To receive a presentation and progress report on the Apprenticeship Levy from the HR Services Manager.

Contact: Sam Williams, HR Services Manager, Sam.Williams@Shropshire.gov.uk

The HR Manager gave a presentation to Members on the Apprenticeship Levy [copy attached to the signed minutes].  Members noted that the Levy had come into force in April 2017, it applied to organisations with a pay bill in excess of £3m per year, and was set at 0.5% of the pay bill per annum.  The levy collected was for apprenticeship training and assessments but could not be used for salaries or transport. Government made a contribution of 10% to the fund. 

She continued that Upskill Shropshire Board had been established with the Director for Place and Enterprise appointed as its Chairman.  The Board was a vehicle for delivering apprenticeships but it had a wider function than this.  Apprenticeships were available across all Directorates of the Council and each Directorate took responsibility for considering and approving applications and selecting the Provider from the fifteen on the framework, across the twenty-four available categories.  The scheme also unpinned the Council’s Leadership Programmes and upskilling the Council’s existing workforce, including the new skills identified by the Digital Transformation Programme.

The Council also had a commercial offer, which was open to other organisations and Local Authorities.  There were three levels of offer and organisations could decide to only purchase access to the Council Framework, the Council could provide a full matching service or an advice service. To date, two local authorities had signed up to access the framework, although a number of enquiries had been received, and take-up of the service was expected to increase.  A dedicated website had been developed, Officers had promoted the offer at the NHS employment Fair and would do so at the Telford Apprenticeship Show in March.  A presentation had also been made to the Shropshire Business Board, and further work was being undertaken to better understand their priorities.

Members noted that the Framework consisted of twenty-four categories with fifteen providers, based both locally and nationally.  The larger national providers could offer whole suites of subject areas.  Members noted that apprenticeships were no longer just for young people in low skill roles but were now open to all ages and included professional and post degree level training.

Members considered the scheme’s performance and noted that the Government had set a target of 2.3% of an organisation’s workforce consisting of apprenticeships, which had not yet been achieved.  This was not causing concern as it was accepted that the scheme was still in its early days.  She continued that the funds collected through the levy could be kept in the Council’s accounts for up to two years.  In answer to a Member’s query, the HR Manager explained that there were no targets for schools as maintanined schools were outside the Council’s control in terms of the way they managed their workforce, although the team provided advice to encourage the take up of apprenticeships.  

Members discussed the need to fully utilise the Levy and increasing the number of apprenticeships offered by the Council. The HR Manager confirmed that an apprenticeship role had to comprise of a minimum of 20% time spent in off the job training although some of this could be completed on-line without the need to attend a college site.  In answer to a Member’s question, she explained that the length of the apprenticeship was dependent on the level of qualification; with level 2 or 3 taking 1 year to complete, but level 7, which was equivalent to a Master’s Degree, taking up to 4 years.  She confirmed that the employer was not bound to offer a permanent position at the end of the apprenticeship.  In response to a Member’ enquiry she explained that equality and diversity issues received consideration and flexible access to training promoted.  Members asked that Officers consider how the scheme could benefit the children for whom it had corporate parent responsibilities and young carers.  The Director of Place and Enterprise agreed to raise this with the Board.  

Corrine Brown and Karen Haywood from Shrewsbury Colleges Group were invited to update Members on the Governments proposed new qualification of Technical Levels (T’levels).  Members heard that the current system of technical qualifications offered by different organisations caused confusion. The Government was proposing a systematic reform post 16 education, restructuring it from Level 3 onwards.  The reform included reform of funding structures and appointing a single awarding body for each route.  Employers had complained that the current system did not adequately equip students for the working life, and they lacked basic work place skills. It was proposed that to close the skill gap, T’levels would have a minimum forty day work placement directly relevant to the study programme.  It was hoped that the extended work placement would lead to employers taking on the students placed with them at the end of the qualification.  Pilot schemes had shown that 20% of students received a job offer at the end of the placement compared to 10-12% with previous schemes. 

Members noted that the increased time spent in work placement brought challenges in the form of transport, work wear and other support required.  Providers were working closely with students to ensure that these issues did not have a negative impact on them.  Employers could chose to reimburse students expenses and make a subsistence allowance but this was not mandatory. Ms Brown confirmed that employers in the pilot scheme had been positive about working with providers and they had received support from the Federation of Small Employers. Employers were represented on each T’level development panel. 

Public consultation work had demonstrated a lack of understanding about the proposed changes and Members noted that work needed to be undertaken with the current Year 8 students to introduce the new system. Ms Brown added that it was understood that people would expect to change careers three to five times during their working lives and the Government was developing a new Career Strategy which was expected to be launched in early 2018. Ms Brown confirmed that there was an intention to have a parity of esteem between A’levels and T’levels, with either qualification acceptable to universities, although universities had not yet commented on this. 

Members discussed the availability of provision and ensuring that there was similar provision offered across the county.

Agreed: that the report be noted and an update should be added to the Committee’s work programme.