BREAKING: Apprenticeship achievement rate falls to 67 per cent under new method

The percentage of people passing their apprenticeship has fallen to 67 percent, figures released this morning show.

The overall achievement rate for apprenticeship frameworks fell from 71.7 percent to 67 percent in 2015/16, however this follows a change to the methodology.

Applying the new methodology to 2013/14 and 2014/15 shows overall achievement rates remain at 67 percent (see table below).

The Skills Funding Agency Minimum Standard threshold for 2015/16 apprenticeship achievement rates was set at 62 percent. The SFA say: “If a college or training organisation fails to meet minimum standards, the Agency’s approach to intervention will apply.” 

See updated table 14 in the January 2017 Statistical First Release. The figures should have been included in the original January release, but were delayed following “technical issues”, as reported in FE Week.

Full story to follow.

‘Good’ Ofsted report finally unveiled for recently incorporated FE college, after 90-day wait

Questions surround why publication of a ‘good’-overall Ofsted report was delayed until 90-days after the recently created FE college was inspected.

The report on Basildon-based Prospects College of Advanced Technology was published this morning, after it was inspected between November 15 and 18 last year.

Its performance is of key interest to the government and wider FE sector, as PROCAT was transformed from an independent training provider in to the first new FE college in more than 20 years back in 2014.

The 90-day gap is three times as long as the average 30 days between inspection and report being published.

That is thought to be the by far the second longest delay under the new common inspection framework, after a ‘good’ report on the nation’s largest college NCG was finally unveiled last September following a four-month hold-up.

Speculation has surrounding the cause of the PROCAT delay, with appeal over Ofsted’s initial judgements a likely source of delay.

When asked about this, principal Neil Bates (pictured right) said: “Any confirmation of grades comes at the end of the inspection and moderation process. You will also be aware that the process prior to publication of the report is confidential.”

He added: “We are very pleased with the judgements that have been made.

“We recognise this is our first inspection since incorporation and there are areas of the college that still require improvement, if we are to achieve our objective of being recognized as an outstanding specialist technical college.”

An Ofsted spokesperson told FE Week: “All inspection reports go through a moderation process before they are published and no judgement is confirmed, prior to the report’s official publication.”

PROCAT was rated good for effectiveness of leadership and management, quality of teaching, learning and assessment, apprenticeships, personal development, behaviour and welfare, and outcomes for learners.

The only ‘requires improvement’ headline field rating was for 16 to 19 study programmes.

The report recognised that “leaders work very productively with a range of high-profile and major employers to ensure that the apprenticeship provision is very responsive to industry requirements and skill shortages”.

Attendance levels were also said to be high, while “apprentices gain valuable knowledge and skills by working to high industry expectations and standards”.

The then-skills Minister Nick Boles visited Essex to mark the “milestone” transformation of Prospects Learning Foundation in to the first new FE college in more than 20 years, as reported in FE Week in August 2014.

His predecessor Matthew Hancock has confirmed four months previously that it was to become an FE college. The move had been exclusively revealed by FE Week the previous July.

The provider, which had just under 2,000 learners last academic year, first opened in 2007. It subsequently underwent an £11.5m expansion of its main Basildon training base.

Lincoln College Group defends ‘isolated error’ after being named in minimum wage offenders’ list

A college group has defended itself after it appeared in the government’s largest ever list of national minimum and living wage offenders.

Lincoln College Corporate Support Solutions Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of the larger group, “failed to pay £526.51 to one worker”, according to the list unveiled by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy today (February 15).

In total the list named 360 businesses, with employers in the hairdressing, hospitality and retail sectors the most prolific offenders.

Lincoln was the only college group identified in the list, through its connections with LCCSS.

But its head of communications, James Newall, told FE Week that this was down to “an isolated error that occurred, with one out of a total of around 400 corporate support solutions staff”.

He said: “The error occurred when the employee left the college and received a salary deduction, in relation to a course they had completed.

“The deduction technically took them below the minimum wage for that month. Once identified this was immediately rectified.”

Mr Newall added: “The employee was paid the money to ensure our technical compliance and then returned it to us to cover the cost of the course.

“This has never happened before and we are confident will never happen again.”

He stressed that LCCSS pays the Living Wage Foundation Living Wage, “which at £8.45 per hour, is substantially higher than the National Living Wage currently set at £7.20 per hour”.

The Living Wage Foundation is a campaigning organisation set up in 2011 to persuade employers to pay a ‘Living Wage’ – an independently-calculated recommended minimum wage to cover workers’ basic needs.

Lincoln College Corporate Support Solutions provides “business support service activities” and was incorporated in July 2011, according to Companies House.

The company’s latest full accounts, made up to July 31, 2016, showed Lincoln College Commercial Holding Limited as the “immediate parent company which owns 100 per cent of the issued share capital”.

The 360 employers who were identified underpaid 15,520 workers a total of £995,233, in cases closed since August 2016.

Excuses for underpaying workers including using tips to top-up pay, docking workers’ wages to pay for their Christmas party, and making staff pay for their own uniforms out of their salary.

As well as recovering arrears for some of the UK’s lowest paid workers, HMRC also issued penalties worth around £800,000.

Business minister Margot James said: “Every worker in the UK is entitled to at least the national minimum or living wage and this government will ensure they get it.

“That is why we have named and shamed more than 350 employers who failed to pay the legal minimum, sending the clear message to employers that minimum wage abuses will not go unpunished.”

Chancellor Philip Hammond announced in November that the national minimum wage for apprentices would rise from £3.40 per hour to £3.50 – a bigger increase than rates for most other groups – following the autumn statement.

It amounted to a 10p increase in the minimum wage for apprentices, and was higher than most other minimum wage rate increases.

For 18 to 20 year olds, the increase was from £5.55 per hour to £5.60, while for 16 to 17 year olds – it went up from £4.00 per hour to £4.05. For 21 to 24 year olds, it increased from £6.95 per hour to £7.05.

See here for the full list.

We need a proper framework for apprenticeships

With just weeks to go before the apprenticeship levy and the apprenticeship standards come on line, we are in urgent need of a proper regulatory framework, says Graham Hasting-Evans

The government has made it clear the Institute for Apprenticeships is to be a regulatory body for two critical parts of our new skills system.

But government is less clear how this fits with Ofqual’s role as the qualifications regulator for England and how the planned external quality assurance regulatory role will work.

The IfA will drive all of the major changes in our skills system but it’s only now being created; realistically, it’s probably a year away from being fully operational.

The approach to oversight of assessment organisations appears more fragmented

So there is no newly-established regulatory framework for the reformed (trailblazer) apprenticeships starting in just a few months, or for the soon-to-emerge technical qualifications arising from the post-16 skills plan.  (The DfE has announced work on writing phase one of the new technical qualifications is due to start soon, with an invitation for awarding organisations to tender in the autumn.)

Agreements between the Skills Funding Agency and employers, as well as training providers, have been prepared to control the levy but they are principally about money, not quality assurance and regulation. They are not a regulatory framework for the control of apprenticeship end-point assessments and technical qualifications.

Part of any regulatory framework has to be the oversight and monitoring of training providers and assessment organisations. Clearly Ofsted will take the lead monitoring most of the training providers and although it’s not clear about universities, one would expect a single consistent monitoring arrangement, such as that from Ofsted, would give training providers, apprentices and employers the assurance they need.

But in respect of the oversight and monitoring of assessment organisations, the approach appears more fragmented.

Trailblazer employer groups can pick one of four options for external quality assurance organisations: an employer-appointed body, such as a sector organisation like the sector skills council; a professional body; Ofqual; or the IfA – which is unlikely to be in a position to do this properly for some time.

Different trailblazer employer groups have opted for one of the four and it’s understood each option now has apprenticeship standards assigned to it, with a larger proportion being assigned to Ofqual.

This will have a detrimental impact on public confidence

Right now there is no clear advice on the way this will work, although we are told it’s being worked on.  Most external quality assurance organisations are planning to make a charge, which will be borne by the apprenticeship assessment organisation and charged to the employer through the end-point assessment fee.

Ofqual will not be charging. It will use its current regulatory framework, funded by the taxpayer.

But with just weeks to go before the levy and apprenticeship standards go live, and just months away from new-style technical qualifications being written, a proper regulatory framework is needed now!

The implications of not having any controls in place are that very different regulatory rules will be developed by the various external quality assurance organisations, potentially resulting in harder regimes in some sectors and easier regimes in others. This will have a detrimental impact on the ‘apprenticeship’ brand and the public’s confidence. In addition, training providers and apprenticeship assessment organisations will have to deal with a wide range of different rules, adding to both the regulatory burden and the cost.

We have a regulatory framework for qualifications, set up under the 2009 Act, with Ofqual as the statutory qualifications regulator.

It’s called the general condition of recognition and covers both qualifications and the existing SASE apprenticeship frameworks. Similar frameworks exist in northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

The GCoR works, is in place and is operational. It’s widely understood by both training providers and assessment organisations. It is focused more on ‘knowledge’ rather than ‘competency’, but does do most of the job.

So why not be pragmatic and adopt the GCoR as the short-term regulatory framework for apprenticeship end-point assessment and the new technical qualifications, until the institute is fully operational and has developed, consulted upon and finalised a new regulatory framework?

 

Graham Hasting-Evans is managing director at NOCN

Colleges stand by multi-million pound subcontractor despite insolvency issues

Three colleges have insisted they will stand by a multi-million pound subcontractor, despite it entering into insolvency arrangements.

JTJ Workplace Solutions Limited owed more than £500,000 to HM Revenue and Customs, and £246,000 to Pearson.

This is according to the report of a meeting approving it entering into a corporate voluntary arrangement, published on Companies House last December.

The total amount due to the company’s 12 creditors was £938,366 and the CVA has shored up its finances for the time being, with structured repayment arrangements in place.

FE Week approached the 10 colleges with £6.4 million of subcontracted provision, as of January this year, to ask if they planned to continue with the arrangements in view JTJ’s financial problems.

The three that confirmed they are still subcontracting with JTJ, told FE Week they had no intention of cancelling the arrangement.

Gateshead College, with a contract worth around £2.5 million with JTJ; West Nottinghamshire College, with £810,000; and the Grimsby Institute of Further and Higher Education, with £345,000, each confirmed they were aware of the situation but would continue with JTJ.

Adam Hayes, one of the directors of JTJ, told FE Week that the company was fine to continue with the provision.

It is still trading with “most of the creditors in the CVA (100 per cent of creditors supported the CVA)”, expects “to deliver over 4,000 apprenticeships over the next 12 months” and is “enrolling more learners”.

He said: “We’ve renegotiated commercial terms. That improves the working capital equation which allows us to deliver more apprenticeships for our college partners.”

The Department for Education told FE Week it was difficult for it to comment on this case, because JTJ as a subcontractor worked for the colleges, not the government.

However, a spokesperson added DfE was aware of the situation and monitoring it.

West Nottinghamshire College confirmed it had 368 apprentices with JTJ Workplace Solutions.

Of these learners, 282 are apprentices still currently on-programme.

The remaining 86, who have completed their learning and are awaiting certification include apprentices, trainees, and classroom based learners.

Lesley Roberts, vice-principal for employer engagement and business development at the college, said: “We are aware that JTJ has entered a CVA, which allows it to continue to legally operate.

“The college is monitoring the situation closely and has put additional, yet precautionary, measures in place, as any responsible contractor would do.”

A spokesperson for the Grimsby Institute said: “We are aware that JTJ has a CVA in place and we will continue to work closely with them while monitoring the situation.”

Similarly, a Gateshead College spokesperson said the college was aware of the CVA and was monitoring the situation, but had no plans to terminate.

Garry Phillips, chief executive officer of Ealing, Hammersmith and West London’s College, added: “We’ve received no information that would suggest any learner’s apprenticeship at our college will be affected”.

A spokesperson for North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College said: “We don’t currently have any learners with JTJ Workplace Solutions.”

She added: “We have had no more enrolments so there are no implications for any on learners.

“We have regular reviews of our sub-contracting arrangements with third parties and JTJ will be part of this review process.”

A spokesperson for the College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London said: “Our last students completed their programmes with them in October 2016.

“There are no plans for further subcontracting to JTJ in the 2016/17 academic year and none of our students are affected by current issues within the provider.”

Barnet and Southgate College, Bromley College, Central College Nottingham and the WKCIC Group were unable to comment by the time of going to press.

Here are the full subcontracting arrangements as of January:

Hull College Group silent on future of under fire chief executive

Hull College Group has repeatedly refused to publicly back its chief executive, after he was urged to resign following a damning FE Commissioner report that exposed a £10 million deficit over four years.

Commissioner Richard Atkins’ team was sent in to carry out an emergency assessment, after the Skills Funding Agency issued it with a notice of concern last November.

The resulting report, published four days ago, warned that the senior leadership team had not succeeded in addressing a steady decline in financial performance, recognising a “cumulative deficit of around £10 million over the past four years” with its operating performance.

It added that “a further deficit in excess of £1m is forecast for the current year.”

The University and College Union subsequently called on the college group’s chief executive officer Gary Warke (pictured) to stand down, with a UCU spokesperson claiming yesterday: “At an extraordinary staff meetings held at the college today, the chair of governers Pat Tomlinson was vague about CEO Gary Warke’s position.”

FE Week contacted the college yesterday evening, inviting them to respond to the “vague” claim, and say if Mr Warke will be staying or going.

Their official response this morning only stated: “The corporation and leadership team is currently working with the FE commissioner to review the recommendations set out in the report and to put in place a comprehensive and effective action plan to secure the necessary improvement.

“We are unable to make any further comment at this time, as we contribute to the assessment of the final financial recovery plan.”

FE Week went back to them twice this morning, asking if they could be more specific and would back Mr Warke going forward.

A spokesperson only said: “We are unable to make any further comment at this time, until we complete the assessment of the final recovery plan.”

UCU regional official, Julie Kelley, said yesterday: “Following the recent damning report from the FE commissioner, we feel the time has come for Mr Warke to stand down, enabling a new management team to start the process of recovery.

“We hope that Mr Warke will not be rewarded with a generous severance package should he leave.”

The SFA issued Hull with a notice of concern on November 11 last year, triggering the visit from Mr Atkins’ team.

The subsequent report explained that the notice was issued because the college had been rated ‘inadequate’ by the SFA for financial health (based on its 2016 to 2018 financial plan) and had also requested exceptional financial support.

It revealed that “the college intends to put in place a different management structure in early 2017”, including a newly appointed “‘turnaround director’ to help to deliver financial recovery”.

It added: “Although the senior leadership team has a range of skills and experience, it has not succeeded in addressing key issues facing the college, including steady decline in financial performance and loss of market share.

“There is concern at all levels of the organisation that the college lacks strategic vision and strong, resolute leadership and that this is frustrating and demotivating for staff.”

Mr Atkins’ report made a number of recommendations, including instructions for the corporation to “respond accordingly in relation to leadership and governance”.

It also advised the college, which was unavailable to comment ahead of publication, to carry out a formal review of governance processes “to ensure the corporation fully understands its duties and responsibilities and is able to establish clear processes to discharge them, including holding the college’s leadership to account”.

FE Week previously reported, in May last year, that Mr Warke had been accused of trying to bully a member of the shadow cabinet for supporting a staff strike action.

Karl Turner, who is the MP for Kingston upon Hull, joined “angry and demoralised” Hull College workers on the picket that week in a row over pay and a controversial new lesson observation system.

He subsequently called for an investigation into Mr Warke, after he was allegedly sent a “threatening and derogatory” letter. Mr Warke declined to comment any further on the matter.

Minister backs early years educator u-turn as sector made to wait by PM’s office

A government u-turn on GCSE requirements for early years educator apprenticeships has the backing of the secretary of state for women, equalities and early years, but FE Week understands the final government decision is being delayed by the Prime Minister’s office.

Caroline Dinenage (pictured above) is understood to have pushed schools minister Nick Gibb to accept the case for a change in policy, but the decision originally expected before Christmas is now with Number 10.

Sector representatives have called for the current requirements of at least a C in GCSE maths and English to be extended, to allow functional skills qualifications to count as a valid alternative as in all other apprenticeships.

Nick Gibb

A government consultation into the literacy and numeracy qualification requirements for level three early years educators was subsequently launched on November 5, 2016.

As yet no government announcement has been made over how it plans to react to the consultation responses, but FE Week now understands a decision is imminent.

In a speech in July at the then-childcare and education minister Sam Gyimah acknowledged widespread concern about the impact of the GCSE requirements on EYE teacher recruitment, at the National Day Nurseries Association Conference in Milton Keynes last July.

On November 8, 2016, Ms Dinenage then promised she would respond to the consultation as part of a wider workforce strategy, ideally by December, in speaking to delegates at trade magazine Nursery World’s Business Summit in London.

According to Nursery World, she said: “It was the biggest issue that providers mentioned to me as I went around the country.”

The consultation closing date was November 28, and Ms Dinenage said she was “pushing and pushing to get the workforce strategy out before Christmas”.

She then tweeted in December that the “consultation only just finished, 4000+ replies to read & wildly different views. Getting this right more vital than speed!”.

Stella Ziolkowski, director of quality and workforce development, National Day Nurseries Association, said she hoped Ms Dinenage’s pledge to address the issue would lead to functional skills qualifications being accepted as part of EYE apprenticeships.

She said: “Our response to the consultation was that the requirements should be broadened to include functional skills, so practitioners and apprentices could demonstrate they had working knowledge and experience in the relevant subjects to support young children in their early development of literacy and numeracy skills.

“At the moment, there is an ever-decreasing pool in which to fish for good quality candidates – the stringent GCSE requirements are reducing this further, with some vocational candidates unable to apply.”

She added: “With increased demand on the horizon from 30 hours free childcare set to exacerbate the recruitment crisis the sector is experiencing, it’s vital that the minister gives a positive response.”

In November 2016, FE Week reported the launch of the consultation, following considerable pressure from campaigners in the sectors.

An announcement in September 2014 that EYE applicants would have to gain at least a C in maths and English before they could graduate sparked outrage which led to calls for change.

Following this a campaign to convince the Department for Education to reverse the decision for level three apprenticeships was launched in April by Cache, a sector specialist in health, care and education. 

It proposed viable alternative qualifications, including functional skills, should be allowed.

The launch of the consultation on what numeracy and literacy skills are needed by EYEs, by Ms Dinenage, was greeted as a major step in the right direction.

FE Week contacted the Department for Education on January 27 to ask when the resulted of the consultation would be published, but a spokesperson could only say that the announcement would be made “in due course”.

Enquiries to Ms Dinenage’s office received no response.

Learndirect tops list of European Social Fund contracts with provision worth almost £50 million

Learndirect has come out on top in the race to win European Social Fund contracts, securing 26 deals worth almost £49.5 million, FE Week analysis has shown.

Calderdale College was the second biggest winner, with 13 contracts worth just over £35 million, followed by Serco with 15 contracts valued at £31.6 million.

Overall, 85 organisations won 285 ESF contracts with a total value of just over £446 million, according to statistics released today by the Skills Funding Agency on gov.uk.

Independent training providers scooped a large majority of the contracts, securing 200 out of 285, which made up a total of £305.6 million, or 68 per cent, of the available funding.

This was split between 45 ITPs, who together constituted 53 per cent of all the bodies that won contracts.

After ITPs, FE Week analysis revealed 29 colleges held a quarter (70) of the ESF contracts, valued at just over £127 million.

Local authorities took a significantly smaller amount from the pot, with eight LAs securing just ten contracts (four per cent of the total number), valued at £9.1 million.

The remaining one per cent of the money, £4.5 million, went to other bodies including higher education institutions.

Following Learndirect, Calderdale College and Serco in the top five in terms of total contract size were ESG (Skills), with £24.1 million across 16 contracts, and Seetec Business Technology Centre with ten contracts worth £21.9 million.

The largest single contract went to Economic Solutions Limited in Greater Manchester, with a contract worth £11.5 million for “active inclusion”.

Next was PriceWaterhouse Coopers with a £10.6 million contract in the Sheffield City Region for “enhancing equal access to lifelong learning, upgrading the skills and competences of the workforce and increasing the labour market relevance of education and training systems”.

Then Calderdale College in the Black Country lep came in third with a contract valued at just under £10 million for the same purposes as PwC.

Learndirect, which has previously made FE Week headlines over the size of its subcontracting management fees, secured a £7.5 million contract under the Lancashire lep, while Advanced Personnel Management Group (UK) was granted £6.5 million in the Stoke on Trent and Staffordshire lep for “sustainable integration of young people not in employment, education or training in the labour market”.

On December 7, 2015, the first areas involved in the initial round of invitations to tender for 2014 to 2020 ESF contracts were announced.

The invitations were long awaited, as the previous 2007 to 2013 ESF contracts had closed on July 31, with none going out to tender through the SFA in between.

Then on December 14, 2015, the second wave of invitations to tender for ESF cash was published, totalling £16.2 million. The third round of invitations came out on January 2017.

In this round, one contract was been tendered for each of the first five leps, while a total of 28 were issued for London, worth around £30.2 million.

The other five lep area contracts were collectively worth £7.9 million, making the third round of invitations worth more than £38 million in total.

 

FE Commissioner intervention report exposes financial turmoil at Hull College Group

A new FE Commissioner intervention report has exposed the grave financial problems facing Hull College Group.

Commissioner Richard Atkins’ (pictured) team was sent in to carry out their assessment, after the Skills Funding Agency issued it with a notice of concern in November last year.

The report, however, only emerged on gov.uk this evening.

It comes after FE Week reported a week ago that the Department for Education was remaining tight-lipped about the cause of the apparent hold on reports, as none had been published since October.

The report on Hull explained that the notice was issued because the college had been rated inadequate by the agency for financial health (based on its 2016 to 2018 financial plan) and as a result of the college’s request for exceptional financial support.

It warned that the senior leadership team had not succeeded in addressing key issues facing the college, including steady decline in financial performance and loss of market share.

There was said to be concern at all levels of the organisation that it “lacks strategic vision and strong, resolute leadership and that this is frustrating and demotivating for staff”.

The section on the college’s financial position warned that “its operating performance, as measured by ‘surplus/deficit after interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation costs’ has amounted to a cumulative deficit of around £10 million over the past four years, and a further deficit in excess of £1 million is forecast for the current year.

“The college has not achieved its budgeted income for any of the last three years.”

It concluded that a “substantial amount of work needs to be done” to secure a sustained financial recovery.

Commenting on the relationship with the board, it said: “Governors do not appear to have been advised on a timely basis, that falling student numbers have not simply caused by adverse demographic trends, but are also the result of loss of market share.”

Concern was also expressed about slow reaction to the many problems faced by the college.

“There is criticism from the corporation and staff that ‘bad news’ is not reported to the corporation with sufficient speed or candour, thus slowing down the ability to take the rigorous actions required to ensure sustainable financial recovery,” the report said.

It also raised concern about staff costs.

“Despite a number of years of staff cuts, on the SFA’s definition, the college’s staff costs are high, at around 78 per cent of income for 2015/16 and a forecast 72 per cent for 2016/17 (as a comparator, the area review benchmark is 60 to 65 per cent),” the report said.

“This level of cost is unaffordable.”

There has been a long-running dispute between the college and the University and College Union, as the college has tried to force through redundancies.

UCU members at the college had been set to walk out on October 13 over planned job losses.

But the union announced the day before that it had suspended the industrial action after “positive talks”.

This followed the college’s announcement that it would make around 70 redundancies and close its three nurseries before the end of the year, to address a £2.6 million deficit.

Since 2011, the college has seen more than 380 job losses through redundancy, according to the UCU.

FE Week reported last week that a stop appeared to have been put on publication of FE commissioner intervention reports.

The previous intervention report, into City of Liverpool College, had been published in October, although the document itself was dated August 2016.

FE Week believes that up to 18 colleges should have been subject to intervention by the FE commissioner and his team since then.

But when we asked about the missing reports, the Department for Education was unable to give any reason for the hold-up, and would only say at the time that these would be available in due course.