Train to Gain’s value for money questioned Wednesday, July 22, 2009 - 13:35

A report published on 21 July 2009 by the NAO - Train to Gain: Developing the skills of the workforce - suggests that the government's £1.47 billion flagship scheme to change the culture of learning at work is not providing value for money.

Amyas Morse, Head of the NAO, said:

"Train to Gain is achieving growth in training that employers value, but taxpayers have a right to expect that much more than half of the public funding should result in training that would not otherwise have occurred. Inconsistent management contributed to a slow start to the programme, followed by rapid growth and now the risk of demand exceeding budgets. We also need to see evidence that money is directed more to areas of greatest need, with training providers who do the best job for their learners and on bringing the whole range of business benefits to employers."

The report states that by March 2009, Train to Gain had supported employer-focused training for over one million learners. But while achieving undoubted benefits for employers, the NAO concluded that over its full lifetime the programme has not provided good value for money.

This, it says, is because "unrealistically ambitious initial targets and inconsistent implementation reduced the efficiency of the programme". Take up was much lower than expected at first, leading to under spending and the need for changes in eligibility to increase learner numbers. "The now strong demand for training needs to be better managed, to make the programme sustainable while avoiding overspending ... Achieving long term impacts on business performance will partly depend on increasing employers' support and investment in training."

The NAO recognises that learners have benefited from improved work skills at a basic level, and surveys of employers have provided evidence of improved business performance from the training. For many of the 554,100 learners who achieved a qualification it was their first qualification, giving them a boost in self-confidence as well as new employment skills.

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), said:

"We disagree that Train to Gain has not delivered good value for money, particularly when the majority of employers report that [it] has improved productivity."

Alastair Thomson, NIACE's Principal Advocacy Officer said:

"Since eligibility for Train to Gain was opened up, the programme has started to reach impressive numbers of learners through the workplace but the National Audit Office is right to question whether the price has been too high.

NIACE's main concern is the NAO's finding that half of the employers using Train to Gain would have arranged the same or similar training in the absence of the programme. The Government needs to do much more to incentivise employers to put their hands into their own pockets to train their workforce. Without this a culture of private investment in learning won't get any closer.

The price of Train to Gain's achievement has been paid by individual adult learners who are seeing fewer affordable classes that they can choose for themselves. This hits learners outside the labour market who can't access Train to Gain, workers whose employers are resistant to training and anyone whose learning aspirations don't match those their boss has for them."