Why So Few Employer Providers?

FIN’s Kerry Boffey explains why more businesses might be willing to become apprenticeship ‘employer providers’ if changes were made.

The apprenticeship provider and assessment register of over 1,800 providers lists only a modest 127 employer providers, i.e. employers who train their own apprentices rather than contract out the training to an external provider. Big names are among them from a wide range of industries, such as National Grid, Hayes Travel, HMRC and Pizza Hut, so why aren’t there more?

Sadly, one reason is that some publicly listed companies may be fearful that an Ofsted inspection outcome could damage their corporate reputation. Hence the risk for them of becoming an employer provider is too large.

This is unfortunate because employer provider apprenticeship programmes offer a unique and invaluable opportunity for individuals to gain a technical qualification and advance their careers within their chosen employer. The employer providers who champion apprenticeships provide additional bespoke content and delivery that are often underestimated in their value.

Apprentices can benefit significantly from tailored training above the standard requirements and highly relevant to their industry. This approach not only catapults apprentices’ careers but also enhances their employability with highly transferable skills. Apprentices are exposed to real-world applications and cutting-edge practices specific to their field, offering a deeply immersive learning experience intrinsically linked to their day-to-day work.

Value of access to technical expertise is often taken for granted

The Fellowship of Inspection Nominees employer provider group, chaired by former HMI Gerard McGrath, believes that the value of access to this technical expertise is often taken for granted. Ofsted inspectors, who may not be specialists in the technical fields or do not have recent industry experience, might not fully explore or appreciate the benefits and advantages of this currency and expertise. Instead, there is more emphasis on covering all of the framework, which as we know is more aligned to 16-18 full time education, not learning and working in industry.

Our experience shows that when employer providers commission a quality review to evaluate their programmes, external advisors, such as FIN’s own specialists in the field, bring vibrancy and depth to the evaluation. This expert matching uncovers both strengths and technical shortfalls that only a specialist could identify.

The depth of technical knowledge adds value to the robustness of a review and highlights the shortfall in current inspection resourcing, which tends to favour generalists who are specialists in application of the education inspection framework rather than the appropriate industry. This applies not only to technical elements but also to understanding the technical environments, such as specialist high security or the impact of working night shifts. The list of specific systems and processes, requiring firsthand knowledge, is long and applies to each and every employer provider. These are the technical specialisms that general inspectors might lack.

Impartial careers advice issue

One of the obstacles often faced by employer providers is the expectation to deliver impartial career advice. While impartial guidance is important, it can be counterproductive for employer providers who are investing time and resources into training apprentices. These employers are addressing recruitment challenges within their industry and naturally focus on retaining their trained apprentices. This can be a difficult challenge. FIN members, Ernst & Young LLP, were complimented recently on their CIAG in an Ofsted report: “Apprentices understand the next steps that are available to them. Managers, counsellors and coaches work with apprentices to help them consider their next stage of career development. Coaches discuss apprentices’ future goals and how to meet these goals both inside and outside the organisation. Apprentices are ambitious for their future and confident about their next steps”.

Why is high quality impactful internal careers advice valued less that external careers advice? Surely the priority is about career development and opportunity, either internal or external. We know some inspectors have recognised this; however this approach is not consistent across the country.

Managing apprenticeship programmes involves balancing business aspirations, funding requirements and the demands of the Ofsted education framework. This is a constant challenge for those overseeing the programmes. However, the benefits are clear: retaining employees, excellent promotion opportunities and socio-economic advantages for both the business and the apprentices.

No less stringent

No one is suggesting that employer providers should be subject to less stringent inspection than other apprenticeship providers, but given that only 127 exist, are there adequate and sufficient considerations for employer providers? Are they sufficiently highly valued for their contributions to further education and apprenticeship programmes? Could greater consideration be given to how these programmes are inspected and judged? Recognising the true value and impact of employer-led apprenticeship programmes can drive improvements and innovations that benefit both businesses and apprentices. Could there be less emphasis on generic aspects of the education inspection framework that is more suited to full time education and instead inspectors focus on the real positive technical impact on industry and succession planning?

With the new government committed to reforming the levy, it is time to acknowledge and appreciate the high value these providers bring, ensuring that their contributions are fully recognised and supported. They have a key role to play in ensuring the continued success and growth of apprenticeship programmes, which ministers expect to form a major part of the new Youth Guarantee.

By Kerry Boffey, CEO – Fellowship of Inspection Nominees