PM’s mental health first aid training pledge only for schools, not colleges

The Prime Minister’s pledge to roll out mental health first aid training to education staff working with young people will not cover the FE sector.

Theresa May (pictured left) spoke out yesterday about a “burning injustice of mental health and inadequate treatment” at the Charity Commission annual meeting at the Royal Society in London yesterday (January 9), but she only referred to the changes applying to the school system.

She said: “We will introduce a package of measures to transform the way we respond to mental illness in young people starting in our schools.

“We will pilot new approaches such as offering mental health first aid training for teachers and staff to help them identify and assist children experiencing mental health problems.”

But when FE Week asked if the same training would also be offered to staff in our sector, a spokesperson for Number 10 replied that “there are no set FE plans at this point”.

Responding to this, Shakira Martin, NUS vice president for FE, said she was disappointed to see the government focused too closely on the school system again.

She said: “It is disappointing that the same training is not being rolled out across FE providers too.

“A young person’s mental health problems do not stop as soon as they leave the school gates.

“Yet far too often the Department for Education’s focus is solely on young people in schools, despite the fact that there is an urgent need to look at the mental wellbeing of young people in colleges too.”

She added: “There is a strong need for coordinated mental health provision between local health authorities and institutions at every stage of a young person’s education.

“If the government is serious about tackling the mental health crisis among young people it cannot afford to overlook this.”

The decision to neglect FE comes after Ian Ashman, president of the Association of Colleges (pictured right), announced in November that he would be dedicating his term of office to tackling what he described as a “massive increase” in the mental health support needs of college students.

In an expert piece for FE Week he said: “On more than one occasion a student has told me that the mental health support provided by the college has literally been the difference between life and death.

“This is surely a good enough reason to make this a priority for all of us.”

There was some suggestion in Mrs May’s speech that challenges around mental health in FE might be looked at in the future, though no time frame was given.

She referred to trialling “approaches to ensure schools and colleges work closer together with local NHS services to provide dedicated children and young people’s mental health services”.

And the PM also cited “a major thematic review” led by the Care Quality Commission and Ofsted, which will cover “services for children and teenagers across the country to find out what is working, and what is not”.

The Number 10 spokesperson told FE Week: “The government will be reviewing children and young people’s mental health in the green paper – and this will cover ages 0-25”.

Alongside these changes, in December it was announced that MPs from both the education and health committees would look at how a broad range of education providers, including colleges, could help to prevent or minimise mental health problems among young people.

Neil Carmichael MP, chair of the education committee (pictured above left), said at the time that the “undoubted increase” in young people suffering from mental health issues was “extremely alarming,” adding that colleges have a “key part” to play in tackling the problem.

Qualifications achievement rates dashboard still unavailable after days of problems

The promised new qualifications achievement rates dashboard for apprenticeships, education and training will still be unavailable until at least tomorrow, following almost a week of problems that provoked repeated complaints though online forum FE Connect.

The main issue accepted by Skills Funding Agency is that the QAR is incorrectly only including learners as timely, where they have an actual end date in the 2015/16 year.

It means, for example, that a learner who had a planned end date for example of July 31 last year (before the end of 2015/16), but actually achieved this in 2016/17 with an end date of August 1 or beyond (but within the required 90 days), isn’t being recognised.

Issues were acknowledged as far back as January 4, when the QAR team announced on SFA forum FE Connect: “After investigation we found that the automated procedure to write and load the QAR data extract files to the hub had failed to include additional fields that allow you to arrive at the results displayed on the QAR dashboards.

“It also omitted age-bands for E&T. An amended extract file will be loaded onto the Hub today that fixes both these points.”

However, the problems are still ongoing, with providers told at shortly before midday today that “the QAR dashboard is still not up and running after its maintenance”.

“We are hoping to resolve the issue today and publish tomorrow (January 10) but this is only if and when we have resolved the access issues we are currently experiencing,” added the CDS Service Centre.

It comes after the SFA announced through an online Update bulletin on December 21 that it would “shortly publish provisional 2015 to 2016 qualification achievement rates and minimum standards” covering apprenticeships and education and training.

It added: “We aim to publish the final QAR data following publication of the next SFR at the end of January 2017. We would welcome your feedback at the earliest opportunity but no later than Monday 16 January 2017.”

The SFA came in for fierce criticism on FE Connect in early December over its management of a key provider submission of learner data, which was labelled a “total farce” and “very disturbing”.

The agency’s online data collection system, known as the ‘Hub’, was understood to have initially gone down on December 5, when providers had less than a day left to submit their fourth Individualised Learner Record returns of the academic year.

It added an extra day in light of this, but providers still complained they were experiencing problems up to the 6pm deadline.

Despite this, the SFA opted against a further extension, even though the return that month, named ILR R04, was particularly significant – as it is used to calculate not only the SFA 16 to 18 monthly apprenticeship payments, but also by the Education Funding Agency to support the setting of allocations for the next academic year.

The SFA was unavailable to comment on the latest QAR problems.

Skills Funding Agency to remain in charge of assessment organisation register

The Skills Funding Agency will stay in charge of the new register of apprentice assessment organisations, despite its slow start, and even though it is not related to funding.

The government’s Draft Strategic Guidance to the IfA, unveiled on January 4, controversially confirmed that the SFA would “maintain responsibility for administration” of the register.

This will be a source of dismay to many in the sector who have been frustrated with the agency’s slow progress with approval of AOs.

Exclusive FE Week analysis showed in December that there were still 78 approved apprenticeship standards without a single AO, amounting to just over 50 per cent of the total approved for delivery.

In January, the SFA assumed responsibility for issuing certificates for completed apprenticeship standards, taking over from the Federation of Industry Sector Skills and Standards.

And the IfA’s strategic guidance indicated the agency and not the institute, which is supposed to be the new policing body for apprenticeships, will retain the certification responsibility long-term.

Graham Hasting-Evans, managing director of awarding organisation NOCN, said dividing such key responsibilities between the SFA and the IfA was likely to “result in duplication”.

“In our view, we need to have in place one organisation which is accountable for implementation, quality assurance and delivery of the most fundamental change to our skills system in a decade – and we need to start putting it in place now,” he said.

Sadly we are very disappointed. So little progress has been made in the eight months since the Enterprise Act was passed.

“We had hoped that the consultation would set out clearly the government’s vision and plans for the structure of the institute in April 2018 with the roadmap of how it plans to get to that point.

“Sadly we are very disappointed. So little progress has been made in the eight months since the Enterprise Act was passed. One wonders if anything meaningful will be in place for April 2017?”

Stephen Wright, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, meanwhile complained that the proposed arrangement “seems to be fragmented across a number of agencies and would benefit from consolidation”.

“What doesn’t seem to come through clearly in the strategic guidance is the critical role of assessment professionals,” he added.

The decision to pass the certification process over to the SFA means that apprenticeship end-point assessment organisations must now request apprenticeship certificates from the SFA, which will contact them directly with details of the process.

However, for apprentices completing an apprenticeship framework, providers will still need to apply to FISSS for certificates, with the last ones expected to be issued in 2021/2022.

A DfE spokesperson said: “Giving the SFA the responsibility for issuing certificates for apprenticeship standards will streamline the process and we have been working with FISSS through the transition.

“The SFA has also contacted all organisations on the register of apprentice assessment organisations to inform them of the change.”

Mark Froud, managing director of FISSS, said: “We wish the SFA well with this important service and hope they exceed the high service standards we deliver for framework certification.”

DfE writes off another £3m from undersubscribed UTCs

Over £3 million of taxpayers’ money has been lost by the Department for Education, through unrecovered payments to failed university technical colleges for students who never enrolled.

The DfE was unable to recover a total of £3,384,512 in pupil number adjustment clawbacks from the unsuccessful Royal Greenwich, Central Bedfordshire and Hackney UTCs, according to the DfE’s annual report and accounts for the year ended March 31, 2016.

This is money that the department should be able to reclaim from institutions that have failed to recruit their forecasted number of students.

However, in these cases the cash had to be written off due to financial difficulties at the three UTCs.

The greatest loss was recorded by Royal Greenwich UTC, which failed to meet its forecast student numbers in 2014/15 and 2015/16 resulting in a PNA bill of £1,884,303 for the financial year.

Between them, the three bodies failed to fill around 700 places between 2013/14 and 2015/16.

According to the DfE report, Royal Greenwich was “financially unsustainable”, a situation which eventually lead to its absorption into the forthcoming University Multi Academy Trust in February 2016.

According to the DfE report, Royal Greenwich was “financially unsustainable”

It was decided that passing the debt on would “place severe financial pressures” on it and put “its financial future at risk”, so the DfE elected to abandon its claim.

Greenwich Council is now forking out £13 million to convert the UTC into a secondary school.

Similarly, Central Bedfordshire UTC fell short of forecast pupil numbers in 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16 – resulting in a PNA clawback of £768,209.

It was shut down and had its funding agreement terminated on August 31, 2016.

A deficit of £184,000 was taken on by Bedford College in September 2016, along with remaining pupils and staff.

But in order to close Central Bedfordshire UTC in “a solvent position”, the DfE chose to again abandon the PNA claim.

Hackney UTC, one of the first of an increasing number of UTC closures, did not meet forecast pupil numbers for 2013/14, resulting in a PNA clawback of £817,000.

It went into liquidation in August 2015, with financial assets estimated at £85,000, which the DfE report states resulted in a loss of £732,000.

Charles Parker, chief executive of the Baker Dearing Trust, which develops and promotes UTCs, said he regretted the cost of the closed UTCs.

“The decision to close any UTC is only ever taken when there is no realistic alternative,” he said.

“Baker Dearing is aware of the cost of the UTC closures referred to in the DfE accounts for 2015-16 and regrets this, but notes that at the time it was felt to be in taxpayers’ interests to recognise the loss on closure rather than incur further costs.”

A DfE spokesperson said: “We are not complacent, which is why we are strengthening the UTC programme through a number of reforms to make it more sustainable.

“This includes partnerships with successful secondary schools, establishing more UTCs as part of multi-academy trusts, funding intensive support from a teaching school, and doing more to raise parent and pupil awareness of UTCs.”

Julian Gravatt, assistant chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “Hopefully the DfE will have learned lessons from the early years of the UTC programme.

“AoC’s recommendation is that DfE should instigate a review of UTCs and school sixth forms using the same tests of viability that it used in the college area review programme.”

Are college governors personally liable if something goes wrong?

Dr Sue answers your questions on all aspects of governance, from taking time off to liability.

 

Question One: Time off work

As a school governor I was given time off work. Does the same apply to college governors?

Answer: Governors frequently ask about their entitlement to time off work to carry out their functions.

Under employment law, employers are required to give ‘reasonable time off’ to allow employees to be a member of the managing or governing body of an educational establishment, which includes colleges.

Leave of absence can be with or without pay

The amount of time off should be agreed between the employee and employer beforehand, based on: how long the duties might take; the amount of time the employee has already had off for public duties; how the time off will affect the business.

The employer can refuse a request for time off if they think it’s unreasonable. It should be noted that this leave of absence can be with or without pay. This is at the employer’s own discretion. What constitutes ‘reasonable time off’ is not defined in law and is an area for negotiation between the employer and employee. It may also be helpful to prepare your case before you approach your employer and be ready to explain the benefits to the business, such as, you would be helping shape the workforce of tomorrow as well as your own continual professional development.

 

Question Two: Personal liability

As a board member of a college governing body am I personally liable if something goes wrong? We have been asked to take decisions about merger and to set a deficit budget for large building projects. We’ve done due diligence but I’m nervous.

Answer: Governors are often concerned that they may be held personally liable for decisions they take in relation to their role as a college governor, particularly in respect of decisions around procurement and setting budgets.

Since 1992, governing bodies have been incorporated. As a corporate body, protection is afforded to individual members provided that they act reasonably, in accordance with procedures. As charity trustees, governors have a duty to act with skill and care to safeguard the assets of the college. The duty to act with good faith imposes a high standard of care and means that a governor must act honestly and transparently at all times.

You are right to be on guard

Governors should take reasonable care when discharging their duties, should take advice where appropriate and should be mindful of any decision that could be seen as benefiting themselves, their business or close family members.

To reassure you, I am not aware of any case of negligence being brought in relation to individual governors. Where governors act reasonably, in accordance with the corporation’s powers and their instruments and articles, the likelihood of negligence being proved is small. But you are right to be on your guard.

 

Question Three: Ofsted

I was looking forward to reading the Chief Inspector’s Annual Report BUT there was no obvious section on college governance. Am I missing something?

Answer: You are right, there is no separate section on college governance and this year the report does not go into any depth on governance matters.

However, what is there does explain the issue in no uncertain terms: “All of the colleges judged inadequate this year were characterised by systemic weaknesses in leadership and/or governance. Strengthening leadership capacity within the sector remains a priority.”

Governors should increase rigour by challenging leaders

This builds on a statement that was in the 2014/15 report which explained that in weaker colleges governors should increase rigour by challenging leaders.

Recent annual reports, through case studies and the individual college reports, do give indications of what Ofsted sees as good governance, with the main emphasis being on challenge, for example:

“Although governors know the challenges facing the college to ensure learners develop their mathematical and English skills, they have not sufficiently held leaders to account for improving the quality of teaching, learning and assessment across all subjects to improve achievement.”

“Governors have a good understanding of the main features of the college’s educational and financial performance. In a few key respects, however, they have been less effective in holding leaders to account. For example, they have not ensured that leaders’ vision for the college is clearly articulated and shared.”

“The governing body left no stone unturned in its scrutiny of progress against agreed targets for improvement. All staff had responded well to the more stringent performance management scheme that had a direct impact on improving the quality of teaching in all subject areas.”

 

Sue Pember is director of policy and external relations at Holex

 

Apprentice targets should cross administrative boundaries

We are failing to meet apprenticeship targets in construction due to some ridiculous barriers that should simply be removed, says Jeremy Rabinovitch.

Apprentices are the lifeblood of the economy. These are people who want to work yet don’t want to spend years learning something without being guaranteed a job.

Apprenticeships can provide fantastic opportunities both from a financial and career progression point of view – not to mention filling the skills gaps of the future.

I work as a workplace coordinator in the construction sector and as such I am responsible for ensuring our developments have local labour and apprentices working on them.

However, local boroughs, especially in London, make it hard to ensure this happens.

Nowadays most councils insist that around a fifth of the workforce comes from within the boundary walls; in some boroughs, apprentices can only come from within that borough. We are limiting the success of the apprenticeships initiative by setting up boundaries where they are not necessary.

We need to use the people in the industry to promote it and get the next generation into apprenticeships

Here’s an example: the company I work for is developing a large hotel and the local borough has stipulated we need to employ around 20 apprentices during construction.

At first glance that may seem fairly reasonable, however there are conditions that can make this simple target unachievable in practice.

First, we are told that all apprentices must be living in the local borough: a fantastic aspiration, but by the borough’s own admission unrealistic, given there aren’t 20 people on their books interested in construction. In practice, this means out of two people who went to the same school and want to do the same job, one will be afforded fewer opportunities with our subcontractors because they live on the opposite side of the road to their friend, who lives within the boundary of the borough.

The second issue, and possibly the bigger, is the fact that many boroughs require evidence only of someone starting an apprenticeship to count towards a company’s targets.

This means if we have 20 apprenticeships to fill, we can have 20 young people who all leave after their first day, but these are counted as apprenticeships.

This is scandalous – it’s not even work experience. Yet if we place someone on site for two years, who completes an apprenticeship but lives in a different borough, this may not meet our target and we could be fined.

We have to change the way we approach apprenticeships. When the government is so determined to make apprenticeships a vital cog in the financial wheel of the country, why are such ridiculous rules allowed to exist?

Schools are yet another battlefront. I would love the chance to go into schools and promote the available opportunities but despite contacting as many schools as possible, I find it very difficult to get invited. It is easy to surmise from this that schools are more interested in promoting their own sixth form than considering what their students may actually want or benefit from.

More and more want to do apprenticeships but encouragement from schools and even parents is often sadly lacking

The young people get it. More and more want to do apprenticeships but encouragement from schools and even parents is often sadly lacking. So how do we get round this?

Unless attitudes in parents and schools change it’s not going to change and the government’s three-million target will have been just another pipe dream.

We have to work together. The CITB offers a shared apprenticeship programme, which is a fantastic way of helping apprentices acquire the relevant work experience by moving from site to site – bearing in mind subcontractors are there only for a small percentage of the actual development.

There are some good initiatives out there, but we have to do more. We need to use the people in the industry to promote it and get the next generation into apprenticeships before we lose them to the same tired revolving door that insists on sixth form then university.

Times are changing, so we have to move with them. Let’s get the boroughs and councils working together to make the practicalities more achievable and let’s get the schools to invite more companies and training providers in to talk not just to the pupils, but to teachers and parents as well.

 

Jeremy Rabinovitch is workplace co-ordinator at Tolent Construction Ltd

FE holds the key to 2017’s global skills challenges

Building a world-class skills training system is entirely within our grasp if it is properly supported and prioritised, says Carole Stott.

To say that 2016 was an eventful year is an understatement. There can scarcely be a person whose life will not be touched in some way by its momentous events. There is little that feels stable and people, businesses and sectors the world over are wondering what 2017 will bring and are trying to plan for the unknown and the unpredictable.

Last year was testing for FE. Many of us struggled to deal with issues such as English and maths requirements, an inspection regime that appears to take little account of the context in which we operate, area-based reviews requiring fundamental long-term strategic decisions in the midst of chronic uncertainty, the need to build partnerships and alliances requiring trust and cooperation in a context where people are feeling threatened and often suspicious, a new apprenticeship policy and system which is not yet fully formed but which will be a number one priority for many, and all of this in a context of continued austerity and funding challenges.

Not all of these challenges will disappear in 2017. Implementing the decisions of area-based reviews will bring fresh challenges, and alongside this we will see further development of the Skills Plan and technical and professional routes, continued devolution, and reforms in curriculum and higher education. So it is not surprising if people feel beleaguered.

Ours is not a downhearted sector

But ours is not a downhearted sector. We have an educational and social mission that drives us forward. Every day in our work we see the positive benefits and outcomes as people’s lives are genuinely transformed.

The recent changes in the political landscape in the UK have made the educational and social purpose of FE ever more important.

Recent voting in Europe and the USA reveals a growing sense of exclusion and inequality felt by many in our communities. The decision to leave the European Union will have many unknown consequences, but one thing is very clear. If our economy is to thrive as a free-trading nation outside of the EU, we must invest in skills.

If we really want a society that works for everyone then we have to invest in developing everyone’s talents and careers.

This is a global challenge but the responses and the solutions will need to emerge locally. Our colleges and our FE system are essential to this endeavour.

We have the knowledge and expertise to make this work. Colleges in particular are essential stakeholders in their local communities. They have the relationships, the understanding and the professional expertise to help in this shared endeavour. The importance of FE is perhaps more clearly understood now.

The importance of FE is perhaps more clearly understood now

But if this is to be achieved we need a renewed focus on world-class standards.

We have the wherewithal and the experience and expertise to deliver this.

Success at the recent EuroSkills and WorldSkills events, where the UK was placed seventh in both competitions, was a great start.

We can build from this: grow our expertise in training to world-class standards from this base so that these standards permeate our system. This is entirely within our grasp if it is properly supported and prioritised.

I have the great privilege and pleasure of meeting many of our WorldSkills competitors. They are, of course, highly skilled young people.

But I’m even more impressed by their other qualities: their clear focus on their end goal, their absolute determination, perseverance and ability to repeatedly overcome setbacks, their constant hard work and belief that they can learn more and do better.

What employer, what country would not want these qualities in their people?

Those of us working in further education also need to nurture these qualities and these characteristics.

If we do, and like these young people, develop and use our talents wisely, then we can play our part in building the education and skills system to support a thriving economy and society in a fast-changing world.

 

Carole Stott is chair of WorldSkills UK and the Association of Colleges

Frostbite survivor shares chilling story with Trent college students

Students at Trent College received an inspiring talk on resilience from mountaineer Nigel Vardy, who lost his fingers, toes and part of his nose to frostbite.

In 1999, Vardy suffered severe frostbite in temperatures of minus 60 degrees Celsius on Mount McKinley in Alaska, but has since gone on to climb some of the world’s toughest mountains.

Vardy’s message was one of resilience, recovery and adversity against the odds, inspiring students to apply the same values both academically and outside of the college gates, telling them “never give up, however many challenges you may face”.

The talk came as part of the college’s Arts and Speakers programme, which invites guests from the world of sport, the arts, politics, industry and beyond to pay a visit to the Nottingham-based campus and share their stories with students.

David Tidy, the college’s assistant head of curriculum, who coordinates the Arts and Speakers programme, said: “Nigel’s talk was incredibly inspiring and showed the true resilience of the human spirit under exceptionally difficult circumstances.

“He helped the students realise that a setback does not have to mean the end of their dreams.”

 

Featured picture: Nigel Vardy, nicknamed Mr Frostbite following his ordeal

Virtual technology suite will aid apprenticeship learning

The UK’s first college of advanced technology has installed a virtual reality suite to enhance student learning.

Prospects College of Advanced Technology in Essex hopes the equipment will benefit its construction, utilities and infrastructure students, enabling them to test their skills without fear of failure or risk of injury.

The suite recreates a wide variety of scenarios enabling students to be virtually present on site, and allows for observation, evaluation and immediate feedback from tutors.

Ian Rist, an electrical instructor at the college who has already implemented the technology in his lesson plans, said: “The equipment will assist the students in electrical test circuits and installations without the hazards faced in real life.

“It is only when then the students become competent in a VR environment that they can progress to complete the test for real. This will teach learners to a high specification while maintaining health and safety.”

PROCAT is a specialist college, focusing on developing its students to work in the science, technology, engineering and manufacturing industries, and meet industry needs.

 

Featured picture: A student demonstrates the new technology