quote HEE facebook linkedin twitter bracketDetail search file-download keyboard-arrow-down keyboard-arrow-right close event-note

You are here

CapitalAHP Fair Share Model for Practice Placements June 2021

This Fair Share model for Allied Health Professions (AHP) practice placements has been developed in collaboration with Health Education England (HEE) (London region) the London and South East Placement Partnership (LSEAPP) and the Placement provider representatives through the Chief AHP network during 2020-2021.

The model was prompted by requests from practice educators, AHP education leads and Chief AHPs to help benchmark their provision of practice learning (and supporting the future workforce) relative to workforce capacity.

The guidance has been developed based on the HEE Non-medical Education Training (NMET) data available for the academic period 2018-2019.  The focus has been on Physiotherapy (PT), Occupational therapy (OT) and Speech and Language therapy (SLT) as these are the disciplines represented in LSEAPP.  The 2018-19 period was used as this represents a period of stability in the placement modelling prior to the Covid-19 pandemic which has disrupted business as usual.

This guidance is intended for local organisations (NHS trusts and Private, Voluntary and Independent) to consider how they support the future AHP workforce through placement provision per FTE, and particularly PT, OT and SLT.   Other disciplines may also find this useful but recognise that there are different arrangements in place.   It is not intended as a guide for distribution of placements across different HEIs as this is managed elsewhere.

Background – other guidance

To develop a fair share model the working group explored other models developed elsewhere including:

NHS education for Scotland (NES) guidance 2011 for AHPs

This model outlined a commitment and how this is calculated with the following key points:

  • there is a nationally agreed allocation system for placements
  • one HEI acting as allocating institution on behalf of the others.
  • uses as proportional method where each board offers a proportion of all the placements weeks needed relative to their share of the Scottish workforce

York and Humberside

All healthcare students

Potential students on placement at any one time

= WTE Registered practitioners x 39* (weeks) x 0.5^

             52 (weeks in year)   

= WTERP x 0.375

*taking into account annual leave, training, sickness

^not practical for mentor to have a student 100% time, but 50% reasonable

Equal allocation formula from HEE North West England Project

  • AHP and Nursing (figures below relate to physiotherapy)
  • Whole time equivalent (WTE) workforce figures across North West (approx. 2600)
  • Calculated % of total WTE practitioners per Trust (e.g. 50 WTE = 2%)
  • Total number of placements required across NW as baseline (approx. 1700)
  • Using % figure of WTE per Trust minimum quota calculated (2% of 1700 = 34.5)
  • Minimum quota equated to 65% of total WTE (physio/student ratio 3:2) 50 staff: 35 students

NHS AHP London workforce

The following data is taken from HEE data for AHP qualified staff (FTE) in post in the London region only.

NHS AHP workforce FTE


2015: 3,098

2019: 3,326

2015 (prediction - do nothing): 3,852

Occupational Therapy

2015: 2,341

2019: 2,469

2015 (prediction - do nothing): 2,622

Speech and Language Therapy

2015: 1,512

2019: 1,517

2015 (prediction - do nothing): 1,444

Student numbers

The following data is taken from all London region HEI student target entry numbers in 2018-19 for all pre-registration programmes (BSc and MSc).   In this modeling, this number is used as a proxy for numbers in each year of the programme and to calculate the overall number of students per year group requiring placements (column A below).

The number of weeks of placement per year (column B) is calculated to accommodate the different arrangements at each HEI.  For instance, some HEIs have placements across all years, while others may only have in penultimate and final year (e.g. HEI X – year 2 - 15 weeks, year 3 – 15 weeks, HEI Y – year 1 – 6 weeks, year 2 – 8 weeks, year 3 - 16 weeks).  The requirement in each case is 30 weeks/yr.   Again, this is a proxy and based on an assumption that 35-hour week x 30 weeks = 1050 hours.


Student numbers per AHP profession and number placement weeks required 2018 - 2019


Number of students per year group requiring placements: 592

Number of weeks of placement (approx 30/yr): 17,760

Number placements per HEI: 5-6

Total number placements = A x (ave) C: 3,256

Occupational Therapy2

Number of students per year group requiring placements: 358

Number of weeks of placement (approx 30/yr): 10,740

Number placements per HEI: 4-6

Total number placements = A x (ave) C: 1,1611

Speech and Language Therapy3

Number of students per year group requiring placements: 140

Number of weeks of placement (approx 30/yr): 4,200

Number placements per HEI: 4-5

Total number placements = A x (ave) C: 560

HEIs per profession in 2018-19 include: 1 Brunel University of London, Canterbury Christ Church University, University of Essex, University of Hertfordshire, Kings College London, London South Bank University, St George’s University of London, St Mary’s University, University of East London.  2Brunel University of London, Canterbury Christ Church University, London South Bank University, Oxford Brookes University, St George’s University of London. 3 City University London, University College London

Therefore, to meet the capacity demands in 2018-19 with the number of FTE for each profession:

Calculations of Number of weeks / staff FTE


Staff FTE: 3,326

Number of weeks of placement (approx 30/yr): 17,760

Weeks/FTE: 5.34

Occupational Therapy

Staff FTE: 2,469

Number of weeks of placement (approx 30/yr): 10,740

Weeks/FTE: 4.35

Speech and Language Therapy

Staff FTE: 1,517

Number of weeks of placement (approx 30/yr): 4,200

Weeks/FTE: 2.77

LSEAPP principles as a guide for placement providers (Chief AHP, AHP education lead, Head of Therapies)


The following guidance is meant to be at a strategic level within organisations so at Chief AHP, AHP education lead, Head of therapies or equivalent to plan supporting the future workforce /placement capacity by considering this at an organisation / service or team level rather than at an individual level.


It is also designed to more closely reflect potential income from the NMET tariff and indicated in the HEE Letter - Non-Medical Education Training Tariffs payments - 11-03-21 = £2.52/hr (+MFF). 


Therefore, based on previous examples and to meet the needs for future workforce/ capacity the following fair share formula is recommended per year (NB this is slightly higher than above calculations to anticipate future growth): 

Fair Share = 7 weeks placement (full time) / FTE (qualified staff)


How might this formula be used?

If a trust/organisation has 50 FTE Occupational Therapy staff (excluding vacancy etc.), then the organisation would need to consider accommodating students for 7 weeks/FTE = 350 weeks of student placement.  

What are the implications for income?  

This money could be used to further support workforce development.  Using the same example above. If the organisation with 50FTE provided 350 weeks of placement at 35 hours/week for a number of students, then this would translate into

=   350 weeks * 35 hours *£2.52 = £30,870 annual NMET return

(NB this figure does not include MFF so should be taken as approximate)                      

Should some staff (eg Band 6 and 7) have more responsibility for student learning?

This might be inevitable, but the formula includes qualified staff across all Bands as this helps to consider the future workforce as an organisation/ whole team responsibility and not restricted to some staff.

Is the formula relevant only in NHS providers?

No, it is not restricted to NHS.  We would encourage other includes Private, Voluntary, and Independent providers to consider applying the principles.

Is this relevant for international students?

International students are not included in the NMET tariff and local arrangements are in place for international students and should be discussed with each HEI.