Agenda item

This report provides an update on the work being undertaken locally to provide Disabled residents access to inclusive apprenticeships. The paper also highlights the current scale of opportunities on offer through local businesses and considers how workforce remodelling of apprenticeships can support inclusivity.

7.1           Councillor Richardson welcomed H&F officers Oliur Rahman, Tom Perrigo from The Economy department, Jo Baty from Adult Social Care and Helen Green from Children’s Services.  Additional guests and contributors included Sharon Probets from Imperial, Sue Jenkins from West London College, and Clare Caccavone and Charlotte Warner, from Ambitious about autism.

7.2           Oliur Rahman provided highlights from the report which included businesses reporting a skills shortage exacerbated by the impact of Covid-19.  This was a good opportunity to engage with employers to identify and access employment opportunities for an untapped talent pool of disabled residents.  Current local data about apprenticeship take up indicated that 60 disabled residents had begun an apprenticeship.  There were approximately 8400 employed disabled residents in H&F in the borough.  The borough as an employer was one of only three London boroughs that offered an inclusive apprenticeship and there was an intention to increase the number of available opportunities.  Nationally, there were 116 inclusive apprenticeships available and as of March 2022, 11 of these were available with employers that were registered as disability confident. 

7.3           The council intended to work with 130 employers locally and tap into established networks to grow opportunities.  Adjustment was key but there were opportunities following the pandemic with significant movement in the employment market reflecting people’s choices and changes in direction. The council was also reviewing the varied support that was available through partners and how resources could be allocated to ensure that support provided through coproduction was available for disabled residents.

7.4           Sue Jenkins commented on inclusive apprenticeship and how the lack of GCSE maths and English qualifications prevented many from being eligible in accessing the apprenticeships.  The West London College had worked with four inclusive apprenticeships and about 100 people had progressed into full time employment. This had taken significant amount of effort and commitment which extended beyond making reasonable adjustments. Lobbying for an adjustment to the structure was necessary to maximise opportunities and remove barriers which would allow people to achieve vocational standards.

7.5           Clare Caccavone agreed that there were many who were autistic and did not regard themselves as disabled, but this was a long-term health condition.  Many were also unaware that they fell within the category of protected characteristics rights offered within the Equalities Act 2010.  Many young people were traumatised by the requirement to achieve the minimum standard academic qualification which was a contradictory gateway and barrier.  It was suggested that given the skills gap, sustainable work opportunities would be better delivered by changing the way in which job applications and interviews were structured, using e.g., job trial periods.  Referencing a Manchester based provider, Clare Caccavone explained that the GCSE qualification requirement had been removed with adaptations to the process to support autistic apprenticeship applicants. Depending on the development of robust evidence-based data, the aim was to replicate this approach nationally, working with councils and providers, and Ambitious about Autism welcomed the opportunity to work with H&F on this.

7.6           Councillor Richardson asked how inclusive apprenticeships could be coproduced with disabled residents, particularly given the reformation of Work Zone in H&F.  Councillor Lloyd-Harris referenced the gender statistics in the report and enquired about the reasons why there were more females than males accessing both intermediate and advanced apprenticeships, and why the data in some categories appeared similar. 

7.7           Oliur Rahman supported the need to lobby for a change through both the employer and provider engagement networks, acknowledging that the entry requirements issue was a huge challenge, as referenced in the report.  He agreed that limiting progression at level two was an unacceptable barrier. He also endorsed the suggestion to change recruitment and interview processes and that this had been raised with the local employer network. Referring to the similarity of the data, a possible explanation was that data had been rounded up to the nearest 10 or 20, and why there appeared to be more females than male apprentices. The opportunity to meet with Ambitious about Autism to discuss how H&F autistic residents could be better supported was welcomed.

7.8           Sharon Probets concurred with points made, highlighting the difficulties of meeting the level two qualification in English and maths and that this had presented a significant barrier for NHS staff who had been unable to complete the qualification component of the standard.  It was suggested that a reasonable adjustment would be disconnect maths and English from the qualification component of an inclusive apprenticeship. This would have risky financial implications for providers. 

7.9           Kevin Croft welcomed an opportunity to follow up with Clare Caccavone about job trials, building on the discussion in the previous item about supporting staff in their career development.  He suggested that a campaign could be developed to address this with providers.

7.10        Roy Margolis commended Oliur Rahman and colleagues on the development of this excellent work.  Based in the Careers and Enterprise Company and an aim of the organisation was to support the amplification of technical routes in schools, which meant promoting apprenticeships. He asked if there were any strategies being employed to make career advisors in schools and colleges aware of inclusive apprenticeships. Tom Perrigo referred to Clare Caccavone’s view on the culture of retaking exams and questioning whether a young person had a disability in a job centre environment and agreed that this was traumatising for many young people. Reflecting on this and other similar points made, there was a disconnect between the need to evidence level 2 qualifications and what training providers received funding for. Expanding on this, he referred to green volunteering and skills which were much sought after by innovative green technology firms which would value and invest significantly in nurturing creative, vocational talent, and skills.

7.11        A query was submitted on behalf of Councillor Umeh regarding two residents who had been in a 6-month Kickstart programme but were unable to access any other opportunities.  Oliur Rahman responded that Work Zone had helped create many vacancies through Kickstart and the intention was to continue to support residents that had completed the programme in identifying other opportunities.  He agreed to follow up with Councillor Umeh after the meeting.

ACTION: Further information to be provided by Councillor Umeh to

The Economy Department officers

7.12        Councillor Richardson commended officers for their work and support of inclusive apprenticeships and welcomed the integration of this within the council’s industrial strategy.   Much progress had been made since this area had first been discussed by the PAC and Councillor Richardson thanked officers for supporting the scrutiny efforts of the committee.

RESOLVED

That the report was noted.