(A) ANGELA HUGGETT, HEAD OF HR STRATEGY & EDUCATION, LBB
(B) LINDA KING, YOUTH SUPPORT PROGRAMME MANAGER, LBB
(B) REPRESENTATIVE FROM NHS IN BROMLEY (TO BE CONFIRMED)
Minutes:
The Committee had been provided with a range of written evidence in advance of the meeting. This included a report providing an overview of Bromley Council's Apprenticeship Scheme, a submission from London and South East Colleges, an article from The Times newspaper and feedback received as a result of the call for evidence.
The Chairman noted with disappointment and regret that the NHS, the largest employer in the Borough, had been unable to field a witness to attend the meeting and support the Committee’s review.
The Chairman welcomed Mrs Angela Huggett. Head of HR Strategy & Education, LBB and Mrs Linda King, Youth Support Programme Manager, LBB, to the meeting. The Committee explored a number of themes and issues with the witnesses.
In response to a series of questions from the Committee, Mrs Huggett explained that the development of the Council’s Apprenticeship Scheme sat within her remit. Since the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy the Council had begun work to develop a range of specialist apprenticeship opportunities such as housing, legal and social work. This was in addition to the apprenticeship opportunities that were being made available to the Council’s Children Looked After. The take up in apprenticeship opportunities from the Local Authority’s children looked after had been low and work was being undertaken with the Children Looked After and Care Leavers Service to open the available opportunities to a wider pool. It was clear that more work needed to be done to engage and motivate young people and ensure that they had the necessary skills to complete the application process. A further area of focus was to review the application process and identify whether a less complicated route could be developed for children looked after.
There had been a good response to the Council’s launch of its apprenticeship scheme. However the number of applications had been relatively low and very few applications were turned down. Interest in the apprenticeship scheme was growing and there had been more applications for the second cohort.
The Apprenticeship Scheme was open to all ages but the Council’s current cohort was mainly 18 to 25 years. Opportunities were open to everyone regardless of whether applicants had special educational needs. There was no overtly positive discrimination for applicants with special educational needs. However, once applicants were accepted any specific needs would be accommodated with a programme developed around individual need. Entry level was dependant on the qualification that was being pursued however all participants were required to pass a functional skills test. Each apprentice had their own learning plan at both the college and within the work based placement. The length of the course was dependant on the qualification. Each apprentice spent 4 days in the work place setting and one day at college. There was also homework to be completed most weeks.
The percentage target set for employers was based on the payroll bill. The figures were very fluid and as the Council’s payroll bill reduced the number of apprenticeship opportunities it was required to provide would also reduce. The Council was now aiming for 20 apprenticeship opportunities. In the first cohort 16 apprentices had stated Business and Administration Level Two qualifications with the Council. Two of this cohort had identified special educational needs. The necessary adjustments had been made and additional measures put in place to support these apprentices and ensure a level playing field. The Head of HR Strategy and Education emphasised the need to ensure that colleagues who were supporting the all apprentices in their work based placements were sufficiently trained to provide the support and training that was required irrespective of need or ability.
In terms of funding for the Council’s Apprenticeship Scheme, the Head of HR Strategy and Education reported that the Apprenticeship Levy provided ring-fenced funding for training. Members of the Council had actively supported the Apprenticeship Scheme and the funding that had been set aside was used to support the corporate aspects of the scheme such as salaries. The pay for Bromley apprentices was fairly generous with the Council paying its apprentices at the top end of the statutory scale. The Departments offering apprenticeship opportunities funded positions through vacancies. The Committee noted that the Apprenticeship Levy was based on the Council’s total pay bill and would be ongoing.
The Head of HR Strategy and Education circulated feedback from some of the Council’s current cohort of apprentices. The issues surrounding the college experience had been previously raised and action was being taken to address this. The current cohort were just about to undertaken their exams. The results from this round of exams would provide a measure of progress.
In response to a question, Mrs Huggett reported that more research needed to be undertaken around the impact of ‘T-Levels’, the new qualification set to be implemented in 2020/21. In terms of provision of more specialist training that could be required in the future, Mrs Huggett explained that the Council could chose a more specialist provider if it were felt that it was appropriate however; any provider had to be accredited and appear on the Government’s Register of Training Providers.
The responsibility of the employer to apprentices within the scheme was to provide skills for work and to support participants in building a career path. There was no obligation to provide a job following the period of training. Clearly as the employer would have made a significant investment in the apprentice it was hoped that an opportunity within the organisation could be found but there was no obligation on the employer to keep the apprentice on post qualification. The Head of HR Strategy and Education reported that the Council also worked with external partners in order to identify potentially suitable career paths for its apprentices. Apprentices would need to apply for a permanent position following their period of training and the application process would need to comply with the equal opportunities legal framework. The Head of HR Strategy and Education emphasised that as a result of the skill set that the apprentices had developed during their training it was hoped that they would be strong contenders for any suitable positions. As with any position within the Council, recruitment and appointment would be based on the needs of the Service.
A Member emphasised the need to be clear about the many different career paths that were available within local government as opportunities did not extend only to business and administration. There was a wealth of opportunities in other more technical areas such as planning and property services as well as facilities management. The Chairman further noted that historically apprenticeships used to be trade based. The Local Authority worked with a number of contractors such as Veolia, Amey and Id Verde and it was suggested that any contract let by the Council should include a clause requiring that the contractor offer apprenticeship opportunities to people identified as suitable by the Council. The Chairman suggested that as one of the largest employers in the Borough it was the Local Authority’s social duty to facilitate such relationships.
Another Member stressed the need to vociferously encourage partners and local businesses to open doors and provide apprenticeship opportunities for young people in the Borough. The Youth Support Programme Manager confirmed that the Bromley Education Business Partnership engaged with employers across the Borough and encouraged them to support the work of the Partnership. A Jobs Fair was being held on Friday 6th July 2018. This was an annual event bringing together employers and young people. The aim of the event was to try to secure opportunities for young people at risk of NEET. A number of work based learning opportunities were available and this was one of a number of ways that the Local Authority was engaging with local employers. The Chairman suggested that an approach should be made to two major employers with whom the Council did not yet work Metrobus and Stagecoach, as a number of different, practical opportunities could be made available. The Youth Support Programme Manager also agreed to provide information to the Committee concerning whether the Service worked with the Armed Forces to identify any opportunities available to young people.
Action Point 6: That the Youth Support Programme Manager confirm whether the Service works with the Armed Forces to identify any opportunities available to young people.
The Youth Support Programme Manager confirmed that there was an increasing number of young people with mental health issues approaching the service for support. These young people could fall out of education for long periods of time. This made them more vulnerable to becoming NEET. The Service offered support where it could and had been working with Clarion Housing Association which offered at home, online training which often met the needs of the young people. Bromley Education Partnership also looked to link young people with volunteering opportunities. Whilst not providing any financial support, this type of opportunity could often keep young people engaged with the world of work or the world of training. Bromley Education Partnership also looked to link young people with flexible employers who understood the challenges faced by young people with mental health issues. Work was undertaken to identify the ways in which young people engaged and then find suitable opportunities.
In terms of assessing the level of support a young person required; when a young person first accessed the Service a basic assessment would be undertaken. This included a review of the family history. From this assessment an action plan was developed with the young person to support them in getting job ready and ensure that they had the basic skills necessary to access the world of work. A NEET Worker was also employed to provide additional support when necessary.
The Youth Support Programme Manager reported that the Council worked with Community Links Bromley around the Youth Employment Scheme. As part of this Scheme, young people were encouraged to develop their own opportunities and Community Links supported this work by providing a network for the young people to access.
In response to a question surrounding how young people being electively home educated could be reached, the Youth Support Programme Manager reported that contacted details were provided by the Education Department and young people who had no plan were contacted when they officially become NEET.
In response to a question concerning whether schools were directing young people to all the available opportunities, not just those available through the education route, the Youth Programme Support Manager reported that there was less reliable information since the responsibility to track Year 14’s was removed from Local Authorities. The Service worked closely with schools in terms of the support that was available and the next steps. However it was emphasised that Bromley was a borough where the majority of young people remained in education. The Head of HR Strategy and Education confirmed that both schools and parents had been invited to the launch of the Council’s Apprenticeship Scheme and this would be the case with each cohort.
The Committee noted that often apprenticeship opportunities across the Borough arose out of work experience opportunities. Often young people found employers willing to provide an apprenticeship and the Bromley Education Partnership provided the apprenticeship guidelines to the employer. Where appropriate young people were signposted to specific employers however there was not the resource available to approach a wide range of employers across the Borough.
A Member noted that the issue of the cost of travel had been highlighted by some parents. The cost of travel was not covered by the Apprenticeship Scheme and it was not possible to get an education based loan. It was suggested that this could act as a deterrent for some as often the level of pay was less than the statutory minimum wage. The Member suggested that in order to mitigate against high travel costs young people should be encouraged to seek more local opportunities. In response, the Youth Support Programme Manager confirmed that there were certain travel concessions open to participants of apprenticeship schemes and young people were advised of these concessions.
The Director of Education reported that the Department had recently submitted a bid for funding for Alternate Provision which would focus on young people between the ages of 12 and 14. The programme for which the funding was being bid was designed to provide a positive way for young people to engage with training and a identify possible routes into future work at an early stage. The Programme would be delivered in partnership with ‘Check-A-Trade’.
Action Point 7: That the Director of Education provide a further briefing note on the Council’s Alternate Provision bid and the programme for which any funding would be used.
In response to a question from the Chairman concerning when the ‘T-Level’ qualification would be ready, the Youth Support Programme Manger reported that there were still some issues to be resolved surrounding the level of work experience to go alongside the qualification and whether the expected level of work experience was in fact available. There were also issues to be resolved surrounding resourcing of the increased element of work experience as currently the funding would be received by London South East Colleges whilst the burden of delivering the increased level of work experience would fall on the Local Authority.
The Chairman thanked Angela Huggett and Linda King for their insightful and valuable contribution to the Committee’s review.