of training

Having price agreed between employers and providers will prioritise learning that delivers most value

Employers will ‘shop around’ for training which represents strong value for money

Government funding linked to achievement will provide strong incentive to employers to ensure apps achieve

Synoptic end assessment should be conducted by an independent body

The introduction of synoptic end assessment will contribute to a raising of standards

5b. Will the funding principles contribute to a raising of standards and increase relevance of training provided to businesses?

Raising of standards Increase relevance of training

Yes No Don’t know Yes No Don’t know

Don’t know Fully disagree Partially disagree Partially agree Fully agree

13

Question 6: What would be the impact of these funding proposals on the experience and future prospects of apprentices?

36% of respondents believe that the funding proposals will impact beneficially on the experience and future prospects of the apprentices. 29% believe that collectively the proposals will be detrimental to the experience and future prospects of an apprentice and 14% believe that there will be no discernible impact, positive or negative. There is a fairly even split between those that believe changes will create growth and those that believe there will be a decline in the number of apprenticeship opportunities, however more respondents agree, either partially or fully, that a positive impact of funding proposals, specifically from businesses co-investment, will be the continuation of employment for apprentices beyond the apprenticeship programme. Over 60% of respondents partially or fully agree that the proposal will result in an increase in the number of apprentices asked to contribute to training, specifically affecting the 19-24 and 25+ cohorts.

6a. What would be the impact of these funding principles on the experience and future prospects of apprentices

There will more apprenticeship opportunities

There will be fewer apprenticeship opportunities

Apprentices will benefit from only having to complete skills development programmes that directly relate to

the job they are employed to do

Localised and bespoke content and attainment will make it more difficult for apprentices to change

companies when they achieve

The use of more than one provider to deliver an apprenticeship may be disruptive

There will be an increase in the number of apprentices asked to contribute to the cost of their training

The option to businesses to procure training from multiple providers will provide an enhanced experience

Having made a financial contribution to the cost of training, an employer is more likely to offer

continuation of employment

Don’t know Fully disagree Partially disagree Partially agree Fully agree

6b. What will the overall impact these funding principles be on the

experience and future prospects of apprentices

Impact benefically on the experience of the apprentice 36%

Impact negatively on the experience of the apprentice 29%

No discernible change to the experience of the apprentice 14%

Don’t know 21%

14

Question 7: Direct Payment Model - What are the advantages and disadvantages of providing government support for apprenticeships in this way?

Only 36% of all respondents have a preference for the Direct Payment Model. As is to be expected, there is a higher level of support for Model 1 from businesses and employer representative bodies than there is from providers, however business response by business size are mixed. (see Q.13 response for all preferences). Employers in control of the funding and able to procure the training they require is seen as a particular advantage (weighted average score of 62%) and being able to utilise their own in-company staff is also considered advantageous (also a weighted average score of 62%). The risk to apprentices that work for companies who cease trading is seen as particularly disadvantageous (weighted average score of 74%) as are the perceived barriers that will be created by an overly burdensome process for learner recruitment and commissioning of training (also with a weighted average score of 74%). Overall the perceived advantages are significantly outweighed by the perceived disadvantages

• As listed in 7a – a weighted average for Model 1 advantages is 59.5% • As listed in 7c – a weighted average for Model 1 disadvantages is 73.2%.

7a. What are the advantages in providing support this way? – Direct Payment

Employers will be in control and have access to funds to procure the training they require

Cost paid for training will reflect the value placed on it by the employer

Communication between employer/provider/apprentice will improve and positively impact on the apprentice

Employers will increase the use of in-company expertise to progress apprentices through to completion

Poor provision will be sifted out of the system as employers measure quality and impact

Other (weighted average)

1 = No advantage 10 = Extremely advantageous

7b. Direct comparison of advantage responses from businesses/providers

Employers will increase the use of in-company expertise

Poor provision will be sifted out as employers measure quality / impact Independent provider

College Large business Medium business Small business Micro business

Employers in control and will procure training they require

Cost paid will reflect value placed on it by employers

Communications will improve and positively impact on apprentice

15

7c. What are the disadvantages in providing support this way? - Direct Payment

7d. Direct comparison of disadvantage responses from businesses/providers

(weighted average) 1 = No disadvantage 10 = Extremely disadvantageous

Bureaucracy of registration, eligibility, claim, price and content negotiation, commissioning of provider, will be a barrier

Development of a new on-line system will be cost prohibitive and may cause delays in implementation

Employers will be dis-incentivised if they have to make payments before claiming costs back

Price, not quality will become the determining factor in more procurement transactions

Businesses that cease trading will create a significant issue apprentices they are supporting

Other

Bureaucracy will be a barrier Development of an on-line system will be cost prohibitive / delays

Price not quality will become the primary factor

Businesses that cease trading will create issues for apprentice

Employers dis-incentivised if the have to make payment and claim

7e. The percentage of respondents who stated a preference for Direct Payment

0

10

20

30

40

Respondents with Model 1 as preferred model - 36%

Respondents with Model 1 as 2nd choice- 32%

Respondents with Model 1 as least preferred model - 23%

Independent provider

College Large business Medium business Small business Micro business

16

Question 9: PAYE Payment Model - What are the advantages and disadvantages of providing government support for apprenticeships in this way?

Model 2 – PAYE Payment is a particularly unpopular preference with only 8% of respondents expressing this as their preferred model. This model is particularly unattractive to large and small businesses with 0% of these groups supporting Model 2, and this statistic is replicated within returns from Independent Training Providers, Awarding Organisations, Schools and Professional Bodies. (see Q.13 response for all preferences). Advantages and disadvantages of this model are reflective of those identified with the responses for Model 1, however the additional disadvantage associated with the possible requirement to seek additional funding from HMRC in cases where PAYE liability is insufficient to cover costs is seen as significant (weighted average of 78%) Overall the perceived advantages are significantly outweighed by the perceived disadvantages

• As listed in 9a – a weighted average for Model 2 advantages is 56.7% • As listed in 9c – a weighted average for Model 2 disadvantages is 76%.

9a. What are the advantages in providing support this way? – PAYE Payment


Independent provider College Large business Medium business Small business Micro business

Employers in control and will procure training they require

Cost paid will reflect value placed on it by employers

Communications will improve and positively impact on apprentice

Employers will be in control and have access to funds to procure the training they require

Cost paid for training will reflect the value placed on it by the employer

Communication between employer/provider/apprentice will improve and positively impact on the apprentice

Employers will increase the use of in-company expertise to progress apprentices through to completion

Poor provision will be sifted out of the system as employers measure quality and impact

Other

Employers will increase the use of in-company expertise

Poor provision will be sifted out as employers measure quality / impact

(weighted average) 1 = No advantage

10 = Extremely advantageous

17

9c. What are the disadvantages in providing support this way? - PAYE Payment



The additional requirement to seek additional funding via HMRC in cases where PAYE liability will not be sufficient to cover costs will be a barrier

Employers will be dis-incentivised if they have to make payments before claiming costs back

Price, not quality will become the determining factor in more procurement transactions

Businesses that cease trading will create a significant issue apprentices they are supporting

Other

Bureaucracy will be a barrier Development of an on-line system will be cost prohibitive / delays

Price not quality will become the primary factor

Businesses that cease trading will create issues for apprentice

Employers dis-incentivised if they have to make payment and claim

9e. The percentage of respondents who stated a preference for PAYE Payment

0

10

20

30

40

50




Development of a new on-line system will be cost prohibitive and may cause delays in implementation

Bureaucracy of registration, eligibility, claim, price and content negotiation, commissioning of provider, will be a barrier

Additional requirement to seek additional funding via HMRC

Independent provider College Large business Medium

business Small business Micro business

18

Question 11: Provider Payment Model - What are the advantages and disadvantages of providing government support for apprenticeships in this way?

Model 3 – Direct Payment is the preferred model for 56% of respondents. An obvious preference with Independent Training Providers (79%) and Colleges (67%), with a majority preference also evidenced by Business Representative Organisations (100%) Individuals (61%) Local Government (56%). Micro Businesses have an equal preference for model 1 and 3. (see Q.13 response for all preferences). The majority of respondents clearly believe that the advantages of model 3 outweigh the disadvantages. Working within a known structure and process, as well as negation of increased bureaucracy are seen as particularly positive, as are the stronger safeguarding arrangements that will be maintained. The most highlighted disadvantage relates to the challenge businesses may experience in coordinating and financing synoptic end assessments. A potential issue across all three models. Overall the perceived advantages significantly outweigh the perceived disadvantages

• As listed in 11a – a weighted average for Model 3 advantages is 65.4% • As listed in 11c – a weighted average for Model 3 disadvantages is 53%.

11a. What are the advantages in providing support this way? – Provider Payment

It is a model familiar to all employers and providers

The bureaucracy associated with models 1 & 2 are removed from the employers perspective

An employer contribution must be generated before / received before public funding is awarded

The mandatory requirement for a cash contribution will increase employer expectation of provider service & quality

Stronger safeguarding arrangements for apprentices that lose their job (provider assumes responsibility)

Other


Mandatory requirement for a cash contribution will increase expectation

Stronger safeguarding arrangements for apprentices

Independent provider College

Large business Medium business Small business Micro business


The bureaucracy associated with models 1 & 2 are removed

An employer contribution must be generated

(weighted average) 1 = No advantage

10 = Extremely advantageous

19

11c. What are the disadvantages in providing support this way?- Provider Payment



Limited incentive for employers to take greater ownership of their training needs and apprenticeship development

Reduced emphasis on cost effectiveness within delivery programmes

Requirement for employer for assume responsibility for financing and claiming the assessment component

Other

11e. The percentage of respondents who stated a preference for Provider Payment

0 10 20 30 40 50 60




Continuation of provider devised training programme as opposed to employer devised / influenced programme

Reduced likelihood of collaboration between multiple providers with unique / niche requirements


The bureaucracy associated with models 1 & 2 are removed

Mandatory requirement for a cash contribution will increase expectation

Stronger safeguarding arrangements for apprentices

An employer contribution must be generated

Independent provider College Large business Medium business Small business Micro business

20

Question 13: All things considered, which is your preferred model and why?

With such a diverse membership in Apprenticeships 4 England, there is always likely to be a significant variation in the preferences that each of the individual members and membership groups has. However, all respondents are fully committed to increasing participation, raising quality, ensuring relevance and responsiveness of provision, delivering value for money and enhancing the experience and opportunities for apprentices. In reflecting the view of the membership that have responded to this consultation, Apprenticeships 4 England in the event of a continued ambition to adopt of one of the three described models will advocate Model 3. In addition to the evidence secured through this consultation, our preference is also predicated upon the improvements that have been made in all aspects of apprenticeship provision in recent years; increased business support for apprenticeship provision, growth in the number of apprentices recruited, higher levels of achievement and the positive impact of apprenticeships secured through successful collaboration between all stakeholders. A radical transition from what we currently have may be detrimental to our shared ambition for continued improvement.

13a. Which is the preferred model?

Bus. representative org. Direct Payment - 0%

PAYE Payment- 100%

Provider Payment - 100%

Independent provider Direct Payment - 21%

PAYE Payment- 0%


College Direct Payment - 28%

PAYE Payment- 5%


Awarding organisation Direct Payment - 100%

PAYE Payment- 0%


School Direct Payment - 100%

PAYE Payment- 0%


Charity / social enterprise

Direct Payment - 62%

PAYE Payment- 13%


Individual


PAYE Payment- 17%


Local government


PAYE Payment- 9%


Large business Direct Payment - 64%

PAYE Payment- 0%


Medium business Direct Payment - 50%

PAYE Payment- 25%


Small business Direct Payment - 57%

PAYE Payment- 0%


Micro business Direct Payment - 45%

PAYE Payment- 10%


Professional body Direct Payment - 80%

PAYE Payment- 0%


Trade union Direct Payment - 0%

PAYE Payment- 100%


All Respondents

Direct Payment 36%

PAYE Payment 8%

Provider Payment 56%

21

Question 14: What should the government take into account when making the transition from the current system to your preferred model, or any other models?

A strong message from our membership is that feedback from ‘all’ stakeholders is scrutinised and used to inform a final position, not isolated to key interest groups. There are clearly concerns over cost of transition to, and implementation of, a new model, more so should the preferred solution be radically different from the current arrangements. Incurring excessive costs associated with new resource, training, role realignment and communication strategies, all at national, regional and local levels are of paramount concern, as is the recognition of the challenges individual and different types of organisations may have in transitioning from the current arrangement to any new model. Finally, there is resounding support (86% of all respondents) in their expectation of a comprehensive rationale that demonstrates how any change will positively impact on the opportunities and experiences of apprentices.

14a. What should the government take into account?

5 HIGH PRIORITY 4 3 2 1 LOW PRIORITY

The overall level of support requested from all

stakeholders during the consultation period

The time to develop new centralised systems

The cost associated with the development and

implementation of a new model

The impact of a new model on different size of

organisation

The additional costs associated with the providers transition and implementation of new

processes / procedures

The new inspection and audit regimes that will

emerge as a result of a new model

Contingency plans for when things go wrong

The benefit to the apprentice

The communication strategy that will be required to support adoption by all

stakeholders

22

14b. How did businesses and providers responses differ to the question ‘what should government take into account’?

Training College Large Medium Small Micro Provider Business Business Business Business


1. LOW

PRIORITY 2 3 4

5. HIGH

PRIORITY

The overall level of support requested from all stakeholders during the

consultation period

The time to develop new centralised systems








The cost associated with the development and implementation of a new model

The communication strategy that will be required to support adoption by all stakeholders

The impact of a new model on different size of organisation

The additional costs associated with the providers transition and implementation of new processes /

procedures

The new inspection and audit regimes that will emerge as a result of a new model

Contingency plans for when things go wrong

The benefit to the apprentice

23

Question 15: What impact would adopting your preferred model - and other models - have on businesses’ engagement with and approach to apprenticeship training?

In addition to the critical decisions that need to be made with regard to adoption of a preferred model to regulate how government funding is transitioned from central sources to local collaborations to support training, there is the key decision on the level of co-investment that will be required from businesses to support training costs. As the data below indicates, whilst some are optimistic about positive impact from the adoption of a new model in relation to businesses engagement with and approach to apprenticeship training, there are high levels of overall concern in the negative impact that may be caused, specifically for all age adult provision, with Independent Training Providers being particularly concerned. Whilst most accept that there will be a continuing requirement for co-investment for 19-24 and 25+ provision, the overall impact on apprenticeship training will be judged positively or negatively dependent upon the level of business co-investment for 16-18 training. Should we retain something close to the current arrangements, ideally model 3 or something closely related to it, our members are more positive than negative about the impact of any change.

15a. What will be the impact from adoption of any one of the models – by age

16-18

19-24

25+

Agree that changes will create an increase the number of businesses that recruit apprentices

Agree that changes will create a reduction in the number of businesses that recruit apprentices

Agree that changes will disadvantage SMEs who do not have infrastructure to manage financial process

Agree that changes will dilute and disrupt existing quality and audit processes

Agree that changes will increase collaboration between providers to secure & deliver programmes

Agree that changes will place price above quality in the procurement process

Agree that changes will create confusion in content, quality and pricing of apprenticeships

Agree that changes will increase the number of businesses that engage in design and delivery

Agree that changes will drive efficiencies in the cost of apprenticeship provision

Agree that changes will raise standards in apprenticeship programmes

16-18

19-24

25+

16-18

19-24

25+

16-18

19-24

25+

16-18

19-24

25+

Positive impact statements Negative impact statements

24

15b. How did businesses and providers respond to the question ‘what will be the impact from adoption of models? – by model

Agree that changes will create an increase the number of businesses that recruit apprentices

Positive impact statements Negative impact statements

Direct PAYE Provider

Independent provider

College Large business Medium business

Small business Micro business






Agree that changes will increase collaboration between providers to secure & deliver programmes

Agree that changes will increase the number of businesses that engage in design and delivery

Agree that changes will drive efficiencies in the cost of apprenticeship provision

Agree that changes will raise standards in apprenticeship programmes

Agree that changes will create a reduction in the number of businesses that recruit apprentices

Agree that changes will disadvantage SMEs who do not have infrastructure to manage financial process

Agree that changes will dilute and disrupt existing quality and audit processes

Agree that changes will place price above quality in the procurement process

Agree that changes will create confusion in content, quality and pricing of apprenticeships





25

Summary of key outcomes

• With a positive overall response of 29%, there is not strong support from most stakeholders in the assumption that businesses will be prepared to pay more in order to secure greater influence over apprenticeship training and delivery, with the exception of large businesses, of whom more than half at 52% evidenced a willingness to do so for this reason.

• The key expectations from those that do support greater business co-investment are a reduction in bureaucratic processes and greater control over content and delivery arrangements.

• Small and micro businesses are more concerned than other respondent groups about the negative impact in their relationships with providers if greater co-investment is required.

• There is a significant divide for the principle of greater co-investment between 16-18 training and adult training, with almost three quarters of respondents believing 16-18 apprenticeship training should remain fully funded; However, a similarly high percentage endorse and recognise the need for co-investment for adult apprenticeship training, as is currently the case. However, recognition of in-kind contribution is an expectation alongside cash contributions.

• Businesses in general are more positive than providers of the advantages in placing funding in the hands of the employer, and on the converse, providers are more concerned than businesses about the disadvantages of doing so. They specifically highlight increased bureaucracy and over complication of inspection arrangements.

• A majority of respondents recognise that there is likely to be a greater focus on price, with a concern that price could become the key factor in procurement of apprenticeship training.

• Whilst the majority of respondents would be prepared to negotiate the price of apprenticeship training, small businesses are less reluctant to do so than other sized businesses.

• To support price negotiation, there is an expectation from the majority of all respondents for: national pricing guidelines, published data on actual provider cost and performance.

• The vast majority of respondents agree with the principle that the employer is the customer. 49% of all respondents agree that the implementation of the principles as outlined will increase relevance and responsiveness of training to business needs, and 40% believe that the implementation of all principles as outlined will raise standards.

26

Summary of key outcomes continued

• There is very little support for the introduction of synoptic end assessments, with only 23% of respondents believing that this will be advantageous in raising standards.

• In respect of improving the experience and future prospects of apprentices 36% of respondents believe that the funding principles will be advantageous and 29% believe that their implementation will be detrimental. Over 60% of all respondents believe that implementation of all principles will result in more apprentices being asked to contribute to their own training costs.

• 56% of all respondents stated a preference for Model 3 – Provider Payment Model, with 36% having a preference for Model 1 – Direct Payment Model. At 8% of all respondents with a preference, Model 2 – PAYE Payment Model is by far the least favoured.

• Small and micro businesses responded more favorably than the other business categories for retention of the existing model and arrangements.

• In designing the new system to ensure it is easy to engage with for employers and training providers, the key messages from the Apprenticeships 4 England membership are:

Ø All stakeholders are involved in the further design of the preferred model, irrespective of their stated preference resulting from the consultation.

Ø The model adopted must not increase the bureaucracy to a level that

would be detrimental to the overarching ambition, and result in an exclusion or dilution of participation for some organisations.

Ø The different costs that each of the stakeholder groups will incur, associated with resource development, role realignment, staff training, implementation and audit / inspection processes are clearly recognised and built into the funding principles

Ø Is a ‘one size fits all option’ appropriate? Or could there be an adoption of

more than one model in order to meet the need of specific stakeholders and safeguard future apprenticeship training across different types and size of organisations?

Ø Detailed, readily accessible and regularly updated detail on national

guidelines for; content, pricing, process, provider performance, business / sector engagement and impact.

Ø A rationale that clearly evidences the benefits to the apprentice from the

adoption and implementation of the preferred model.

Apprenticeships 4 England

Contact No. 07858 617153

Office No. 08432 890505

Fax No. 08445 3576864

Email. [email protected]

Documents

Apprenticeships 4 England response