Apprenticeship Assessment Reform: Risks, Opportunities and the Year Ahead
If 2025 was a year of reform announcements for the FE and skills system – and it was, from V-levels to professional development to new ways of funding and delivering modular provision – then 2026 is set to be the year for those across the sector to consider their delivery approaches to these new qualifications, new types of provision, and new ways of working.
Apprenticeship reform was a theme throughout last year, with DfE’s announcement in February of a range of significant reforms, including assessment, the transfer of responsibility for apprenticeships from DfE to DWP in September, and publication of new assessment plans in December.
Our report for the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, considers the risks and opportunities of these apprenticeship assessment reforms. This National Apprenticeship Week, it is timely to reflect on these – how, and how successfully, assessment organisations, training providers and employers respond to those risks and opportunities will be the defining apprenticeship story of 2026.
Assessment reforms: risks and opportunities
End-point assessment (EPA) has been one of the most significant apprenticeship reforms of the last decade. Our research allowed us to explore how successfully it has evolved over that time. On the credit side, our research suggests it is widely regarded as a robust measure of occupational competence – it has arguably raised training standards, requiring apprentices to work harder and longer than under previous frameworks.
However, the system is not without flaws: rigid rules, administrative burdens, costs, and issues with certain standards and sectors pose delivery challenges for providers, employers and assessment organisations. While many people we spoke to during our research felt EPA was fundamentally sound and well understood, reforms could usefully address these concerns and explore innovations such as technology integration. Any changes, however, should be implemented carefully to preserve the system’s strengths.
The approach announced by DfE last February and now being delivered by DWP, Skills England, and Ofqual maintains some familiar features but introduces significant flexibility: assessment can now take place during the apprenticeship, training providers may deliver and mark elements of it, and assessment plans will be drastically shorter – shrinking from 30-40 pages to just three or four.
The government has framed these changes as reducing bureaucracy and red tape, creating a simpler, more flexible system. However, the reality is more nuanced. While stakeholders welcome certain refinements – such as removing unnecessary duplication and allowing assessment to capture authentic workplace observation – our research did identify concerns about risks with the proposed changes. These include:
Increased complexity and inconsistency
Allowing flexibility in when, how and by whom assessment is delivered is likely to drive greater variation in delivery and complexity. And the latitude to assessment organisations in design and delivery will lead to apprentices on the same standard being assessed in different ways. It is important for confidence in the system that government oversees the system in ways which give assurance apprentices assessed in different ways have undertaken an assessment of comparable rigour.
Shorter, less detailed assessment plans
The amount of detail in assessment plans has see-sawed over the last decade. Initial, short EPA plans were criticised for lack of detail, and replaced over time with lengthy, prescriptive plans. The reforms now propose extremely short, high-level plans. But there is a risk that these are interpreted inconsistently, and don’t give apprentices or employers a clear enough sense of how assessment will happen.
Threats to independence of assessment
Allowing training providers and employers to deliver parts of the assessment could weaken the principle that apprentices should be independently judged. This could reduce confidence among employers and apprentices that assessments are fair and credible.
Reduced synopticity
Because some assessment can now be taken on programme (rather than at the end), there is a risk that assessments become less synoptic and may not sufficiently evaluate all key knowledge and skills components together at the end of the apprenticeship.
None of those risks are insurmountable, and can all be managed by government and those involved in assessment delivery. But they are real. And require the government and the sector to think both carefully and innovatively about implementation.
Our central conclusion was stark: these reforms are “a sledgehammer to crack a relatively small number of nuts.” Most identified problems could have been solved by refining individual problematic assessment plans rather than overhauling all 700+ standards.
Nevertheless, if government proceeds, and all indications suggest that it is doing, four things are critical:
- Hold firm to independence, consistency and synopticity – these principles are non-negotiable.
- Be realistic about timescales – the original plan to revise all assessment plans by August 2026 already looks unachievable.
- Communicate clearly and broadly – reforms of this nature always risk too much information remaining confined to insider groups.
- Evaluate properly – collect data to understand what actually works.
The machinery of the government’s shift to DWP presents an opportunity to reflect. Apprenticeship reforms conceived in the Department for Business but delivered through an education lens have sometimes felt awkwardly translated. What will a DWP perspective bring?
How assessment organisations, training providers and employers navigate these changes will determine whether apprenticeships emerge stronger or diminished. That’s what makes this the apprenticeship story of 2026.
By Alex Morris, Senior Consultant at Avencera
Responses