Since the general election, debates on the future of post-16 education have focused on the growth and skills levy, the review of level 3 qualifications and the creation of Skills England.
But there’s another issue, big on the horizon: a population bulge in those reaching the age of 16.
The number of 16- and 17-year-olds in England will grow by 110,000 by 2028. Without action, AELP’s Local and Regional Partner Networks are already warning us that more young people will head into a clogged and under-funded system at a time when we already have 900,000 NEETs.
A negative experience at a young and formative age has a profoundly damaging impact that is hard to fix. Making sure there is provision for this cohort now will pay dividends for the next 60 years.
The chancellor allocated £300 million for ‘further education’ in the budget. We understand this funding may well be for 16-19 provision, so it appears government is aware of the problem.
But how this money is spent is as important as how much, particularly as this is a temporary five-year bulge, not a permanent increase.
The risk is that building new premises to serve the population bulge will create expensive white elephants (once that bulge recedes) while diverting resources from delivery for tens of thousands of young people.
But there is another way. A model is emerging that proves that you do not need to build additional physical capacity to deliver additional quality provision.
Independent training providers such as SCL, Access, Learning Curve and Juniper Training are stepping into these rapidly emerging gaps in provision by utilising existing space and responding rapidly to local need.
As they don’t need to build, they can do this quickly and without access to capital funding. Scarce funding goes on learning and engagement rather than bricks and mortar.
It appears government is aware of the problem
For example, in Leeds, an extra £3.5 million has been allocated to support specific, targeted hot-spots where colleges have run out of room and where more flexible provision is needed. Juniper Training, one of the ITPs helping to fill the gap, took just two months to go from initial exploration with Leeds City Council to starting their first cohort.
“We are not tied to a campus-first way of thinking,” explains Juniper MD, Lesley Holland. “We are used to taking on and managing commercial leases of premises from which we deliver.”
Stuart Allen Chief Education Officer of SCL adds: “We think differently and integrate ‘hooks’ in our programmes such as sport, creative arts and other enrichment activities that enthuse and engage young people where traditional ways of learning sometimes do not work.”
Colleges point out that there is a financial logic that pushes them to build provision around a settled status of full classrooms, on-campus and for learners on longer study programmes where there is a good chance of completion.
ITPs, on the other hand, with access to immediate working capital, expertise in commercial property and rapid decision-making cycles (together with the longer-term incentives to develop and prove new models of provision) are better-equipped to respond to the bulge.
In addition, this flexibility means they can address the needs of the most disadvantaged students on shorter, more intensive programmes.
There is a quadruple win here: the Department for Education avoids funding capital projects that take time to come to fruition and could quickly become obsolete; tens of thousands of 16-19 year olds, often the most vulnerable, get the provision they need; local business premises are used; and colleges can focus on their existing provision.
And when the bulge is over, it is ITPs who will be responsible for scaling back their provision, not government.
To make this happen, government needs to make some rapid administrative changes to the rules, especially around the way growth caps are applied. At the moment, that restriction alone is directly stopping thousands of disadvantaged learners getting vital support – ironic given the incoming youth guarantee.
The 16-19 bulge is a looming, major challenge. But we have a proven way of meeting it, as the Leeds example shows. We now need government to remove the barriers that prevent ITPs from spinning up the provision the country so desperately needs.
AELP and our members stand ready to help make this happen.
Your thoughts