Exam board faces £50,000 Ofqual fine for handling of qualifications fraud case

An awarding organisation is facing a fine of £50,000 over its handling of a high-profile case of alleged qualifications fraud in 2015.

The notice to impose a monetary penalty on Industry Qualifications, published today, is only the third such fine issued by Ofqual.

It stated: “Ofqual considers that IQ breached the conditions in relation to its approval and management of a college, the investigation of suspected malpractice at the college and the actions it took in respect of persons alleged to have been concerned in such malpractice.”

IQ confirmed the provider in question is Ashley Commerce College, in Ilford, which was subject to a BBC investigation also covered by FE Week.

We reported in May 2015 that IQ had to revoke 251 level two and three door-supervision and CCTV surveillance qualifications it certificated, after the college was exposed for allegedly allowing students to gain the qualifications illegally.

Ofqual’s report said that IQ had failed to “identify the potential for conflicts of interest to arise” or to manage any such conflicts when it approved the college to deliver its qualifications.

The head of the college was also an assessor and moderator for IQ qualifications and had a financial interest in the provider “such that it was in his interest for learners to pass assessments”, the report said.

The awarding organisation’s monitoring of the college was deemed “defective” as IQ had “failed to recognise” that the proportion of learner work reviewed by its external verifier was “substantially less” than was required by IQ’s policy, the report said.

IQ’s investigation into the incident was also branded “defective”.

The exams regulator said the awarding organisation could not produce records of “its investigative methodology”, “decisions it made during the investigation” nor of “the findings it made during or following the investigation”.

IQ’s response to allegations made by the head of the college was “flawed”, Ofqual said.

A “draft statement” which was “said to have been prepared by the head of the college” alleged that “241 learners had been complicit in malpractice”.

But Ofqual said that IQ “had not adequately investigated whether or not the allegations made in the (draft) statement were true” nor had it “notified the learners named in the (draft) statement that an allegation of malpractice had been made against them”.

Furthermore, the report said a signed version of the head’s statement was only available in December 2015 – eight months after IQ wrote to the affected learners.

The appeals process put in place by IQ was also deemed to be “flawed”, with a “disproportionately high” burden of proof.

The exams regulator initially set its intended fine at £60,000, having taken into account “the fact that IQ has commenced a comprehensive review its processes and procedures to secure ongoing compliance, and the desirability of allowing IQ to commit resources to that review”.

But this was subsequently reduced to £50,000, as it judged the initial amount “too high in view of the statutory maximum penalty in this case”.

In a statement, IQ said that “with hindsight, its investigation at Ashley Commerce College could have been more extensive” and that it “accepts that its management of appeals fell short of its own policy”.

But it refuted the other points raised by Ofqual, and hit out at the exams regulator for its refusal to meet with representatives of IQ during its investigation.

Raymond Clarke, IQ chief executive, said the notice was “not fair and will be challenged”.

Mr Clarke said: “It is a matter of significant concern that it has taken 22 months for Ofqual to reach this determination, a period during which Ofqual has steadfastly refused to meet with IQ, or allow any direct oral representation to those casting judgement on our actions and motives”.

The statement also alleged that Ofqual’s analysis was “flawed” and “fails to address significant weaknesses in policy and operation of the regulator”.

It comes after City and Guilds was fined £38,000 in August 2016 for the late issuing of more than 22,000 results, and Pearson was charged £85,000 in November 2016 for widespread certification failures.

A final decision on imposing the fine will be made by Ofqual on or after March 20, today’s report said.

IQ has repeatedly called – since the Ashley Commerce College scandal broke – for the Department for Education and the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy to work with Ofqual to establish a panel to explore the issue.

This is especially the case for industries that “require individuals to have specified qualifications to obtain a license to work”.

Leaked briefing document reveals £170 million Institutes of Technology could be with ‘wholly new’ institutions

New Institutes of Technology could be based at “wholly new” institutions, not just existing FE providers, a Department for Education briefing document leaked to FE Week has revealed.

In January, the release of a green paper called ‘Building Our Industrial Strategy’, confirmed that £170 million of capital funding would be spent on IoTs.

At the time the DfE indicated that they would be based at existing providers.

The latest document, seen by FE Week, goes into far more detail about the “next steps” for IoTs, including confirmation that they could be established as “a wholly new institution”.

The DfE document, which has not been made public yet, states that the delivery model will not be “one size fits all” because of the “nationwide variance in skills needs and provision”.

Instead, bidders looking to establish an IoT will be able to “adopt models best suited to their local needs”.

Different delivery and governance models provided include “extending technical education provision from within an existing high-performing college”, “delivery through partnerships of FE and HE”, or “a group of employers partnering with an education provider to create an IoT”.

And a further option would be to establish “a wholly new institution where there is evidence that existing providers cannot meet higher level STEM skills needs”.

The government first announced plans for the institutes in July 2015, then again through its Post-16 Skills Plan in July 2016.

Until now it has also been unclear whether independent training providers would be able to get involved with setting up new IoTs, through applying for the £170 million which will come as capital funding across the next three years to 2019/20.

However, this latest update from the DfE indicates that IoT bids “can be submitted by the lead partner of a consortium, who could be either an FE college, higher education institution, private training provider or employer consortia representing more than one employer; or by the local enterprise partnership or combined authority.

The document does state that the DfE expects “the majority of proposals to emerge from the area review process which has stimulated many local areas to consider how an IoT could best be established to meet their specific needs”.

It adds: “In most cases, these are based on a FE College working collaboratively and innovatively across further and higher education and industry usually as part of a consortium.”

Proposals, it says, should be supported “in most cases” by an FE college, “unless there is robust evidence that this is not appropriate for the local area”.

Backing from the local economic partnership or combined authority and local employers identified as potential “anchor partners” is required as well.

The paper warns bidders: “We would not expect to see competing bids which duplicate provision in an area and we would expect the requirement that bids are supported by the LEP or Combined Authority to ensure this does not happen.”

Ofsted watch: FE college overcomes ‘inadequate’ period

An FE college has climbed its way out of being ‘inadequate’ while an adult and community learning provider and a private provider boosted their provision upwards to ‘good’ in this week’s Ofsted reports.

City College Coventry was rated ‘requires improvement’ in a report published Wednesday (February 22) following an ‘inadequate’ grade in November 2015.

While the 3,500-learner college still has areas to improve, inspectors said its current interim principal, Dr Elaine McMahon, who joined the college shortly after the previous inspection has been “successful in bringing about improvement across the college”.

However, too few learners on classroom-based programmes are successful in developing “appropriate levels of skill in English and mathematics or achieve their qualifications in these subjects,” the report said.

And while safeguarding at the college was deemed “effective”, inspectors noted that too few learners have a “well-developed understanding of life in modern Britain and how to keep safe from the dangers of radicalisation and extremism”.

Meanwhile, Brighton-based adult and community learning provider Friends Centre rose from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ in a report published on Tuesday (February 21).

Inspectors said that college leaders had “taken very successful action to raise achievement rates” with most learners now achieving their qualification or individual learning goals.

The 1,000-learner provider has also built “excellent partnerships” and ensure that courses “align well” to its city’s needs while providing learners with “good advice, guidance, support and progression routes”.

Another adult and community learning provider, was found to have made “significant” progress in areas including improvement in teaching, learning and assessment including English, maths and English for speakers of other languages courses, in a monitoring visit report published February 20.

It was the third such visit to the provider after it was rated inadequate following an inspection in November 2015.

Gateway sixth form college in Leicester had its first monitoring visit on February 22 since its ‘inadequate’ rating in November 2016.

Senior managers at the sixth form have worked with inspectors to create a post-inspection action plan, based on the improvement actions identified in the previous inspection report.

Bishop Burton College meanwhile retained its ‘good’ rating in a report published February 22.

In order to reach ‘outstanding’, inspectors said teachers should “plan additional activities and offer extra qualifications to their most able learners on study programmes to enable them to achieve high grades”.

They also need to extend apprentices’ skills “beyond the expectations for competence set out in the apprenticeship qualification frameworks”.

It was bad news for Jancett Childcare & Jace Training Ltd who slumped from ‘good’ to ‘requires improvement’.

Leaders at the 620-learner private training provider, which has five training centres in London, Surrey and Kent, have not “followed up sufficiently the majority of the recommendations from the previous inspection”, inspectors said.

They found too few apprentices completing their qualifications “within the time planned”, and the achievements of learners on 16 to 19 study programmes, including English and mathematics, are “low”.

Anderson Stockley Accredited Training Ltd however went in the opposite direction and achieved a ‘good’ grade this week following a ‘requires improvement’ rating in March 2015.

Inspectors said the quality of teaching, learning and assessment and outcomes for apprentices have improved since its last inspection, and a “more rigorous” approach to observations of teaching, learning and assessment has “been introduced that is linked clearly to continuous professional development and effective action planning to ensure improvement”.

Also holding on to a grade two this week following a short inspection were independent training provider Outsource Vocational Learning Limited Intec and St Brendan’s Sixth Form College.

No employer provider or other FE and skills provider inspection reports were published this week.

 

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
City College Coventry 24/01/2017 22/02/2017 3 4
Bishop Burton College 17/01/2017 22/02/2017 2 2

 

Sixth Form Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Gateway Sixth Form College 11/01/2017 22/02/2017 M M

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
JANCETT CHILDCARE & JACE TRAINING LIMITED 17/01/2017 21/02/2017 3 2
Anderson Stockley Accredited Training Ltd 24/01/2017 22/02/2017 2 3

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Friends Centre 23/01/2017 21/02/2017 2 3
Wakefield Metropolitan District Council 25/01/2017 20/02/2017 M M

 

Short inspections (remains grade 2) Inspected Published
St Brendan’s Sixth Form College 17/02/2017 21/02/2017
Outsource Vocational Learning Limited 24/01/2017 21/02/2017

Early years educators shaken by sudden trailblazer shutdown

The government has shut down the trailblazer group for early years educator apprenticeships, in a move described by sector insiders as “very disappointing”.

The employer-led Early Years Apprenticeship trailblazer group was disbanded by the Department for Education last week, due to what a spokesperson described as “slow progress” in developing its apprenticeship standard. FE Week understands it is the first of its kind to be shut down by the DfE.

“Given the very slow progress of this particular trailblazer, the decision has been taken to terminate its work on this apprenticeship standard,” they said.

“We remain committed to employers developing apprenticeship standards for use in the early years sector.”

The early years sector has been stuck in limbo for a while now, as it waits for the government to respond to a consultation on the literacy and numeracy qualification requirements to enter level three courses, which was launched at the start of November.

It is extremely disappointing that the Early Years Apprenticeship trailblazer group has been asked to stand down

Sector representatives want the current requirements – at least a C in both GCSE maths and English – to be extended to allow functional skills qualifications to count as a valid alternative, as they are in all other apprenticeships.

Caroline Dinenage, the secretary of state for women, equalities and early years, is understood to have pushed the schools minister Nick Gibb to accept the case for a change in policy, but the decision, which was originally expected before Christmas, has been delayed by Number 10.

Julie Hyde, associate director of CACHE, a sector specialist in health, care and education, said: “It is extremely disappointing that the Early Years Apprenticeship trailblazer group has been asked to stand down, especially at this point in time.”

However, she pointed to “the strength of support from the sector”, and said that a decision from the government to add functional skills as an alternative was still “anticipated” and would “enable the current proposed apprenticeship standard to be accepted”.

She continued: “The group has worked hard to develop the apprenticeship standard employers require and that reflects the needs of the early years workforce.”

Stella Ziolkowski, director of quality and workforce development at the National Day Nurseries Association, concurred, saying that it was “very disappointing” to lose the “knowledge and expertise” of the trailblazer group, which was one of the first to be set up in March 2014.

“We feel very let down,” she confirmed, adding that the early years sector has relied on apprentices because of its struggles with high turnover resulting from low pay.

We feel very let down

She said: “Early years employers have clearly told us that GCSE requirements should not be the only standard used to progress to level three. This simply is not working.

“It’s clear the GCSE policy has had a massively negative impact on recruitment and retention within nurseries.”

FE Week has repeatedly asked the DfE when a response to the consultation would finally be published.

“Our public consultation on the GCSE requirement for level three early years educator roles received over 4,000 responses,” a spokesperson said.

“We will respond to this, and publish our workforce strategy, shortly.”

Ethnic minority target for apprenticeship diversity group

The government launched the Apprenticeship Diversity Champions Network this week. One of its key aims will be to increase the proportion of apprentices from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities by 20 per cent. FE Week’s Alix Robertson went along to the opening event to find out more.

A new employers’ network designed to promote diversity in apprenticeships was launched this week, and it’s put good practice and dispelling myths at the top of its list of priorities.

The Apprenticeship Diversity Champions Network is chaired by Nus Ghani, MP for Wealden, and is made up of 23 employers, including Rolls Royce, the BBC and BAE Systems, alongside other small- and medium-sized employers.

We have to make parents understand that this is a solid step to their child not only learning but earning

One major focus for the new group will be to help the government achieve its commitment to “increase the proportion of apprenticeship starts by people from BAME backgrounds by 20 per cent by 2020”, which was first spelled out in a document called ‘English Apprenticeships: Our 2020 Vision’, published last December.

FE Week asked the Department for Education to put this target into context ahead of the launch event, at Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in London.

A spokesperson said that the aim would be to increase the proportion of BAME starts from just under 10 per cent at present to 11.9 per cent (which amounts to a 20 per cent increase). The DfE would not confirm where the original 10 per cent figure was taken from.

According to our analysis of the latest available statistics, the problem of BAME underrepresentation in apprenticeships appears to lie more in recruitment than in attracting candidates.

For example, while 38 per cent of the applications for apprenticeships in 2015/16 were from individuals not classed as ‘white British’, they made up just 17.2 per cent of the apprentices taken on for the same year.

We put this to the apprenticeships and skills minister Robert Halfon at the launch, to find out what he and the network were going to do to drive change.

Halfon with Nusrat Ghani, chair of the Apprenticeship Diversity Network

“The ‘Get in Go Far’ apprenticeships promotion campaign is hugely important because it is being shown on social media, on TV, on radio, and in cinemas and it is not just about encouraging people to do apprenticeships, but encouraging employers in terms of recruitment,” he said.

“The diversity network is something very serious because when you have someone like Nus as the ambassador, and you see companies like Balfour Beatty or Rolls Royce successfully employing significant numbers of BAME individuals, then the culture will change.”

He also claimed that schools had to share some of the blame for underrepresentation from BAME groups, saying: “We’ll only achieve this if schools do a lot more to encourage apprenticeships and skills and at the moment they do not.”

Ms Ghani told FE Week that the effort was “also about convincing the parents”.

She added: “We have to make parents understand that this is a solid step to their child not only learning but earning and opening up their opportunities and their career going forward.”

This particular problem was picked out by Mr Halfon during his speech at the launch.

“Sometimes I meet families from different black and minority ethnic backgrounds and they say to me that they just want their kids to go to university, because that is seen as the prestigious route.”

Cultural preconceptions were also raised in speeches made by apprentices at the event.

One of them, Chris Achiampong, a degree-level apprentice with IBM, told his story of growing up on a council estate and being signed by Arsenal football team – but having to give up his dream after a bad injury.

When I first said to my mum that I wasn’t going to university … her heart nearly exploded, she was going crazy

He has subsequently become one of the faces of ‘Get In Go Far’.

“I’m from a Ghanian household,” he said. “My mum came to the UK for a better life and lived in what you would call deprived circumstances. She was a single parent and she believed in the power of education and academic achievement.”

Chris explained that after leaving football he had won a place at Loughborough University to study economics, but declined it in favour of an apprenticeship.

“When I first said to my mum that I wasn’t going to university … her heart nearly exploded, she was going crazy,” he said.

However, he added: “I took her into the offices and she saw everyone else in their suits and she said ‘ok, I can see my boy here’. Now she’s telling all her friends.”

People with disabilities and women also key

The work of the new Apprenticeship Diversity Champions Network is not only focused on improving BAME representation – it will also aim to boost the number of female apprentices and those with disabilities.

Mr Halfon spoke passionately to FE Week about how he hopes the network will widen access to apprenticeships for people with disabilities, by tackling simple day-to-day challenges as well as addressing the bigger picture.

Mr Halfon himself was born with mild cerebral palsy and developed osteoarthritis partly due to undergoing many operations to treat it.

He gave an example of meeting with the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association.

“One of the problems they have is with apprentices not being able to get there because the bus is so troublesome,” he said.

Something as simple as talking buses can help people who have eyesight difficulties to cope with the logistics

“People think of macro government initiatives, but something as simple as talking buses can help people who have eyesight difficulties to cope with the logistics.”

He also highlighted the importance of sharing positive examples, saying: “I very much want ‘Get In Go Far’ to feature a disabled person, and that doesn’t just mean the stereotype of a disabled person in a wheelchair, I want people with autism to have access to apprenticeship too and others.”

The network will also look at the lack of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

“Jaguar Land Rover is working with Warwick College, and setting a great example with I think around 20 per cent of its apprentices being women. If they can do it, why can’t everybody else?” asked Mr Halfon.

“Again, unfortunately this goes right back – not just to secondary school, but primary school. A huge cultural shift is required.”

Manchester merger scrapped by FE Commissioner

One of just two mergers recommended in the troubled Manchester area review has been scrapped following intervention by the FE commissioner, FE Week understands.

Plans to merge Tameside, Oldham and Stockport colleges have been called off after the FE commissioner Richard Atkins visited at least one of them – forcing them back to the drawing board.

The proposal was made at the end of a nine-month process riven by deep tensions between the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and the colleges involved.

Both Oldham and Tameside colleges have told FE Week that the merger is “not going ahead”.

“All three colleges are now considering alternative options”, a spokesperson for Oldham College added.

Oldham received a financial notice of concern from the Skills Funding Agency in November, triggering intervention from Mr Atkins and his team.

FE Week understands that the commissioner made a number of recommendations, including changes to its merger plans, although these have not yet been published.

A formal structure would not achieve our longer-term aims

Meanwhile, Stockport College has already found an alternative merger partner, and is in talks with nearby Trafford College.

Trafford was due to have joined the LTE Group alongside Manchester College, but this plan has now also fallen off the table.

In an email dated February 3 and seen by FE Week, Trafford’s principal Lesley Davies told staff that the merger is expected to go through at the end of December and that she will lead the merged college.

Trafford’s chair Graham Luccock confirmed that the college was in “early discussions” with Stockport over a possible merger

He said the college had reviewed “possible options in detail” with the LTE Group but had “decided that a formal structure would not achieve our longer-term aims”.

But he added: “We fully support the aims for the Manchester area-based review”.

The new merger plan comes after Stockport was rated ‘inadequate’ in an Ofsted report published in November.

It’s not known whether the report triggered a visit from Mr Atkins’ team, as the college had previously been subject to intervention from the FE commissioner.

The college was placed in administered status in December 2013 following a visit from Mr Atkins’ predecessor Sir David Collins, and it’s unclear if this was ever lifted. FE Week asked Stockport College for a response, but was told that the only person who could comment was its principal Simon Andrews, who was out of the country.

The college’s deputy principal was not fully briefed on matters relating to the college’s merger plans, and the college chair was unavailable, a spokesperson said.

As previously reported by FE Week, the Greater Manchester area review has been one of the most problematic of the reviews of post-16 education and training.

It began in September 2015 but didn’t come to an end until June 2016 – making it the longest of the reviews so far – and caused serious ructions between the colleges and the GMCA, which chaired the process. Despite 10 general FE colleges and 11 sixth form colleges taking part, it ended with just two proposed mergers involving five colleges.

In a statement seen by FE Week in June, the GMCA said it “remains to be convinced” that the proposed outcomes would meet the skills need for Manchester.

The final report into the Greater Manchester review, published in November, said that the three-way Stockport, Oldham and Tameside merger would create a “new post-16 institution which focuses on progression to high quality technical education and training”.

But it acknowledged that “Stockport College is financially weak, and all three colleges were graded ‘requires improvement’ in their most recent Ofsted inspection”.

A spokesperson for the Department for Education would not be drawn on whether Mr Atkins recommended that the colleges change their merger plans, saying: “The FE commissioner is working with Oldham College and stakeholders in the area.”

Theresa Grant, Trafford Council’s chief executive, who chaired the Greater Manchester area review on behalf on the GMCA, declined to comment.

Rule change could price assessors out of running apprenticeship exams

It might not be financially viable for awarding bodies to run end-point assessment exams, after it emerged that they will be forced to base their costs on deals negotiated with employers without their say-so.

New rules coming into force in May will set the cost of final apprenticeship exams at a fifth of the overall training costs agreed between an employer and a training provider – moving away from previous guidelines which set the charge at no more than 20 per cent of the funding-band maximum for that standard.

Assessors fear that this means they will lose money if employers drive hard bargains on deals with providers.

A draft copy of the handbook for apprentice assessment organisations, seen by FE Week, makes it clear that the change is designed to drive down overall costs.

It says: “The published rules confirm that the 20 per cent is of the total agreed price, not 20 per cent of the funding-band maximum.

“We agreed this because if the agreed price is less than the funding-band maximum, it ensures that the assessment costs are proportionately lower as well.”

Awarding organisations can only provide their services for a fair price

Stephen Wright, the chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, issued a stark warning about the impact of the new rule.

“Like every other organisation, awarding organisations can only provide their services for a fair price,” he said.

“If the percentage of the price between the trainer and the employer is too low to deliver a valid assessment, then awarding organisations will simply not offer end-point assessments, which will undermine the whole system.”

Graham Hasting-Evans, the managing director of NOCN, a major awarding body, said that awarding organisations need control of the exam charges, to make sure they cover their costs and are able to make some profit.

He stressed that apprenticeship exam costs “are driven by the employer group’s specification for testing as set out in the assessment plan, and have nothing at all to do with the training costs”.

Details of what should be included in an apprentice’s final exam are set out by the employer groups developing a standard, and are outlined in the assessment plan.

Exam costs… have nothing to do with the training costs

Some of these can be highly detailed, and therefore have high costs attached to them. For example, the gas network team leader assessment plan estimates the final exam to cost £3,808.

But the standard has a funding-band maximum of £9,000 and the agreed price may be lower than that.

As the assessment costs are not related to the cost of training, the cost of delivering these exams to the specification set out in the assessment plan is unlikely to change regardless of the negotiated price for the apprenticeship.

Mr Hasting-Evans said that one way the government could reduce the cost of apprenticeship exams was to “review all the specifications with a view to improving efficiency and reducing costs”.

FE Week understands that a number of assessment organisations are reporting difficulties in recruiting assessors at payment rates that would allow them to break even.

The government has already started struggling to persuade organisations to sign up to deliver apprenticeship final exams.

By the end of January just over half – 81 out of 159 – standards approved for delivery had at least one assessment organisation in place.

But the proportion of learners on standards without an approved assessment organisation has been dropping rapidly, from 42 per cent in July to 18 per cent in October.

The Department for Education declined to comment either on the rule change or on the concerns raised by Mr Hasting-Evans and Mr Wright.

Colleges welcome new apprenticeship subcontracting rules

Colleges are using the new subcontracting rules to regain some of the ground lost to independent training providers accused of nicking their lunch, FE Week can reveal.

Just a third of apprenticeship funding is currently allocated to colleges – and a significant proportion of that is actually delivered by independent training providers acting as subcontractors.

The problem has become so severe that the former skills minister Nick Boles warned colleges in 2015 that they should not let ITPs “nick your lunch” over apprenticeships.

But new rules coming into force in May mean that lead providers will soon need to “directly deliver” at least some of the training or assessment of each apprenticeship programme – and the government stresses that this must “not be a token amount”.

The change is being seen as “an enormous opportunity to expand apprenticeship provision”, according to Andrew Martin, the deputy principal of West Nottinghamshire College, which has the largest apprenticeship allocation from the Skills Funding Agency of any college.

Why on earth are you letting these guys [ITPs] nick your lunch?

The college subcontracted 82.4 per cent of its apprenticeship provision in 2015/16, which earned it £3.2 million in topslicing fees from provision worth £15.5 million.

However, he added that “new delivery models are already emerging” which “will still require a sub-contracting relationship”.

The rules state that “the volume of training and/or on-programme assessment that you directly deliver for each employer must have some substance and must not be a token amount to satisfy this rule.”

All subcontracting arrangements must now be agreed with the employer before the start of an apprenticeship programme.

As previously reported by FE Week, the proportion of all apprenticeship funding allocated to colleges dropped from 37 per cent in 2015/16 to 32 per cent in 2016/17 – despite Mr Boles’ challenge for colleges to double their share of apprenticeships.

Speaking at the Association of Colleges annual conference in November 2015, he urged colleges to move from delivering one third of all apprenticeships to two thirds.

“As your friend, I have to ask you this, why on earth are you letting these guys [ITPs] nick your lunch?” he asked.

A Freedom of Information request published by the AELP in June 2016 revealed the scale of apprenticeship subcontracting by colleges.

The FOI, based on SFA data, showed that 40 per cent (62,240 out of 157,290) of all apprenticeship starts contracted through FE colleges in 2014/15 were actually delivered by ITPs as subcontractors.

All lead providers are required to publish a list of subcontractors, the value of any subcontract, and the management fees retained they have retained.

A top-slice fee of around 15 to 20 per cent of the contract value is typical for many lead providers – income that is now at risk due to the new rules.

But Teresa Frith, senior skills policy manager at the AoC, said the new rule would not stop colleges from subcontracting.

“What it will do is stop those main and subcontractors who see apprenticeships as an income stream, with little serious thought given to providing quality education and training,” she said.

The needs of the apprentice and the employer must be the priority for both the provider and the subcontractor

“The needs of the apprentice and the employer must be the priority for both the provider and the subcontractor.”

Eastleigh College principal Jan Edrich said she “welcomes the opportunity to deliver some provision directly to apprentices”.

The college subcontracted 80 per cent of its apprenticeship provision in 2015/16.

A spokesperson for Hull College, another major subcontractor, said it was also looking to continue to farm out part of its provision.

The college is “working closely with partners to ensure any future delivery within a partnership model meets the criteria clearly set out by the SFA”, according to its spokesperson.

And a representative for Central College Nottingham said it had “developed a five-year plan going forward to reduce our subcontracting activity and work with partners in other ways”.

FE Week has repeatedly reported on the issue of subcontracting – and the large management fees charged by lead providers – since our first edition in 2011.

One of the worst offenders is Sheffield-based provider Learndirect, which retained almost £20 million in management fees from its 64 subcontractors in 2015/16 – amounting to 36 per cent of its £55.3 million SFA funding.

A Learndirect spokesperson said: “We expect our engagement with subcontractors to reduce as our primary approach is to directly deliver apprenticeship services to these employers.”

 

West Nottinghamshire College: New delivery models

The impact of the new subcontracting rule is likely to be felt most keenly at West Nottinghamshire College.

It has the largest apprenticeship allocation from the SFA of any college – but the majority of its provision is delivered by subcontractors.

According to figures published on its website, the college subcontracted provision worth more than £15 million in 2015/16 – representing 82.4 per cent of its apprenticeship provision.

These deals earned the college £3.2 million in management fees.

Andrew Martin, its deputy principal, acknowledged that the new rules would “reduce the value of subcontracted provision over the course of the 2017/18 year and beyond, as many high-quality training providers who previously subcontracted choose to work directly with employers”.

He pointed out that “new delivery models are already emerging”, and that these would “still require a subcontracting relationship” with “training providers and colleges working in partnership to best meet employers needs for quality apprenticeship delivery”.

He added: “We see the reforms as an enormous opportunity to expand apprenticeship provision through West Nottinghamshire College to improve workforce skills, whether this is through traditional direct delivery or by working together with our outstanding range of training-provider partners.”

 

Eastleigh College: Welcoming the opportunity

Eastleigh College has the second largest adult apprenticeship allocation of any college – but also subcontracts the majority of this provision.

It has an adult apprenticeships allocation of £11.5 million and a 16-to-18 apprenticeships and traineeships allocation of £1.8 million for 2016/17.

Eastleigh’s published subcontracting fees for 2015/16 show that it subcontracted provision worth £15 million, retaining management fees of £3.4 million – although it’s not clear how much of this was for apprenticeships.

A spokesperson told FE Week that 80 per cent of its apprenticeship provision for that year was delivered by subcontractors.

Its principal Jan Edrich said the college “welcomes the opportunity to deliver some provision directly to apprentices within its subcontracting arrangements”.

She indicated that the college still saw subcontracting as part of its apprenticeships programme.

“The college has had a strong partnership relationship with its subcontractors for many, many years and sees the new requirement as a further way of enhancing the way it works with them,” she said.

“The apprenticeship programmes being developed to meet the new requirement bring together the strengths of each partner for the benefit of the learner.”

 

Learndirect: Engagement with subcontractors to fall

Learndirect – which keeps hitting FE Week headlines due to its soaring top-slicing fees – has said it will deliver more apprenticeships itself.

Latest figures published in November showed it retained almost £20 million (around 36 per cent) in subcontracting management fees from total funding worth £55 million.

The provider has now said it expects “our engagement with subcontractors to reduce as our primary approach is to directly deliver apprenticeship services to these employers, but recognise that should the partnership require it we will explore other delivery options, which could include an element of subcontracting”.

 

FE Week launches #SaveOurAdultEducation campaign

FE Week is calling on the government to make three key policy changes to #SaveOurAdultEducation as part of a massive new campaign.

First of all, we want to introduce FE maintenance grant loans for adult learners, which would make retraining possible for many more older people, by helping cover their living costs while studying, something that is already available to mature students in higher education.

The government has currently left the sector in limbo on the issue.

FE Week revealed before Christmas that the Department for Education had indefinitely delayed a decision on whether to extend maintenance loans to FE.

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden, who will be speaking at the campaign’s parliamentary launch on February 27, alongside the minister himself Robert Halfon, said that extending maintenance loans would be a major step “towards achieving parity of esteem and treatment for adult FE learners”.

The campaign also wants the government to consult on a proper adult education strategy, one that does not disappear under the political weight of apprenticeships and devolution.

We need a lifelong adult education strategy

Another speaker at Monday’s launch, Sue Pember, who is a former top skills civil servant and now leads local authority community learning membership body HOLEX, said: “This is a very timely campaign that should be supported by all who care about adult education. We need a lifelong adult education strategy.”

The third and final demand is to write off advanced learning loans debt, which leaves blameless adult learners unable to complete their course if their training provider goes bust.

This problem is particularly timely, after FE Week last month revealed that the Skills Funding Agency was investigating the demise of John Frank Training.

The provider went into liquidation on November 30, leaving no assets, despite recording a profit of £1.3 million in the first half of 2016.

The collapse meant that hundreds of students who had taken out FE loans to train with the London-based provider were left with hefty debts but no course.

One of these, Asim Shaheen, 49, who was unable to complete a level three hospitality and catering course which he had funded with a loan for over £8,000, told FE Week: “It’s all wrong. My loan should be squashed, if I haven’t got any qualifications to show for it. I’ve been left completely in the lurch.”

It’s more important than ever that this issue of adult training is grasped

David Lammy, an MP who was minister for skills in 2007 and 2008, and who has recently called for a return to widespread “night schools”, has thrown his weight behind #SaveOurAdultEducation.

According to government figures, there are around 1.5 million fewer adults aged 19 or over participating in FE, than there were during Mr Lammy’s stint as minister, when the figure stood at 3.75 million.

“It’s more important than ever that this issue of adult training is grasped,” he told FE Week. Reflecting on the loans issue, he added: “We have got to find a way to give adults the funds to train and retrain throughout their working lives – to a large extent at night schools – both through subsidies and loans where needed.”

Mr Halfon has committed to boosting retraining opportunities for people already in work, in a written response to a letter signed by 60 MPs that backed growing calls to widen the focus of FE policy away from apprenticeships and younger learners.

The letter, sent in mid-January, whose signatories included shadow education secretary Angela Rayner and Mr Lammy, warned that a rethink on retraining for older people was needed to bridge a “gaping skills gap”.

Mr Halfon said in response: “I fully recognise the points your letter makes about the need to address those skills shortages, creating new opportunities in particular for those people who are already in the workforce.

“That is a key theme of our developing industrial strategy.”

The industrial strategy released on January 23 acknowledged a “growing challenge” with training for older people, and committed to exploring “ambitious new approaches to encouraging lifelong learning”.