Before Introducing New Quality Metrics, We Must Make Better Use Of QAR

Before our sector rushes to introduce apprenticeship quality measures, it’s time we made better use of the strongest public indicator we already have.

An industry benchmark

Within our sector, we’re well acquainted with Qualification Achievement Rate (QAR). The real problem is that outside the provider space, it remains poorly understood and even acknowledged, despite being one of the clearest public indicators available to employers when comparing apprenticeship providers.

QAR measures how many learners expected to complete an apprenticeship actually do so. It doesn’t tell the whole story, but that doesn’t make it obsolete; it’s a solid foundation for smarter business decisions and greater transparency across our industry.

Completion is a business metric

For employers, completion is not simply an education statistic, but a delivery reliability – and value – indicator.

When a learner completes their programme, their employer is far more likely to realise the intended return on their investment. When they do not, the cost is felt in wasted management time, disrupted workforce planning, additional recruitment costs and weaker returns on investment.

This highlights just how closely linked completion is to retention, productivity and long-term capability for employers.

Caution should therefore be exercised when dismissing QAR as a measure of provider quality. Additional measures that assess progression, performance and commercial impact are all relevant, but should complement QAR rather than replace it.

In a sector backed by public funding, employer investment and long-term workforce planning, recent claims that completion is in some way an outdated measure fail to consider what QAR really tells employers about providers.

Rewarding quality providers

When a provider has a strong record of supporting learners through to completion, it is usually a sign that programme design, delivery and learner support are working effectively.

The ones that get it right opt for programmes that encompass deliberate strategies. Smaller cohort sizes, consistent coaching, honest candidate screening and a multi-stage approval process are all ways to tell whether a provider is focused on completion rather than enrolment. A provider that prioritises these practices tends to achieve a stronger QAR score as their programmes are designed around successful outcomes rather than stats alone.

QAR is the benchmark that employers should use to assess providers and make informed workforce decisions.

The current data gap

Our sector should be doing more to make QAR accessible, rather than expecting employers to sift through raw data. This matters across the board, but particularly for SMEs, who are often time poor or lack the internal expertise to assess the data comprehensively.

The reality is that QAR has long been difficult to access and use for many of the people who need it most when it comes to decision-making about talent pipelines. While the data is published annually and is an extremely useful resource, the extent of the information provided is vast, the terminology is often unclear, and the methodology can be challenging to follow. As a result, employers can end up focusing on signals that are easier to understand, such as enrolment volumes, brand profile, or headline ROI claims, rather than indicators that reveal whether a provider successfully gets learners through to completion.

The dashboard is designed to make apprenticeship completion data easier for employers to access, interpret and compare across providers and programmes. The data is out there, and comparing QAR across providers is not only possible but a valuable process for employers.

When QAR is easier to understand, the system works better for everyone. Learners are more likely to land the apprenticeships that suit them, providers are rewarded for quality, and public funding is more likely to support the organisations that best help learners succeed.

QAR shouldn’t be dismissed. The priority should be improving visibility and usability, preceding any conversations around the introduction of new metrics. Yes, it doesn’t tell the whole story, and constructive debate should be welcomed about how we can improve other measures in an AI-driven world.

However, allowing employers to make better use of the metric in front of us is a move towards a more transparent apprenticeship market and better long-term workforce outcomes.

By Harry Hobbs, Head of Business Intelligence at Baltic Apprenticeships