PROCEED with caution is the message to the Scottish Executive on the vexed issue of individual learning accounts (ILAs).
The initiative, regarded as a key part of the lifelong learning agenda, was introduced two years ago as a means of funding continuous learning. But it was closed down across the UK amid fears of fraudulent claims by learning providers and “scope for abuse”.
A consultants’ report commissioned by the Executive identifies “a number of good and innovative features” in the scheme and advises ministers to consider their options and avoid being pushed into action.
The report gives ILAs the amber light and urges the Executive to consult widely before switching to green again. Ministers have already decided to relaunch learning accounts next year, with pound;6.5 million earmarked in the recent spending review.
The report, which reflects the views of providers and account holders, reaches the unsurprising conclusion that there must be tighter scrutiny of providers and the courses they offer. This should be done through quality checks, inspection visits, student feedback and ensuring that providers are accredited by a national body.
Confusion among employers about their role, particularly with regard to any contributions towards course costs, was another concern. Although “encouragement” to contribute had been a key element in the programme, little attention was paid to how this could take place.
The accounts had proved particularly attractive to the employed and to those who already had some qualification. But they had not won over those without qualifications and “labour market returners”.
The fact that just over half of the holders could have provided their own funding led to suggestions that it would be more cost-effective to focus support in any subsequent programme on particular groups, although there was no consensus among stakeholders or providers on this.
Another inconclusive area was the requirement that individuals should contribute a proportion of the learning costs, currently a minimum of pound;25. The need to cater for those who might find this difficult was countered by the argument that the contribution was “essential to ensure commitment” on the part of the learner.
The report concludes that there are enough good points to build on though care needs to be taken with the design of any subsequent scheme since “any repetition of ‘misuse’ issues would seal the fate of the programme for good”.
