 Good morning and welcome to the 12th meeting of 2014 of the Public Audit Committee. I have apologies from Tavis Scott and Liam McArthur is here as a substitute and from Colin Cayer and David Torrance is here in Collins Place. Before I start the meeting can I maybe draw members' attention to an issue that's been raised with me by James Dornan about If members start to provide the media with details of the contents of private reports prior to the publication, then it would bring into question the whole basis in which we produce those reports. So I hope that members will take that to heart. I am not suggesting that it has been a member that has done it, but whoever is responsible has done no favours to the committee. So, if we can move on. Item 1, decisions on taking matters in private. Could we agree to take items 6 and 8 in private? Item 2, we have a section 23 report on modern apprenticeships. You've previously heard from the auditor general. And this morning, if we want to invite our witnesses, Katie Hutton, who is the Deputy Director of National Training Programs, Fiona Stewart Head of National Operations, Gordon McGinnis, the Deputy Director of Industry and Enterprise of Skills Development Scotland. And John McCormick, the Senior Deputy Director of Development and Delivery, has been taking ill as unable to join us and he's been replaced by Andrew Livingston, the Director of Finance and Audit. And I believe, Mr Livingston, that you would like to make an opening statement to the committee. We'd like to thank the committee for inviting us to discuss what we believe to be a positive report from Order Scotland on the wider modern apprenticeship programme, including SDS's role in particular. It's important to recognise that SDS's role is primarily to administer the public funding contribution and to ensure that Scottish Government priorities are met through contracting with training providers, colleges and directly with employers across Scotland. The MA programme is demand led and therefore dependent on the opportunities identified by employers. We must administer the programme in a way that is responsive to the needs of employers, but we must also support individual trainees. We take a lead role in the promotion of the programme to particularly young people and employers, as recently demonstrated with last week's highly successful Scottish apprenticeship week, which was coordinated by SDS and comprised more than 150 events across the country. The report recognises key positive aspects of the programme. Our success in meeting a challenging start target of 25,000 starts per year, given the demand led nature of the programme. The increase in the achievement rate was 67% in 2008-9 and was 77% in 2012-13, which is the most up to date available information. Increased prioritisation of young people reflected in the growing number of them starting a modern apprenticeship. These have been achieved in the challenging context of economic downturn and efficiency savings in both public and private sectors. We recognise nonetheless that there is room for improvement, including recognition that more needs to be done to address underrepresentation within frameworks with regard to gender, ethnicity and disability. Clearly this is affected by societal and cultural issues beyond SDS, but we are committed to working with partners to effect real change and equal opportunity. Opportunities for greater penetration of the programme amongst employers. Currently 13% of employers in Scotland are involved in the programme, so we would like to increase this. There are demographic challenges where projections suggest that the number of 16-24 year olds is set to fall between now and 2022, and this may be the best time to consider widening and deepening the offer to foundation and advanced levels. Continued work to improve the efficacy of the contracting process and to facilitate a greater understanding amongst employers and training providers of how it works is seen to be key. We are an organisation which seeks continuous improvement and therefore we welcome the report and its recommendations. Can I start off by asking the question two different issues? The first is your understandable concentration on younger people. It is clear that we have had far too many young people unemployed in this country and that to waste their talents is a drain not just on the economy, but it is a loss to the country. However, is there a danger that in concentrating on those younger people you are neglecting older people who want to retrain and who want to reskill? Andrews made clear that we are responsible for administering the public funding contribution. All public funding is limited by what is available, so we prioritise in line with policy, which is why the majority of our funding goes to 16-24 year olds in effect. I think in terms of looking at what is there in the workforce in the future, in terms of a lot of people are already in the workforce who are going to be there in the long term future, then I suppose it is about balancing priorities. I suppose that is in terms of funding terms. It is about balancing what is there and what is the available funding and I suppose with the recession there has been a great deal of concentration on young people. If we had more funding perhaps we could look at older groups and there are other ways to do it. We have got other support, flexible training opportunities that are there, where we offer 50% of the training costs up to £500 per individual up to 10 employees, up to 10 employees for companies with 100 employees or less, and there are other initiatives out there too. I accept what you are saying about priorities and limited funding however. The question I was asking is are older people out with that young age group being disadvantaged? Are they being let down by the concentration on younger people or are you entirely satisfied that the offer that is available to those over the age of 24-25 is satisfactory? I suppose part of that question is a matter for government policy about what is available in terms of the future. What is available for older groups? You are the professional. You deliver the programmes as you have suggested to me. You individually and you as an organisation and your staff are the ones who deal with those who are unemployed and who are seeking to retrain and retool. I am asking you, is that age group being let down from what you are experiencing? Are they being disadvantaged in the concentration on younger people? I think what we are doing in the board has recently reviewed the patterns and trends of unemployment. There has been an increase in the older age group chair and that is something that we are going to revisit at a further board meeting. A lot of the work we do takes place in partnership through community planning partnerships and the majority of these have local employability partnerships. So responding to that question we would probably address that at a local level as well as nationally. There obviously is provision for older age groups within the national training programmes. I think the statistics reflect that work with industry around how to create different entry routes into the programme, not just through traditional college and modern apprenticeships. We have done some very good work in the energy sector using the energy skills challenge fund to do transition courses perhaps from areas that people have been unemployed with armed services. It is an area that the board have reviewed and will continue to review. As I said, we are also working in partnership with local authority partners in addressing issues at a local level. I understand that you respond locally and it is a local as well as a national issue. Presumably in doing that you are able to compile statistics which are available not just locally but aggregated nationally. Is that older age group being disadvantaged or are you satisfied that everything possible is being done for that older age group? I do not necessarily think they are being disadvantaged. I think there are opportunities to bring them back into the labour market. Statistically that number has grown of that older age group. It is an age group that is not just serviced by herself, it is serviced by the Department of Work and Pensions and the work programme. I think you could look to that type of programme to say that that could be more effective and more successful and that is where I think we also need to do a bit of work in partnership at a local level. Changes in the colleges, I think again a refocus on the younger age group and probably the balance of provision has changed in the college sector as well. But it is perhaps something that we could do a further review in terms of the statistical profile of that older age group and be turned to committee with. That would be helpful but who then is looking at the needs and demands of that older age group in relation to modern apprenticeships? Who has the overall responsibility? You have got to be employed. That is key. That is about whether businesses have a part to play this in terms of looking at the needs and skills of their own workforce. To be honest, in terms of when you are talking about the older age group, that is actually about what the business needs, what the skills of the individuals who are employed by that business want and where you would go forward with that. Again, companies are part of that because the overall thing about modern apprenticeships and what we do is a contribution towards really what are the objectives of the business in terms of moving forward. The second question I had was the issue about high value apprenticeships as opposed to the gateway apprenticeships, which are often available in higher numbers. There is some evidence that for a lot of younger people opportunities in retail are partly just what is available. Do not get me wrong, I am not for a moment suggesting that we do away with high value high end apprenticeships because we need to retool and reskill those employed in our manufacturing sector and in other sectors. Equally, is there a danger that in shifting the focus towards that we start to lose some focus on the end where there are greater numbers of young people engaged in modern apprenticeships such as in retail? We always strive to strike a balance between entry-level positions and also the higher level opportunities that are available. One of the highest areas of support for MEs in the last few years has been retail and hospitality at entry-level jobs. It is always trying to balance that to be honest in terms of how we go about our contracting process. Colin Beattie. I would like to just explore a little bit about gender imbalance. I am looking at page six of the SDS submission here, which gives some interesting statistics, for example, about the higher proportion of females and males going on to further and higher education, which it has put forward here to actually skews the number of females that are actually available for apprenticeships. Obviously there is imbalances in certain areas within the modern apprenticeships. What action has been successful in overcoming the barriers for women to get into these different areas? We want to take a range of activities and it is really framed around three things. One is looking at are there any structural barriers in terms of apprenticeships? One is the cultural and misconceptions, etc. The other thing is about personal choice. In terms of structure, we have undertaken an equality impact assessment of how we operate modern apprenticeships. We cannot find any barriers to it in terms of how we actually operate it. We would not tolerate it. There is quite a lot of women involved in administering modern apprenticeships within SDS. We also, as part of our contractual requirements, all the providers have got to operate equal opportunities policies as well. We do things like capacity building. We have got another programme this year. We have published the quality tool kit, online training materials, etc. Also, we have appointed a head of national training programme development who has got a specific responsibility looking at the whole kind of equal opportunities angle there as well. We have undertaken diversity workshops with our own staff, etc. Also in the cultural side of things, we have got specific initiatives. We have funded STUC to do some work in terms of working with employers and trying to spread the message, etc. There are specific industry initiatives through our skills investment plans, etc. We have got an ICT manager developing range of workshops, etc. and ICT careers. Construction skills has industry leadership group in this set that has proposed to establish a diversity and equality task force. We have got more sponsoring a PhD student to look at the series. We are involved in a whole range of initiatives. There has been an increase. If you look at apprenticeships in 2089, 27 per cent were female, 41 per cent are in 2013, 14 are women. The biggest difference to that is the occupational mix that you were mentioning earlier. The occupational mix, if you bring in certain types of occupations, you will get more female participation. The challenge is with the high value sectors. Just to illustrate the point here, we have been working a lot with the Institute of Physics looking at the statistics coming through there. 70 per cent of individuals at Scottish schools doing hires are males. Of the 90 per cent of females then of that 30 per cent who actually pass, they all go into, 90 per cent of them go into FE and HE. We are talking about a big issue across the piece. It is not as if, I have read some of the academic literature on this, it is not as if the academics all agree with what the solution to that is. Some of them are good for single sex schools, some of them are good for other things. Our training providers, we have talked to the ones in things like automotive engineering. We have made big efforts to try and attract girls, but some figures in terms of in the last year, big providers who act as recruitment agents effectively for businesses are saying that 3 per cent and 4 per cent of applicants are female. This is a wider issue. I think we are putting a lot of effort into it, but it takes a long time to change cultural values, personal choice etc. One comment you made to make sure I understood it. You seem to be implying that females were going into less high value jobs in terms of your modern apprenticeships. That seems to be what you are saying. There is a higher level of skills activity like engineering at level 3, for instance. That is the wrong term that I used. One of the ways around this is from the Wood report that mentioned the introduction of things like foundation apprenticeships. That might be the way of putting part of the apprenticeship down further in the school system to try and generate more interest among girls in particular subject areas. The reverse is true for boys in terms of getting young boys interested in things like care as a career. We know that that is an issue. A wide range of activities by a wide range of partners. I know that FE and HE have the same issue about subject choice too. What would you say was the biggest success within that in terms of correcting gender imbalance? It has been the most successful approach. It is across the ME programme in particular. It is about the range of careers that are in offer. That would be the main one. Just things that we have done like case studies, the more that you can do that. Case studies about girls in occupations that you would normally find them etc. Just getting out to the school system as well. You touched on the different levels of apprenticeships. How many individuals actually progress from a lower to a higher level of apprenticeships? Are there plans to increase that? In terms of moving progressions, the figures were provided in the Audit Scotland supplementary submission. I think we have gone to about 5, 7, 9 and 12, 13. I can't give you the 13, 14 figures because with the subject of Office of National Statistics what I can't say, that's increased again. That's down to, in terms of plans to increase, obviously we encourage it, but it's down to the demands of the job and whether the business wants to move someone. So if you start in, let's take retail for instance as you mentioned Chairman. Retail the jobs in retail at level 2 are sales assistant, but the jobs at level 3 are sales supervisor. So it would need to be whether that individual was deemed at that point in time to move into a supervisory role etc. So it's down to the demands of the business whether they do move, but we are seeing an increase over the last three years in terms of progressions from level 2 to level 3. Just one last question for a clarification for me. What's the difference, the main difference is anyway between the skillsseekers training programme and level 2 apprenticeships? There is a difference. The difference between the skillsseeker and the level 2 apprenticeship is the inclusion of five core skills. The skillsseeker programme was merely an SVQ level 2 delivered in the workplace and I suppose the other thing is in terms of skillsseekers when the skillsseeker programme was phased out back in 2006, I think that Mr Henry was maybe in the department at that time. It was predominantly level 3 young people undertook, but the level 2 skillsseeker has actually been very successful as a programme and was built on to come up with the level 2 MA to include the core skills. So that's things like problem solving in ICT, working with others, the softer skills that employers quite often cite as being missing from young people in the workplace. So that was an improvement with the addition of core skills. Bruce Crawford. Certainly looking at that was quite interesting read in terms of particular areas, particularly when you're looking at the benefit of early intervention and they estimated I think the figure was an annual benefit cost for 100 unemployed young people is a £500,000 per annum, which is a substantial sum. So when you're setting priorities in these circumstances then do you agree that early prevention is key to keeping costs down in the long term because if we don't act early then the costs in the longer term are going to be much more significant? Absolutely. I mean anybody that falls out of the system is a huge cost to the system as you know going forward and it's a waste of talent and we know that in terms of industries going forward with their growth and development plans we need people to be skilled and we need them to have clear progression and clear routeways and pathways through the system. And that's also up to things like industries themselves being clear about where the careers are in their particular industries and that's through the work of the things like the skills investment plans we're working on that too. So I mean yes I think the less remedial activity you have to do in terms of developing people's skills further and the less people become disengaged then it takes a while to bring them back to where they need to be in terms of developing their skills and potential. Interesting also how we're going to make that bridge between that early intervention work that's rightly going on with young people trying to make sure that we don't create a greater cost for society further down the road into the more high skill apprenticeship area. So I'd like to understand how that journey is going to and I know it's early yet and you're only beginning that process but if you can give us a feeling about how you're going to move into that higher skilled agenda which is about skilling up our economy for a different future. Well plans are developing at the moment they're being discussed about how you do that but one of the ways is through for instance if you can take some of the elements of a modern apprenticeship out of what's there what they would be doing in the workplace and actually bring it back into the school system so you do taught learning elements. You might do things like performing engineering operations that you can do and you can give them more work experience as part of it as well so that going into the world of work isn't a shock they're used to that whole environment etc. So there's quite a bit of work to say to say right okay what would be the career route way within that industry what might you be able to do in the school setting so that you can actually then progress people into the workplace you know quicker than they might have done and actually you know getting used to particular industries you know because sometimes you get drop out with people saying well actually this isn't I want to be a hairdresser but actually I find that standing on my feet and working on a Saturday and all sorts of things isn't really what we want to do. So the more that you can actually get people engaged in the career earlier on then they're better able to make better choices then. Obviously much of what happens in terms of the framework of all this is driven by the employers and their needs and therefore and I know that in terms of the level of support that comes in from employers it's significant. In fact I was surprised to see just how much the differential was if I understand that it costs around £85,000 a year in total to train an engineering apprenticeship for instance and from public funding only makes up 9,000 of that. So as we meet the transition into the higher skill element and we're going to increase by 25,000 to 30,000 by 2020 I'm assuming then that a lot of that uptake is going to have to come as much from the public sector and it's going to be a significant support also from the private sector involvement. So I just wanted to understand how you see these various contributions from the public sector and the private sector developing over that time because over that five year period it's going to be important that we get the right flow of income in to support this activity to get the numbers we're trying to achieve. I think that we deploy successfully the resource in the school system together with our public funding resource post school. So for example Katie mentioned the performing manufacturing operations or performing engineering operations. If that's done in the school and it's completed successfully then the individual will be a very attractive option for an employer coming out because they would automatically move into year two of their apprenticeship. So the business would benefit because they're not having to bear the costs of employment for year one but they're getting someone who is partially productive in year two and so therefore you know hopefully businesses who don't already buy in to the apprenticeship process. So that programme would see it as an attractive option and it would allow us to penetrate the market you know to greater levels than we have previously. I think it can add to that so we're just back to your thing about the balance of industries etc. Yes I mean you know at the moment the announcement's been made and we're looking at you know where that demand's going to come from for high level skills. So we're looking at you know things like the skills investment plans what they say for the key and economic growth sector. The other thing is the public sector. You know the public sector has to also step up to the mark here and you know there are areas to explore within the NHS for instance which are highly skilled areas as well to make greater penetration into as well than we have done so. So it will come from a mix in all parts of the economy in Scotland contributing to that. My last question because I visited Prudential at Craigforth in my own constituency last week as part of apprenticeship week and they are now beginning to up the numbers of apprenticeships they're taking in but their experience was quite illuminating to me because it's obviously an industry where they thought they had to always bring in more experienced people who started higher up the level with skills but they've learned a lot from taking in the apprenticeships and actually converting a lot more of them into full time jobs now. Now Prudential are only just beginning to understand the benefit of bringing a young person and skilling them, getting them used to their own culture developing within their own organisation. There must be a fair bit of work requiring to be done even in the financial sector with employers to make them recognise actually the value that they can get out for their own organisation out of taking apprenticeships on and therefore you'd expect in these circumstances that the private sector would be prepared to put a bigger contribution in if they are beginning to recognise the net worth of employing individuals. It's only recently that the insurance sector and financial sector have really taken on board apprenticeships and in this last few months we have actually approved at the modern apprenticeship group a number of frameworks including accountancy, professional services, insurance and banking. Therefore the frameworks are new, the sector skills council and industry bodies are promoting them actively at the moment to try to encourage some of these employers to take up more apprenticeships. A good example is KPMG for example, they are opening a new operations in Glasgow and they are recruiting a substantial number of apprentices because they see the value of growing their own workforce in terms of loyalty and productivity in the longer term. I thought it was key because one of the things that Prudential are certainly capable of doing as other organisations is upskilling their workforce significantly by their training methods, by the process they go through, their human resource development process. So that would help us to get to that higher skilled economy that they are looking for in the future. The other thing that they are doing is there in promoting higher level apprenticeships so they are saying the higher level apprenticeships as promotion opportunities for people in the workplace and opening up entry level jobs at both level 2 and level 3 for individuals. I apologise for being a couple of minutes later, I just got into the routine of coming here at 9.30 for 10 so sorry about that. Can I go to those not in employment, education and training just following on from Colin Beatty's question, I think we are all pleased about gender equality and apprenticeships. I was surprised last week that the number of males last year, well since 2011 to date, the number of males not in employment training has fallen by 4,000 but for the first time the number of females has increased by 1,000. Why is that? These are surely the people that you are there to help. It's not always the case. That's not a homogenous group that you're talking about for instance so people who are not on employment education and training may have a variety of needs. It may be for instance that an employability programme is actually more appropriate for them than necessarily going straight into the workplace so they need to preparatory support before they can take up an opportunity. I want to know why it's good news for men, for males and why the figures are going in the opposite direction for females. I look at the problems that you offer but can I just ask is it a matter of concern that you'll look at? I think it's a matter of concern for all local employability partnerships across Scotland and we're partnered in every single one, the 32 across the country about need figures, about making sure that there are opportunities for all across the piece and it is monitored at a local level. One of the big areas for us there is looking at is the development of the data hub support and we've got 30 out of 32 local authorities actively engaging, putting data so that people can be tracked and offers can be made. The two that aren't at the moment are just down to technical issues but we're working with them on as well. There's a whole infrastructure I think in place across Scotland with local employability partners to look at the offer that's there in terms of providing support for individuals and a lot of that is down to what opportunities are available in the local area. There's opportunities for males because they're falling by 4,000 but from your answer all I can gauge is that there's a lack of opportunities for females. I'm not saying that, what I'm saying is that I think there's a range of support measures in place in terms of there'll be opportunities across the piece and it's about what individuals want to do there. There are more girls for instance that go directly into FE and HE than males so people make different choices too. Do you understand that? Why is modern apprenticeship starts falling by over 400 last year and they were down the previous year by 736? Given that there's 29,000 needs as we call them, why are modern apprenticeships falling rather than rising because I know it's a government target to increase modern apprenticeship starts to 30,000? It's a demand led programme and it reflects the demands of employers. Skills Development Scotland has a target of 25,000 apprenticeship places and we have met that in every year since the target has been there. We respond to employer demand and provide places for young people and adults in key sectors and so therefore the numbers reflect the demand raised by employers. Can I just ask about the Skills Seekers programme? You mentioned it in response to Colin Beattie. Paragraph 14 mentions that SPQ level 2 apprenticeships, when they were introduced in 2009-10, they replaced Skills Seekers. Now this was the subject of considerable discussion at a previous meeting. How many young people 16 to 19 in the Skills Seekers programme were transferred to modern apprenticeships? None of them were transferred to modern apprenticeships because they had started on the Skills Seekers programme so they completed their Skills Seekers programme and it was only new starts after the date of phasing out that started on a level 2 modern apprenticeship so that was the VQ2 plus the core skills. On the Skills Seekers programme prior to the year for 2009-10, how many were relabelled if you like as modern apprenticeships at the end of that? Not every sectoral area chose to have a level 2 apprenticeship. Those who had level 2 skillsseekers did not automatically have a level 2 apprenticeship programme approved, for example engineering, because there were no jobs at that level, there were no entry level jobs, the jobs are at level 3 in the industry. Employers previously used the level 2 to feed into the level 3 programme. When the level 2 apprenticeship was introduced, the engineering sector for example decided that they wouldn't have that. Another sector who chose not to have level 2 apprenticeships although they had level 2 skillsseekers was the social care, so children's childcare learning and development don't have a level 2 apprenticeship so it's not an automatic if there was a skillsseeker in level 2 that there would have automatically been a level 2 apprenticeship. On the Skills Seekers programme prior to being replaced by modern apprenticeships as is stated in paragraph 14. The Auditor General was quite critical about modern apprenticeships not being aligned to the Scottish Government's top economic growth sectors. Recently we had a debate on the ICT digital strategy, which I know is not in the top 10. I think it was just about a fortnight ago we had a debate on the life sciences strategy and out of 25,000 apprenticeships between 13 and 20 were in life sciences. That was quite a critical point from the Auditor General. Are you now looking at aligning modern apprenticeships with sustainable employment, good earnings and areas that the Government has targeted for economic growth because it doesn't seem to have been the case in the past? Life sciences when we've worked and developed the sector skill investment plan and we do that in conjunction with industry through LISAB industry advisory board. It's probably one of the areas where the natural pattern for recruitment has been at graduate level when we introduced the modern apprenticeship programme and worked with centre and employers groups to do that. Initially we had a good uptake that was incentivised at the time and we had a two for one offer where we were off on a wage subsidy. So it was initial uptake of the programme but I think the sector has also went through a bit of a challenging time as well. So the numbers have probably dropped to a level where it's been from an industry point of view a wee bit more sustainable. It's an area where we will look through the introduction of the action plan for life sciences to further promote. We'll probably see the biggest focus within the skill investment plan around improving the connection between graduates within the sector promoting internships. We've been doing some work through the Glasgow Economic Commission and their Life Sciences Action Group in terms of just making better representation from individuals into the sector with things like CV competitions and sponsored internships over the summer. So in terms of looking at the future workforce I would probably still maintain that there's a heavier contribution to be made through probably both further and higher but particularly higher education. The modern apprenticeship programme can make an offer and we'll put a bit additional resource behind that in terms of the action plan. We're doing a lot of work through the kind of STEM agenda linking back into the school systems. I think that that runs across both engineering, ICT, all those disciplines so we're doing more promotional work in schools and we will probably see a further uptake of the modern apprenticeship but as I said I think it's more at a graduate level that we'll see entry points into industry. Come to a final question, was Auditor-General right to say in her report we can't talk about what's happening in the future, we can only talk about what we've got in front of us, was she right to say that you had failed to synchronise modern apprenticeships with outcomes, sustainable employment and the Government's economic growth sectors? I think that the report says that compared to key sectors it says economic growth sectors. I think the other thing is an issue of data classification. For instance engineering apprenticeships are classified under key sectors not economic growth sectors but obviously engineering apprenticeships support a wide range of economic growth sectors too. So I think that we do align it with the key and economic growth sectors. At the other part of that we're also asked to make sure that there's entry level opportunities, as the Chairman said at the very start of this session, opportunities within retail and other types of occupation too. So it's always a balance but I think if you look at the increases we've had, hospitality and tourism which is an economic growth sector is up nearly 700 between 1011 and 1213, food and drink is up over 600, energy is up over 600, so financial services up over 80. Life Sciences Gordon's talked about the challenges there in terms of employer behaviour about the types of routes they prefer to use for their industry. So there is work to do with economic growth sectors but I do think that we've made great inroads there. Can I just say paragraph 3 on page 7, one of the key messages. Scottish Government has set various priorities for modern apprenticeships which is fair but existing performance measures do not focus on long term outcomes such as sustainable employment. So I'm just going to my final question. You've also been criticised for well less than 10% of the training goes to FE colleges and it's also mentioned on page 34 exhibit 10. There are no equivalent independent reviews of the quality of training provided by other training providers. So colleges are inspected all the time by various people but there's a lack of independent reviews of many of the training providers bringing into question the quality of the training providers. Is that something that you'll take on board from this report? It's coming there on the colleges in terms of the number of starts. Obviously we've worked very closely with colleges and we value the work that they actually deliver for us and they bid into the process to get places in the same way as private training providers, employers, third sector organisations do as well. And they are judged on the same basis and the things that we judge our training providers on are the quality of achievements, the number of achievements, the ability to deliver the numbers and unfortunately colleges have in the past let us down both in terms of achievement and in terms of delivering numbers. I think sometimes they're very good at delivering taught learning, theoretical learning but their engagement with employers is not always the best and employers don't necessarily go to colleges to do workforce development which essentially is what apprenticeships are. There are no equivalent independent reviews of the quality of training provided by other including private training providers in relation to colleges. I'm still answering the part about the provision and the number of places that we deliver through colleges. We work with 23 colleges direct and our apprenticeship programme for example is inspected by Education Scotland, the stuff that's delivered through colleges so there is for colleges delivery an independent aspect. We also have our own internal compliance function and we rely on the quality of the accreditation bodies so for example Scottish vocational qualification authority and also city and guilds and other accreditation who also provide independent of Skills Development Scotland a review of activity delivered through training providers. We all have to be approved and accredited by those organisations. Can I add to that in terms of what you did ask about what we're going to do there? I think the comments we've made about colleges there is some are really great, some are less great than others. We've got some really good colleges in Scotland delivering in the modern apprenticeship programme and like any provider you get differences in terms of approach. I think in terms of going forward I think we've got robust and proportionate quality assurance systems but you know we recognise that that you should always look to continuously improve. So we are taking on board and the sort of things that were mentioned there. We're revising the roles of our own contract management staff to spend even more time out talking to trainees. I mean I think what we should say is every time we survey modern apprentices and employers we get high quality ratings when we ask them so that's good. We're also supporting staff development programme for our staff covering quality. There is at the moment we're formalising arrangements with all of the awarding bodies in terms of our respective roles, future plans and sharing information. And also we're talking with Education Scotland at the moment and with Scottish Government about that external quality assurance of off-the-job training that's going on about that being applied to all of the modern apprenticeship programme too. And there's quite a bit of work that's going on in terms of looking at how we might look at that. I think what you've got to be clear here as well is that in the set-up of apprenticeships and in the set-up of competence-based qualifications which form the heart of apprenticeship they were not supposed to be the same as college-delivered qualifications as such. It's about competence on the job being assessed and described. So therefore what we're in terms of our discussions with Education Scotland about how they apply their inspection process to the whole of apprenticeships, it's got to be mindful of that. That it is different and it was deliberately designed to be different because in the whole set-up back to things like towards a skills revolution etc. The idea was that it would be very different from what was currently delivered so it's got to be proportionate to what actually the type of learning that does go on. It does say again, page 34, there's no formal independent review of training providers providing on the job training. So I think I've had long enough here but I can only go by what's read in the report here. Willie Coffey. Thank you very much, convener. I've got the auditor general's report in front of me and it's one of the most positive reports I've ever read at this audit committee serving on this for seven years or so. I don't recognise some of the comments that my colleagues are offering about being neglected and let down and critical in failure. I think this is an incredibly positive story and she's acknowledged that in her comments in the report. I did want to pick up on some of the themes that my colleague Mary Scanlon introduced there, though about long-term outcomes and about quality. To ask her where the opportunities for further gain will be, if we look ahead and track the progress of the 25,000 or so apprentices that are in the system at the moment, is it your brief to look ahead further to see how successful they are becoming, how sustainable their employment is, and how they're developing their earning capacity and so on? Or is it not? Is that not part of your brief? What we do at the moment is that, in fact, there's more data on this than other forms of post-16 learning, but what we do is we survey individuals six months post completion. It's easier to get in touch with them then, to be honest, because how difficult when people move, etc., and phone numbers change and all that stuff. So we track people at post-16, and we get very good results for that. Completers are in the 90s in terms of in a job, and we compare that to non-completers, etc. So post-16 completions of modern apprenticeships, well over 90%, are actually in a job post completion, so that's good. We also ask them things like what effect has it had on, have you had a career change, have you had an increase in pay, etc. So we ask them impact questions like that in our surveys, and again you get good results for that. And I think things like career change and promotion, etc., and a wage rise six months isn't long after completing your apprenticeship. So again, the long-term aspect, the big prize on that is to actually link up with things like HMRC data. And we have been talking to the Scottish Government about how we might do that in the future, and it's really in the gift of HMRC, whether or not they allow access to those kind of data, but that, because surveys are expensive to maintain, etc., whereas HMRC would provide us with coverage, a great deal of coverage in terms of tracking people in the long-term. I think if you track people, you've got a law of diminishing returns, we surveyed them two years after an apprenticeship, their addresses will have changed and all that, and that's very expensive then trying to catch up with that. So we do it post six months, good results on that, but we think there's a bigger prize there, and we'll see how those discussions go with HMRC about joining and also linking it with the benefits data as well. And then we'll try to catch that information and feed it back into the planning process for a modern apprenticeship programme to make the kind of improvements that the Auditor General was leading us towards. I think the other thing I would say is politicians also have to be patient as well, because you want to see results very, very quickly. Are you prepared to wait to see, well, okay, the five-year result of that, the 10-year result, etc., of it? So I think that one of the things with what the Auditor General said, look at long-term outcomes, we do, we have impacts, as I say, in terms of impact measures ourselves, we're talking to government about what that means in terms of looking at the longer-term measures as well and how we might go forward, but as I say, we've already started some of that with government pursuing HMRC and looking at the benefits side of it as well. That's fantastic, it's very encouraging to hear that. Just on the quality assurance front, I wonder if I could again use it, to pick up a theme that Mary Scanlon introduced to me. Where are we really on the kind of broadness of quality assurance frameworks? She did say in her report that yourselves and various awarding bodies have got different QA procedures. Is there a worth in standardising it, or have they all got their own individual merits that they bring to the table? She kind of pushed us into thinking in that direction. So what are reviews about that and similarly where are the opportunities to gain in there, if there are any? I think what the auditor general mentioned, which is like there's a different inspection regime for colleges. So that's independent assurance given by Education Scotland now. What we've said is that there are a number of measures in place to give quality assurance already around modern apprenticeships. That's the process is that the awarding bodies, the quality assurance in terms of awarding centres. We have our quality assurance process, which we developed, looked at EFQM, looked at what Education Scotland had, etc. We've built it around that. It was also on the principle of self-assessment, which was the advice given in the career review that quality assurance should be along the lines of self-assessment. Recently, Government have said that they would want to see Education Scotland apply independent inspection against modern apprenticeships. So basically there will be a change in that policy in terms of self-assessment. We're continuing with what we're doing already, but we've already talked to Education Scotland about going down the Education Scotland inspection route for off-the-job learning, which we'll do. But there is another aspect of saying this is different. It's a bit like saying you run a company and Education Scotland is going to come in and tell you how good your training is because most of the training is done by the employer. So you need to balance this appropriately because on the other hand, all the time you get people, on the one hand, you must do this, you must do that, and then people will complain about bureaucracy too, so you've got to get that right. It's absolutely key that quality assurance is there, and we do have processes in place, but there are going to be changes made to it. The employers are willing to engage with the whole QA process. I mean, I'm familiar with QA and EFQM and other standards. Are you finding that they're growing towards that and seeing it as a useful tool? And who assesses the employer's quality of training, and do they adopt the standards that you're talking about? Basically, it's the job of the training provider college, whatever, to make sure that the training arrangements that are there are fit with the nine quality standards that we've got in our quality assurance processes. You could talk to one employer who'll give you a different answer from another one in terms of, you know, someone will say, well, I'm not going to follow that route. This is all just bureaucracy or red tape. But again, it's about an appropriate balance. I think it's to establish a view around inspection and a view in standard setting. The reality is probably everybody drives a car, their car is serviced by somebody who's come through a modern apprenticeship programme. Your gas central heating system has probably been installed and maintained by somebody who's come through a modern apprenticeship programme. Your electrics and every other trade that you'll touch. So these are standards that are often set by industry. So construction skills and other trades have a Scottish joint industry board. Young people set an end test when they complete that. So I think there's a difference between inspection review and the standards that are set across qualifications to make sure that people are competent as Katie touched on. I think if I could just add as well, the Katie mentioned the SDS call to assurance framework and that is AFQM based and we do assess it. So therefore we can build that into the contracting process. So more than 250 training providers, employers and colleges are signed up to undertake that process. And there are only two who are on development programmes at the moment. So the rest are compliant with the standards. So and therefore as it's industry led, there is a link that we can make there too. But there is always more we can do. For years to come, we've been talking about standards in the public sector and embracing quality and continuous improvements. So what you're saying to me, I think actually encourages me more that employers are willing to embrace these kinds of standards to bring the level and competencies up. So I'm quite happy with that, Candina. Thank you. Macintosh. Thanks for asking me and I can just continue on the same line of questioning. First of all, the general point that the auditor general made was that the overall aim for the modern apprenticeship programme has been changed since 2007 despite a number of changes to the labour market, the recession, the number of apprentices and so on. Are you clear whether or not the main aim of the programme is to serve the economy or whether it's to provide young people with skills they need to improve their employment? The primary aim, as the auditor general points out, is to identify the Scottish Government's economic development within that. It's about enabling the individuals. So we know what our overall target is. We're very clear about giving young people opportunities, about offering a balance of portfolio of provision of entry-level jobs but also the ones that are a bit higher skilled. We're also clear that it's about also trying to align it with the economic growth sectors, the key sectors in Scotland as well, and also about improving under representation. You've already touched on the fact that it's quite tricky to measure the long-term sustainable benefits of apprenticeship at the moment. You're trying and you find new ways of working out does it improve earnings, does it improve sustainable employment and so on. Does it lead to a job in fact? Is it fair to say that the target that is absolutely clear in your mind is 25,000? I mean, that's the political target. We all talk about 25,000 apprenticeships. And in some ways that's the dominant target rather than the quality of the job or the improvement to earnings and so on. Is that a fair point to make? If you set as a target of it's got to be the quality of the job and the earnings, et cetera, then in terms of administering that, that's a very complicated way to do things if you think about that, and then measuring that as well, it could take 10 years, et cetera. So I said, as a point of made politicians, we need to be very patient in terms of identifying the results from that too. And the other issue in here is the challenges that sometimes objectives can sometimes, I'll give you an example for instance, if you get more engineering, it's good for key sectors and it also supports the economic growth sectors. It's really good for things like level 3 ratios and level 3 sustainable jobs, et cetera. And it's good for new recruits because the engineering industry tends to take people who are brand new recruits, but it's not good for the gender balance. Conversely, hospitality is good for economic growth. It's a growth sector and the female participation in that particular occupational framework is really good. That industry tends to take on people in level 2. So level 2 jobs, we know the economic returns in terms of level 2s are less than level 3s, et cetera. So, you know, that's why it's a kind of, there are different things going on and one thing can balance out the other. I accept what you're saying. I think that the point here is we start from position certainly in the Parliament. I think first every party in the Parliament starts from position that we're very proud of the apprenticeship programme and very keen to promote it in the national education generally. But the fact that it was seen as a success, you know, sometimes you can expand programmes and it doesn't necessarily mean you'll repeat the same success. And I think it was the point that Mary Scanlon was making earlier that there's always been a fear that, for example, by increasing the number of level 2 qualifications and substituting the skill seekers programme into it, you can possibly devalue. The apprenticeship programme is held in high esteem, but there's clearly a difference, as you know, between an engineering apprentice and perhaps a retail level 2 apprentice. So, it's trying to make sure that by expanding a successful scheme we make it better work for everybody rather than cheapen it or devalue it. And it's trying to work out whether or not, if the government, it might not be for you to do, it might be for the government to do, if the government don't set you quality targets, if the only focus on numbers, then your focus will only be on numbers, whether you do quality. Well, it's not just numbers, though. I mean, you don't just say to us, it's 25,000 in that set. It's about also those other things that I talked about in terms of individuals, et cetera, and in terms of balancing entry, entry-type occupations. And also, let's not forget, you know, the reason why there are level 2 is because industry have demanded them. I mean, we survey sectors every year in terms of what they think the demand is for the different levels in the different occupational areas. The survey results we got this year from sector skills councils suggested at level 2, they would see demand for 15,000. And we've not contracted for that level because we're trying to balance the level 3 and the higher growth and all that kind of stuff. So, you know, it is always a balancing act in terms of what you're attempting to do. The recent announcement over the extra 5,000 by 2020, there's been quite a lot of emphasis on that in terms of it being, you know, the higher level apprenticeships, et cetera. So, yes, it's always there, there is industry demand. And also there's individual demand for entry-level jobs, too. So, you're always trying to balance. I think the point that Auditor General has flagged up is how do you then, how do we audit that? How do you demonstrate in numbers and targets to the Parliament that you have delivered in quality and not just in numbers? How can you guarantee it? I suppose one of the things is are we still in jobs after the end? We still have to complete the apprenticeship and we've already got statistics to show that the overwhelming vast majority are. I'm sure that the need for that figure isn't reported, is it? Well, it's out there. I mean, we've published it as the impact, you know, it's the outcome survey. I think we had to ask for it. No, I mean, that's been on our website for ages. I mean, that's out there in terms of post completion outcomes. So, what you do is you track that too. So, we're going to start the preparatory work soon to maybe do another survey towards the end of this financial year as well. So, again, what you can't do is pest our employers all the time. We spoke to you last week and then we because everybody surveys them too. So, you've got to balance that appropriately. So, we do, you know, we do part of the reason why we've a big part of our customer research and evaluation plan within SDS is around modern apprenticeships because that is about tracking what value do we get it? What do people think about the quality of it? Is it satisfied with the level of services that we get? So, that's the answer to it. And also things like if we get the link up with the HMRC and benefits data you can actually track what happens later on in terms of earnings, et cetera. I think submission indicated that this is a co-investment programme. This isn't a giveaway from SDS or government to businesses. This is about co-investment and I don't think businesses would keep coming back to the table if it wasn't working for them. You've already seen in terms of both engineering and construction the cost that a business will submit to develop young people. So, that's to me one indicator that the customer is happy and they understand the type of investment they're making and they continue to meet that. In some areas, the level 2 type qualification and speaking to the emogol way from construction skills yesterday they gave a very good example of developments at the Southern General Hospital and they worked with an industry group because the drywalling that was required not just there but in other large projects developed and signed off a level 2 qualification for a trade that has developed because of modern building technology and the commune contractor that took on an extra 20 appendices it probably wouldn't have got a structure training programme or that type of opportunity before. And a final point I think that we're getting more intelligent through the work that we do with the sectors is to think not just about the new jobs but about the placement demand for jobs. So, if you speak with Select which is the Electrical Contractors Association they can already identify probably 900 skilled electricians leaving the sector either through Retiro, through moving into other sectors or emigrating and currently there's about 450 to 500 coming into the sector. So these are important barometers. There's only one way to become an electrician in Scotland and that's through this programme it's one of the highest quality programmes anywhere in the world for that sector. So these are important points that we need to factor in when we're contracting around that balance. We see the same in engineering one of the biggest challenges for us in engineering is to work with employers to make them more aware of the demographic challenge they will face in terms of an ageing workforce and the fact that they need to be investing to develop new talent to come through and substitute for that. So there are a whole range of stuff there that we need to both take into account but I think positive signs back from industry that the programmes are working for them as well. I have to say that I think these things are very encouraging. I suppose the point that the committee would be concerned about is how to capture those that feedback that evidence, that anecdotal evidence as well as measurable evidence in ways that actually could help as an organisation to help individuals. For example, just one other point on this is there's clearly varied spend on each of the apprenticeship programmes. Are you able at all to track the value of the different spend? If a level 2 apprenticeship costs you x100 compared to x1000 for a level 4 or whatever. Are you able to demonstrate the value of that spend? Are there any figures or outcome measurements that translate? We know that every pound of the public purse spent £8.88 is levered in from employers and from other sources. So we know that overall our public investment does actually lever in financial contribution. The contribution rates that we pay from the public purse are really the minimum that is possible to pay to encourage training and it's that balance of public investment against market failure and we strive to get the best value that we can for the public purse. In fact this year we have undertaken a review of our contributions and we've released phase 1 of that in this contracting year. So some frameworks, the longer frameworks where there's more taught of the job learning have actually attracted a higher premium than those where it is purely assessment so all the training is delivered by the employer in the workplace and the training provider goes in and assesses the competency rather than delivers the training. So we strive continually to get best value. You're saying, I suppose and I do doubt you're echoing the point that that employers are quite happy to make their contribution so clearly it works in that sense I suppose I'm trying to ask you about the individual, there's quite a disparity in the funding that's available at different levels and it's trying to work out how you measure that best value. You're obviously trying to get best value, but how do you actually measure it? If it's a demand led programme then is it simply you know if there's greater demand, the public subsidy could actually be less. So that's one measure but that's not necessarily the best way to use the money. One of the things you do there for instance is you use proxy measures and also what you've got to remember is there's something like 80 frameworks if you try and conduct a survey and try and get robust levels at 80 framework level you're a better person than I really and it would be very expensive so what you do is you do things like you ask them well do you things like do you take also you do it by broad occupational groupings so are you more likely to train your existing staff or are you more likely to take on a new recruit now that tells you something about public where investment should more likely be if one of the key objectives is actually about getting new opportunities for people you look at what age groupings so our contribution rate is the main groupings around that are what age are they so more money goes to the younger age groups it's three different age groupings more money goes to those where at level three because we know from economic evidence that level three there are higher returns et cetera so there is within the contribution rates and also the occupational grouping level three there is stacks of evidence out there about about levels if you think about it it's all in relative terms isn't it so there's higher returns for the individual in the state at level three plus that's out that's been known for a long time but level two that doesn't mean we shouldn't be giving opportunities for individuals to start on the workplace that's what I'm saying is you're trying to balance so many things within this in terms of meeting objectives so there's a variety of proxy measures you can use to look at value within the programme as well and as I say Government on you know in the back of what the Auditor General has recommended here is to look at that whole thing about what should we be measuring more and as I say we do actually quite a lot in that in terms of outcome survey but I'm absolutely sure there's more we could be doing I'm going to jump back to points that were raised earlier on in response to Oly Coffey there listening of interest to the point you were making about tracking outcomes and the benefits that could be derived from data sharing with HMRC benefits information I can understand the benefits that we gain from that I have to say it sets alarm bells running ringing if we're harvesting and sharing data of that nature and therefore I wouldn't necessarily expect a response to that I would certainly want to put on record that this is not without its difficulties but it's actually more in relation to the point Colin Beattie I think started off pursuing with your listening with interest to what you were thinking about the work being done in terms of achieving more of a gender balance and certainly in particular sector areas like Bruce Coffey ride during apprenticeship week last week visited a stonemason apprentice in Orkney and she has I mean the full year apprenticeship support by the council of Stork Scotland CITB is excellent and what was interesting was that an apprenticeship had been something that had never occurred that she'd gone through a university degree and been casting around for what she was going to do next and so she came to the notion of apprenticeships very very late now some of what you've referred to there may address that and while there's been some publicity around around her work at Subangis Cathedral what was clear was she hadn't had any real engagement with the local schools and speaking directly to those who are coming in her wake and and therefore I just see that as a huge missed opportunity not least because of quite how engaging she is and the story she has to tell about how she came to go by that so I'm concerned that all the things that you've talked about sound on the face of it very reasonable and very broad ranging but from that simple example it seems that we're missing a trick in using those sort of case studies more fully. I mean I could go on at length at what we do and one of the big things that I've obviously forgotten to say there is about the promotion in terms of through the school system you know we've got our careers and we've got our careers coaches in schools who do things really about tackling gender stereotypes as well on our partner zone on my world of work we've got materials case studies etc for teachers to use within schools as well and maybe that individual didn't get it but I can assure you there's a lot of emphasis going forward trying to do trying to tackle those stereotypes which is done by a whole lot of organisations where there's all those Scottish women in technology etc and particularly on apprenticeships we've done a lot to try and promote apprenticeships as an offer with everything else and Wood talks about parity of esteem issues as well and about trying to you know trying to make sure that work-based learning is the same light as you know further and higher education etc so you know it is a big challenge but we do do a lot on the promotional side too of Sophie Turner what I'm not trying to do is is kind of roll back the clock and say that this should have been picked up earlier but what it does is it provides an example of where things haven't necessarily worked in the past and the things that you were setting out in terms of the work that's being done now would appear to be directed at trying to address that what I'm saying is so you've got this example of Sophie and what she's doing the excellent apprenticeship that she's embarked on at the moment but who isn't being utilised to go into schools and rather than it being something on my world of work website or information packs that are given to teachers or to career advisers you actually speak to the individual themselves we can give a far more compelling story about the benefits of what she is doing and that as I say seems to me a missed opportunity I think to agree and case studies is absolutely way forward with that and any case studies we absolutely capitalise on and we used a lot during Scottish Apprenticeship Week there'll be another and we'll look into your support for this in November there'll be another Apprenticeship Week really focused on individuals as well and that'll be a new departure for this year doing another one in November is a big part of our efforts to capture the mansions of individuals so case studies I absolutely agree with you the more that you can use people who've actually been through you can tell people what it's like that's absolutely the kind of thing that we absolutely want to capitalise on We also have an ambassador programme which capitalises on young people who are ambassadors for the apprenticeship programme so young people identify themselves and are identified through case studies and are promoted as ambassadors who go into schools and who go to youth groups and anywhere where young people are to promote apprenticeships and in fact I think there was some input to the youth parliament not so long ago from SDS again promoting apprenticeships to young people so we do, we also have ambassadors from an employer perspective because again we only have 13% penetration of businesses in Scotland so we rely heavily on word of mouth and others to say this is a great programme here are the benefits I've derived from it so as well as us doing the stuff through my world of work and through Gordon and the industry managers we actually have individuals out there going to business associations and breakfast meetings and doing their 60 seconds of or 2 minutes on how good it is to have an apprentice so we do actually have active promotion through both individuals and employers but there's always room for improvement Finally could I just again following up the line of question to Ken McIntosh was pursuing with you in terms of the variation in the types of support that are available it strikes me both in the likes of the Highlands and Islands those returning to the workforce tend to be slightly older and that has been a problem in terms of the focus on particularly 16 to 19 year olds up until now but also in terms of delivering the course element of the apprenticeship that can Sophie Turner is an example of it but she's doing the course work down in Elgin that can be more costly where you're dealing with issues is there a reflection of that in terms of the support that is provided through SDS across the board or is there a kind of a menu of support that's linked to whether or not it's a new opportunity or skilling somebody who's already in a work whether it's level 2 or level 3 because I think that would be again a concern to me that they wouldn't fully reflect the specific challenges that an employer and an individual would face in a rural community compared to perhaps in cities It's a huge challenge and certainly when we were reviewing contribution rates that we pay we did look at geography but it would be hugely difficult to administer because the funding attaches to an individual and if that individual moves to a different employer then it would be that the employers located in a different area so the girl from Orkney could finish her apprenticeship in Edinburgh because there's a better job comes up but what we do is we do support travel and subsistence for individuals who are in training in the rural areas particularly in the highlands and islands and we have support for employers particularly small employers who would face huge barriers in terms of cost even just travel and we have additional support for those areas That's helpful, I mean I would make a plea that whatever other evaluations you're doing evaluating whether or not it is an inhibitor that there isn't more of a reflection of the additional cost available I think would be pretty key Thank you Related to all the issues to do with stats, evaluation data, performance measures evaluation we're asking you to drill down and drill down and drill down but it's very simplest your job is to make sure that an apprentice has got the skills they're in the job and they keep the job I wonder sometimes the committee, the parliament the government, the auditor general imposes a lot of burdens on you and I just wonder in terms of these burdens that we're asking you to do in terms of information your job It would be nice to have less MSP inquiries I think from day to day because I do think we get an awful lot of demand for information to be honest it's quite and that's why we're trying to publish as much as we can so we can just refer you to that in terms of going back and forward so that would always be a plea on behalf of colleagues particularly and all these inquiries as well I mean essentially I think that there is a law of diminishing returns in terms of drilling down and drilling down because that's when it's back to bringing in one of my colleagues here who's an expert in customer research evaluation where you know sample sizes then you're getting down to that and also you can annoy people by phoning them up what do you think about that and what do you think about that etc so there is always, you know you've always got to try and pitch that one appropriately but I mean a plea for less and less of the same inquiries please because we get a lot that are that were asked last week or the day before and all that sort of stuff so that would be nice and ask it about valuations and data I'll ask you one, do you know how much you're actually spending on collecting all that data information I mean I whatever you're spending there's no going to apprenticeships that's what worries me well I mean I don't have a figure for that sorry I want to share the comments made by my colleague Wally Coffey about it's a great report and also by Ken Macintosh and everybody else about the great job that modern apprenticeships do Ken Macintosh touched on some, I was going to ask some questions about the forward review of how modern apprenticeships have been working etc and Ken talked about the quality of the training and in terms of how does that impact on the individual at the end of it you said that you contacted him six months after I'm wondering if six months, I can understand why six months I think is really important but if that's too short a time to see if for example they've moved up, I was going to say moved on but I really mean moved up within the company based on the training that they've had in the modern apprenticeship programme I mean you do pick that up I think 67% from memory there had a promotion, more responsibilities or whatever so you do pick that up at six months but it could be longer than that six months is also what HE does and I know that there isn't any information in terms of outcomes from the money that they spend and so I mean you could look at making it long term but then you are into if it's a year where are they you know trying to contact them so you're really trying to pitch that one correctly as well You're saying 67% are showing a positive response to that sort of question and that probably suggests that six months is quite a good average I want to go back to something Fiona Stewart said I mean it's been said through the whole session which I found extremely valuable that it's an industry-led businesses, modern apprenticeships and you started to talk about encouraging employers to take part could you go into some more detail about what exactly SDS do to get employers because without the employers taking part there will be no modern apprenticeship programme We obviously use our network of training providers who are you know our front face with employers with individuals who are already in training or who are considering training and those training providers you know go out and promote the programme in many cases employers will go directly to those training providers because the quality of delivery is excellent you know so they've got you know a really good reputation so you know you have particular employers who like to use particular training providers We also use our industry managers and our employer engagement team to go out and you know demonstrate the benefits of apprenticeships but it's not just within our own organisation our partner organisations also go out and you know drum up interest in apprenticeships and tell of the benefits and those are the enterprise agencies so enterprise agencies Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise if they're dealing with for example inward investment companies or companies who are expanding will always have in their kitbag apprenticeships because it's a really really good way of developing the workforce either getting new recruits in for inward investment companies or for expansion opportunities and so you know we do a lot ourselves we also through local authorities they also promote the benefits and most recently obviously the local authorities have had recruitment incentives and they have not just been encouraging employers to take on young people and full stop no training they've been encouraging employers to take on young people with training through apprenticeships so in that way you know expanding the reach of apprenticeships but there's lots of room for improvement and we're not sitting back in our laurels you know and through the work of the parliament I sit in a couple of cross-party working groups and I know MSPs are very keen to go out and promote the benefits of apprenticeships as well and very often we get inquiries from MSPs about supporting businesses in their local area if they've had some contact follow-up you know all of those and that's great I think it's something like the big set piece event obviously Scottish apprenticeship week we're over 140 events I think we had something like 25 MSPs involved in that we're also doing apprenticeship week business breakfast we're one on engineering down in North Ayrshire last week trying to get more engineering companies particularly in an area like North Ayrshire involving the companies in a wide variety of activities Why did you like it? Yes Is there any particular part of industry that you're struggling to get into because I can't remember what the percentage you said of industry that takes part but there's still quite a large number that don't isn't there? You know again as time progresses new frameworks come on board so I explained earlier on we've now got insurance and banking and professional services so that's consultancy services accounting we have auditing which has just come on so it's about promoting the new frameworks to maybe parts of industry that don't realise they're there so part of the role of sector skills councils is not just to present, develop and present the frameworks for approval in Scotland it's also about the promotion and encouraging the employers within their sector from micro businesses through to large employers to actually take up the mantle and use apprenticeships in their workforce development and training There's a huge number a big tale of businesses in Scotland that represent micro businesses and so so traders Federation of Small Business undertook a study about a year and a half ago looking at the challenges for business to recruit and I think a lot of services partners have reflected that in terms of a more proactive support mechanism business gateway used European structural funds to provide more advice around employment legislation and to provide assistance for companies to recruit so the whole programme of work attached to that we worked with the Federation of Small Business CDI in the chambers to develop our skills force which is a website which brings together all offers from local authorities and ourselves and the Job Centre Plus and that's got a call back facility so for an employer who's looking for a support who can quite readily just drop an email into the system or contact the customer service desk and we'll arrange a visit to go out and do the process connect them with partners where that's appropriate if there's a wage subsidy proposition that's available to them so we've tried to open up as much access to the information and services as we can as furnaces we can always do more at the end of the day many of the businesses are busy running their business and sometimes just don't take enough time to pause and put a structured plan in place so I think there's a range of mechanisms that's been started I suspect that's just you've just confirmed that that the small businesses would have been the ones that were most difficult to get into but are you finding there's a growing realisation now that they I mean there's a nervousness around making a commitment and that shouldn't be underestimated so if you look at some days maybe an electrical contractor do they have a sufficiently robust programme of future work to make a four year commitment those are the issues that we play in people's minds we've just completed a big piece of work in creative industries where many people are self-employed and they'll be doing portfolio work it's not just a single job they'll be doing different pieces of work so there's some sectors like that that make it difficult to end up young person and bring a young person into your business or not just a young person but a first employee so those are some of the challenges probably with government around potential structures around shared apprenticeships that would maybe make that easier but we want to maintain the integrity of that employee status model okay thank you and I thank you for your input to the committee meeting this morning I don't think anyone would underestimate the challenges that have faced the skills development Scotland in recent years but also I think we would recognise the vital contribution that you make to helping to give young people and older people as well a future and to help to develop their skills to the full so you know thank you for what you've given us this morning thank you for the work that you do and I know that it's an organisation that has the support of members of this Parliament so thank you for your contribution okay item 3 on our agenda the committee members will have correspondence from the Scottish Government in response to the Auditor General's report on renewable energy does anyone have any comments to make nope Chancellor Scrofer obviously there's talk about a energy skills investment plan in due course obviously we do not as a committee need to know and understand where this is all going from where we've been at at least from the Government well we can we could write to the Government to ask for further information if you wish when this Government's investment just asks them when it becomes available reflecting back on the work that's earlier being done you're probably coming back to this so I would suggest that maybe at this point we note their correspondence item 4 you have a response from the Scottish Government on the report on Scotland's colleges any comments nothing you'll note in the report particularly the Auditor General's comments that her next report is due to be published in early 2015 she mentioned that a couple of times in relation to the points that we had raised and so perhaps the best opportunity for us to pick up on this further might be at that point there was one comment that was made saying that the Scottish Government expects the Scottish funding council page 2 to fund colleges in line with the outcome agreements to negotiate we do not therefore expect colleges to transfer significant amounts of public funds to ALFs now Times Education Supplement Scotland I think have been doing some investigation and I think they've identified a substantial figure running into the millions it would be helpful I think to clarify exactly how much has been put in to the Arn's Link the foundations we certainly can ask the Scottish Government to follow that up later on but I think it would be helpful to have the information just now about how much is currently getting to these Arn's Link because if you're saying that there's not a significant amount I'm not sure quite what the definition of significant is and it's one of the areas that I think concerns many people so I agree with you I think we should get to the fact that the matter has made the statement is it a diminishing amount or is it significant so we need to find out the Scottish Government asked for clarification on that what's the up-to-date figure and we'll hold that until we get a response item 5 annual report any comments can we agree to publish the report read which takes us to item 6 which is in private and at that point we'll suspend the meeting for a few moments