The new apprenticeships reform policing body’s boss insisted a shortage of approved end-point assessors is not a serious problem – despite a roomful of Association of Employment and Learning Providers Autumn conference delegates disagreeing.

Peter Lauener, who is interim chief executive of the new Institute for Apprenticeships, as well as chief executive of the Skills Funding Agency and Education Funding Agency, told a packed audience that having no approved awarding organisations for over 40 per cent of learner starts on new standards is “not ideal” but the situation was “manageable”.

He added that he did not think “there’s a consensus” view that the situation was a serious problem or that apprentices should not start their courses without an end-point assessor in place.

However, when AELP chief executive Mark Dawe took a poll of the audience, not a single hand went up to say it was acceptable for an apprentice to be studying on a course that had no end-point assessment organisation assigned to it. 

Mr Lauener responded by commenting: “Well, I did say I didn’t think it wasn’t ideal.”

He added: “There are 4,200 starts on standards, and there are 800,000 apprentices, so come on, let’s get this in proportion.”

Mr Lauener disputed the comments of Dr Sue Pember, who stood down as the civil service head of further education and skills investment in February 2013, in a previous FE Week article on October 14, in which she said it is “diabolical to let an apprentice start a programme, without explaining not only what the end test will contain, but where it will be, what shape it will take and who will be the organisation to oversee and manage the process”.

He said: “We don’t expect any of the apprentices that are in training at the moment to reach their end-point assessment without having an end-point assessor provider rightly in place.”

“That’s what I would regard as a disgrace, if we were to get anywhere near that – we’re not in position, we don’t think we will get to that position as of the changes we’re making.”

Mr Lauener concluded by saying that it would be “an even bigger mistake” t0 “sacrifice quality in end-point assessment for speed.”

Mr Dawe responded by saying that AELP was willing to work with Mr Lauener in addressing the problem, highlighting that his organisation is involved in a new programme targeted at tackling the shortage of end-point assessors in apprenticeships, but added that “there is a concern I think still during this interim period about the gap”.

Update: Reaction to Peter Lauener comments from Dr Sue Pember, former top civil servant responsible for apprenticeships 

Dr Pember told FE Week: “Whether it is 4,000 or 100,000 it needs to be sorted. The young people involved will never be able to recapture these years again and they need to have a secure transparent route to success. I agree with Peter the end test must ensure good quality. However, there are certain management actions that could be taken now that would resolve the matter:

1. Stop registering apprentices onto new apprenticeship standards where there is no apprenticeship assessment organisation (AAO) appointed.    
2. Urgently work with employers and other organisations to appoint AAOs to the current approved standards that do not have an AAO.
3. Ensure potential AAOs are engaged early on in the process for developing new standards, before agreeing to the standard being developed.
4. Reintroduce parity of esteem and protect apprentices’ interests by ensuring they all end up with a vocational sector qualification as part of the programme and not just those on a level 4
5. Rethink the implementation process bearing in mind that there could eventually be some 2,000 apprenticeship standards. At the current rate of progress it could be around 100 years before the changes are implemented. This is unsustainable, a radically rethink of the implementation processes is needed whilst retaining policy intent the Government is rightly trying to achieve.”

The Association of Colleges has agreed to a settlement before the first judicial review against the government in more than a decade – meaning a small sixth form will now not go ahead.

The AoC joined with Havering Sixth Form College to launch a high court challenge against the Department for Education’s decision to fund a new sixth form at Abbs Cross Academy and Arts College, in Hornchurch, Essex.

The AoC claims that Tim Coulson, regional schools commissioner for the East of England and North East London, failed to follow the government’s own rules after approving the request from the Loxford School Trust, which took over the school in February.

The rules state, for example, that sixth forms should only be created in schools which expect to enrol 200 students or more.

However the court hearing, scheduled for today at the Royal Courts for Justice, was cancelled at the last minute.

A court clerk told FE Week that a settlement had been agreed between the parties.

The application for the new school sixth form has now been withdrawn by the Loxford School Trust and as a result, the Government has also withdrawn its decision to approve the new sixth form.   

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “The Loxford Trust asked the department to reverse its decision to allow the establishment of a sixth form at Abbs Cross Academy and Arts College.

“The Trust recognised its consultation with the local authority was not adequately conducted.”

Responding to the news, David Hughes (pictured right), chief executive at the AoC, told FE Week: “I’m really pleased because we set out to achieve two things.

“Firstly, to challenge permission for new sixth form which didn’t meet criteria nor in interest of young people who want a good quality and breath of offer.

“Secondly, we wanted a proper open review of the guidance, including how the criteria is used, how the evidence is scrutinised and more generally the decision making procedure. And we achieve both of those. Ultimately, we were seeking much more transparency.

“We are looking forward to working with the DfE on the review, and to engage colleges in that process. We want to get the detail so that future decisions are properly substantiated and understood locally.”

Abbs Cross fell from a ‘good’ Ofsted rating to ‘inadequate’ in its last full inspection in June 2015.

Since then, it has been subject to three section eight special measures monitoring inspections, the latest of which was published last month.

The report said leaders and managers are taking effective action towards the removal of special measures.

It advised that the academy should not seek to appoint any further newly qualified teachers.

The AoC had suggested that the outcome of the judicial review could have a bearing on the way the government approves new selective schools, and could even establish the status of guidance to the regional schools commissioners.

Correction: FE Week had originally reported the findings of the school’s second monitoring inspection report as being its latest inspection. We were informed this was incorrect, on November 2, and have amended the article to state a third inspection had since been published.

Apprenticeships minister Robert Halfon (pictured above) has been accused of “trying to hoodwink the house” over apprenticeship funding cuts during a heated clash in parliament this morning.

The accusation was made by David Lammy, MP for Tottenham, at the end of a Westminster Hall debate – over planned apprenticeships funding cuts for younger and disadvantaged learners exposed by FE Week.

He said that Mr Halfon had not responded to key questions on the issue of framework funding, and had instead focused on new standards – despite their low take-up.

“Over 99 per cent [of starts] are on the frameworks, which is the matter of the debate, and the minister has not addressed it at all,” Mr Lammy said.

“He’s trying to hoodwink the house.”

Mr Halfon did not respond to the cuts during his comments today, despite them being raised by a number of speakers including Mr Lammy and Gordon Marsden, shadow skills minister.

But he did say: “To use some frameworks as a way to say the government is not helping the poorest is entirely wrong.”

Mr Lammy’s frustration at Mr Halfon’s lack of response was evident, and he had to be called to order in his closing remarks, during which he said: “It is disappointing that the minister has said nothing about funding rate cuts in this country.

“He’s been reliant on the £2.5bn extra he’s said is coming in. He’s robbing Peter to pay Paul.”

This morning’s debate was called by Mr Lammy in response to FE Week’s analysis of apprenticeship funding rates proposed by the Department for Education in August.

As revealed by FE Week, these new rates would see funding slashed for 16 to 18-year-olds in the most deprived areas by up to 50 per cent for some of the most popular frameworks.

Following a successful #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign by FE Week, the government has now announced a partial u-turn on the worst of the cuts.

The DfE announced on Tuesday it would now pay an extra 20 per cent on the funding band limit for 16-18 year-olds, and £60 million “additional support in areas of disadvantage”.

However, further FE Week analysis into the impact of this u-turn found that while the cuts now aren’t set to be quite as high as before, most frameworks will still feel cuts of 20 per cent or more.