Subcontracting Apprenticeships

Home Forums Data issues Subcontracting Apprenticeships

This topic contains 2 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  steveh 10 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author

  • feltonsafc

    I’m hoping to clarify the position on subcontracting apprenticeships. I have read the guidance and it isn’t clear. Does P123, P20 relate to subcontracting in that we would need to deliver elements of each employers apprenticeship programme that has elements delivered by a subcontractor which has substance and not a token amount to satisfy the rule?

    Scenario 1
    Employer wishes the subcontractor to deliver 100% programme delivery – are we able to do this?

    Scenario 2
    Employer wishes the subcontractor to deliver the main aim/tech cert or main delivery of the standards with ourselves delivering the functional skills to each apprentice – would this satisfy this rule?

    Scenario 3
    Employer wishes the subcontractor to deliver the teaching elements of the apprentices programme, with ourselves delivering the on programme assessment, IQA and certification – are we able to do this?

    Scenario 4
    Employer wishes to have a variety of apprenticeship programme e.g. engineering and management. The employer wishes the subcontractor to deliver all the engineering apprenticeships and ourselves the management apprenticeships – are we able to do this? Does this have to have a specific ratio e.g. 100 engineering apprenticeships against 5 management.

    Any advice would be gratefully received



    Martin West

    I think you need to read this paragraph as meaning you must be the main provider and only use subcontracting to complement your own delivery to the Employer.



    Yeah, “more than a token amount” will mean whatever ESFA need it to mean to stop people doing things they don’t like…

    in terms of these scenarios:

    1. no way, employer should talk to subbie direct.
    2. highly dodgy, I’ve seen presentations expressly say that FS isn’t enough
    3. a bit weird, not quite sure I get this model? why aren’t you just employing the teachers?
    4. if you were doing 100 engineers and subbed 5 management that would be fine, but it’s got to be [ahem] more than a token amount, think we’ve got to assume that’s at least the majority when we’re talking volumes?

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.