Foundation Apprenticeships – A Flexibility Too Far?

Apprenticeships need to be more flexible, but not at the expense of quality. This was the clear message from our members when I joined the Skills Federation a year ago. 

Recent proposals for greater flexibilities in apprenticeships, such as changes to English and maths requirements, and shorter duration, have broadly been welcomed by our members, But the litmus test is that apprenticeships must be structured and implemented to deliver occupational competence. Employers rely on a skilled and capable workforce equipped with the necessary knowledge, skills, and behaviours to drive success. For individuals, this competence is equally vital, providing a trusted route to long-term career progression, enhancing their long-term earning potential and job security in the labour market.

Growing Concern on The Lack of Clarity Surrounding the Proposed Foundation Apprenticeships

However, there is growing concern among our members about the lack of clarity surrounding the proposed foundation apprenticeships. The concept of foundation apprenticeships has been met with mixed reactions from employers. In part they are concerned about the breadth. If foundation apprenticeships are intended to be introductory, they won’t necessarily lead to occupational competence, which is of vital importance for employers. 

Relatedly, it has been made clear that foundation apprentices will be employed. But if they are intended to give young people a ‘taster’ for a sector, employers won’t necessarily have appropriate roles for them. Employers typically take on apprentices to fill real, productive jobs. Creating a role purely for the purpose of employing an apprentice undermines what an apprenticeship is and makes little practical sense for most businesses. 

Terminology Matters

There is also a practical point: terminology matters. The name ‘foundation apprenticeship’ has been used in the past to describe a level 2 apprenticeship. Reusing it may cause confusion for employers. 

Skills Federation members Enginuity, which represents the engineering and manufacturing sector, has tested employer appetite for a foundation-level model. Feedback has shown that demand for foundation apprenticeships in the manufacturing sector is minimal. If foundation apprenticeships are pitched at level 2 but offer a reduced level of specialism relevant to an occupation, they are unlikely to meet the skills needs of SMEs.

As Ann Watson, CEO of Enginuity, puts it: “With 987,000 young people not in education, employment or training, business and government have a joint responsibility to make sure every young person has an opportunity to succeed. 

“But there is a risk that foundation apprenticeships will fall flat if they are not designed to fill an existing skills demand gap – there’s little point developing a product that doesn’t fit neatly into an already complex system.” 

There is consensus on two areas. Firstly, the need to reduce the number of young people who aren’t in education, employment or training, and secondly that solutions which involve experience of work are more likely to lead to success. 

Is There Scope For A New Programme Which Includes Time In The Workplace? 

But does this always need to be delivered through an apprenticeship? Or is there scope for a new programme which includes time in the workplace? 

As with proposals for shorter duration apprenticeships, apprenticeships play a crucial role in developing workforce skills, but they are not the only – or always the most suitable – solution. Instead of solely modifying the apprenticeship model, government could look to adapt what the Levy can fund to better reflect the diverse training needs of industry. 

Foundation apprenticeships may have a role to play, but there are potentially a range of other solutions that could be considered to address the policy priority around reducing NEETs, rather than defaulting to stretching the concept of what an apprenticeship is. 

Whether foundation apprenticeships will provide a much-needed route into work for young people, or end up being the wrong solution to the right question, will depend on how they are scoped and implemented. To ensure success, we would urge that government works in partnership with sector skills bodies to create a flexible solution that works for both employers and individuals. 

Alison Morris, Head of Policy, Skills Federation