Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

NCG finally gets ‘good’ Ofsted after four month standoff

The nation’s largest college has won its battle with Ofsted with the awarding of a grade two overall – more than four months after it was inspected.

Today’s long overdue report comes two weeks after FE Week reported that the college group had been disputing the ‘requires improvement’ grade it was due to have been given.

In the end the education watchdog only handed out one ‘requires improvement’ – for apprenticeship provision – with the other eight headline fields all being rated ‘good’.

The inspection, which took place from May 9 to 13, and on June 28, covered the four colleges within the group – Newcastle College, Newcastle Sixth Form College, Kidderminster College and West Lancashire College.

Inspectors praised the group’s leadership, particularly the chief executive, for establishing a “more collaborative and consultative management culture” and noted that “after a period of decline, most 16- to 19-year-old learners now make good progress”.

The report also found that staff “provide excellent support learners and create a positive rapport in the classrooms”.

The “quality of teaching and learning” had improved as teachers had “engaged enthusiastically” with the colleges’ professional development programme.

But inspectors also noted a number of issues in particular areas – including the quality of provision at West Lancashire College, which “needs further improvement”.

In addition, “too many learners in 2014/15 did not achieve as well as expected on A- and AS-level courses at Newcastle Sixth Form College” and “not enough apprentices achieve their qualification within their planned timescales”.

Joe Docherty, NCG chief executive, called today’s result “welcome news”.

He said: “I am pleased that all four NCG colleges have been assessed as Grade 2 good in their recent Ofsted inspection.

“I am especially pleased that the report highlights the professionalism and dedication of colleagues within our four colleges and the positive difference they make to ensure that learners are given the chance to develop their skills, achieve their qualifications and positively progress in their lives and careers.”

The inspection did not cover the other two NCG members, Rathbone Training and Intraining, which are inspected separately.

As previously reported by FE Week, the delay in publishing the report was likely due to a dispute over disappointing recent retention and overall achievement rates.

For example, NCG’s overall retention rate for level two 16- to 18 year-olds in 2014/15 stood at 15.6 per cent below the national average for a general further education college, while the overall achievement rate at level three (formerly known as the success rate) for that age group was negative 7.5 per cent.

NCG had previously insisted that this data was “misleading” because it was “for all NCG provision including national charity Rathbone, which works exclusively with young people not in education, employment or training, and national private training provider Intraining, both of which have national performance benchmarks lower than those of FE colleges”.

Advanced learner loan growth requests delayed as demand spikes

The Skills Funding Agency appears to have been ignoring requests from several providers to boost advanced learner loan provision – just as applications from 19- to 23-year-olds are taking off.

A number of providers, who have asked to remain anonymous, have told FE Week that they are still waiting for a response on loan growth requests made as long ago as June and July.

SFA guidance states that growth requests should be responded to “within two working days”, prompting the Association of Employment and Learning Providers to demand that the process be sped up.

The latest government figures have shown, meanwhile, that total loan applications made between May 1 and July 1 2016/17 had reached 19,450 – the highest figure for that time of year since the loans scheme started for the 24-plus age group only in 2013.

Just over a quarter of these requests (5,140) were made by 19- to 23-year-olds, who were able to apply for the loans in May for the first time.

“Providers have been told they would get a quick response and they haven’t,” Mark Dawe, AELP’s chief executive, told FE Week.

“We do not believe there is a lack of loans headroom, and there’s obviously a lot of interest in loans for 19- to 23-year-olds in particular, so it is worrying that many of our providers have had no response.”

All the learners who have been promised they are going to be enrolled are just waiting, waiting, waiting…

A senior FE consultant who declined to be named told FE Week that he was aware of some providers who had waited months for news on growth requests.

“Up until May/June time it was a two-day process, but since July I know of three providers that have been waiting on various different growth amounts from the SFA,” he said.

“At the moment what it’s doing is completely stifling the process; all the learners who have been promised they are going to be enrolled are just waiting, waiting, waiting.”

An SFA spokesperson said the organisation was reviewing “a significant number of requests as the loans programme continues to grow” and that it expected “to inform the majority of providers shortly”.

The agency’s figures, published in August, also showed that while there was a healthy interest in 19-to-23 loans – applications for learners aged 24 and above had fallen to just 14,310.

This was the lowest number for that age group, during the period, since the launch.

“The response from 19- to 23-year-olds is higher than I expected and it masks the fact that the applications from 24-plus have gone down,” said Mike

Farmer, an education consultant. “I do think – based on the evidence from higher education as well – it is the case that the younger you are, the less averse you are to taking out loans.”

Julian Gravatt, the assistant chief executive of the Association of Colleges, however said his organisation had been “pleased to see that over 5,000 younger adults under the age of 24 have already applied.”

Apprenticeships and skills minister Robert Halfon told FE Week: “Advanced learner loans enable adults of all ages to gain the skills they need and move up the ladder of opportunity. It’s great to see such a good take-up from those aged 19 to 23.”

Westminster Kingsway name change rejected, but others find loophole

Westminster Kingsway College’s bid to have itself rebranded as Central London Colleges Group was rejected over concerns its new name would undermine its neighbours, it has been revealed.

A Freedom of Information request found that the college’s request was turned down even though another institution, formed by the recent merger between Bromley College, Bexley College and Greenwich Community College, was permitted to use the name London South East Colleges (LSEC).

FE colleges are obliged to apply to the government in order to change their legal names, under rules set out in the Further and Higher Education Act 1992.

However, it seems as though LSEC has managed to exploit a loophole in the legislation; a spokesperson for the group told FE Week that London South East Colleges was merely a “trading name” rather than a legal one – a fact confirmed by the Department for Education, which said no rules had been broken.

Results from the FoI request, lodged last month, showed that the DfE and the now-defunct Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) had received 12 name-change requests within the past 24 months. Westminster Kingsway’s petition, which followed a merger with City and Islington College, was the only one the government turned down

In a letter written at the time, seen by FE Week, the former skills minister Nick Boles told them: “In my view, the name you propose would imply a sub-regional identity that significantly overstates the geographical coverage of the merged colleges and potentially undermines the status of other FE colleges in central London.”

The spokesperson for LSEC revealed that the college’s legal name is actually the less distinctive Bromley College Corporation.

“London South East Colleges is our trading name, which doesn’t require ministerial approval,” they said. “This would only be the case if we were changing the legal name of the corporation, which we are not; it remains Bromley College Corporation.”

However, there are a number of other colleges in the south-east of the capital – which could mean their brands are undermined, and that they lose out on learner applications, when pitted against LSEC’s impressive-sounding trading name.

Asked whether they felt LSEC’s workaround was fair, a spokesperson for Westminster Kingsway said on September 12: “As a group we were disappointed that our original proposal was rejected but we do not comment on the business of other colleges or groups.”

In July, the college told FE Week: “The colleges’ plans to collaborate and create a dynamic new group at the heart of London’s evolving FE sector are independent of the name we initially proposed and were not impacted by BIS’s decision.

“We are working separately to agree a new name and develop a new overarching brand which reflects our exciting plans. In the interim we will be called ‘WKCIC Group’ which has been approved by DfE.”

A press release issued on August 1 by the colleges involved in the South East London merger read: “Greenwich Community College and Bexley College have today formally merged with Bromley College of Higher and Further Education to create London South East Colleges.”

A local rival, Lewisham Southwark College, which itself had been permitted by BIS to change its name from LeSoCo in November 2014, declined to comment on LSEC’s name-change.

A DfE spokesperson told FE Week: “To clarify, Bromley College has not submitted an application to change its corporation name. ‘London South East Colleges’ is a brand (otherwise known as a trading) name. The name of the corporation remains unchanged for the time being. Trading names do not require statutory consent.”

AoC takes DfE to court over controversial new small school sixth form

Battle lines have been drawn by the Association of Colleges, after it launched its first judicial review against the government in more than a decade.

The legal action, which has cost AoC £50,000 so far, concerns the Department for Education’s decision to fund a new sixth form at Abbs Cross Academy and Arts College in Hornchurch.

It claims that DfE’s regional schools commissioner failed to follow the government’s own rules after approving the request from the Loxford School Trust.

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

They should also be graded ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted, offer a full programme of at least 15 A-levels, and not impose a financial burden on the rest of the school.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “We thought long and hard about this action, recognising that the legal costs would be high.

“We will have invested over £50,000 on this process; an investment we felt was necessary at this stage because we wanted to secure clarity on such an important issue.”

We will have invested over £50,000 on this process; an investment we felt was necessary at this stage because we wanted to secure clarity on such an important issue.”

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 two section eight special measures monitoring inspections, one in December 2015 and the following in March this year.

The latest report says that although both the trust’s statement of action and the academy’s improvement plan were “fit for purpose”, the academy’s leaders and managers were “not taking effective action towards the removal of special measures”.

It also advised that the academy should “not seek to appoint newly qualified teachers”.

Nick Linford gave his opinion on the move by the AoC - read it here. — Nick Linford gave his opinion on the move by the AoC – read it here.

The review, due to be heard in early November, is being launched by AoC in partnership with Havering Sixth Form College, which is 1.5 miles away from Abbs Cross.

AoC has 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.

Abbs Cross declined to comment, but a DfE spokesperson said: “We are aware of the judicial review launched by the Association of Colleges and Havering Sixth Form College. It would not be appropriate to comment while proceedings are ongoing.”

FE Week also contacted Dr Tim Coulson, the regional schools commissioner responsible for the decision to go ahead with the sixth form, but he did not respond.

At a Public Accounts Committee hearing in March on ‘overseeing financial sustainability in the further education sector’, Chris Wormald, a former permanent secretary for the DfE, commented on the new guidance, saying “we have just tightened our arrangements for approving new sixth forms.

“You can’t just set up a sixth form; you have to apply to us. The regional schools commissioner takes the decision on behalf of ministers, against the criteria.”

Chief executive of the Association of Colleges, David Hughes (pictured above) told FE Week:

We felt we had no choice but to initiate a judicial review when official government guidance designed to ensure the quality and viability of post-16 education was seemingly ignored.

We were delighted when the government responded to our calls for clear guidance on the establishment of new-school sixth forms, as for too many years the lack of it had allowed the creation of inappropriate school sixth forms.

All we are seeking for here is that the guidance is adhered to.

AoC has long been concerned about the quality and breadth of education available in small-school sixth forms.

Research shows that results in small-school sixth forms are often inferior to other options.

The risks are that young people are not given the advice, guidance and options which allow them to make an informed choice about the best route for them.

All we are seeking for here is that the guidance is adhered to

This is an area about which I’d urge the DfE to carry out more research and analysis on, to help us understand it better.

It would be helpful for Ofsted to carry out a thematic review of the information it already holds, as well as focus on it in future inspections.

The Sainsbury Review and skills plan [unveiled over the summer] provides welcome impetus to the development of high-quality technical education routes for young people.

This will require sufficient investment if it is to be implemented well.

Having too many small-school sixth forms will divert funding that would be better spent in colleges; the college blend of academic and technical education suits many young people.

In some circumstances, such as rural areas, a small-school sixth form is inevitable. In this instance we would want to see more support for partnerships between these sixth forms and colleges so that young people have the widest range of options available to them.

The Tories are letting the country down on apprenticeships funding

Theresa May hasn’t been Prime Minister for very long, so we can’t expect her to know the detail of every policy area.

But if you’re going to stand up at Prime Minister’s Questions and talk about cuts to apprenticeships funding, getting the facts right would be a good plan.

So when the Prime Minister says she “simply [doesn’t] recognise” there are many apprenticeships facing cuts of between 30 and 50%, she simply isn’t paying attention.

The Prime Minister […] simply isn’t paying attention

If someone in No 10 had been listening to my colleague Gordon Marsden, or read the letter signed by 55 Labour MPs, which raised the issue of cuts to apprenticeships funding, the Prime Minister would have been able to give a better answer on Wednesday.

The truth is that many apprenticeships are facing huge cuts as a result of this government’s funding reforms. These cuts will disproportionately hit students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and will be particularly bad in areas where we need to develop skills the most.

When the government has no industrial strategy, and when there is a huge need for a radical programme of housebuilding, delivering cuts of up to 50% for apprenticeships in construction is an abject failure.

Writing in these pages, Robert Halfon said that his focus would be to “boost social mobility, economic productivity, and our country’s skills base.”

These are laudable goals, which MPs of all parties share. But we need more than fine words.

The government’s headline pledge to deliver three million apprenticeship starts has turned this into a numbers game. With 96% of apprenticeship starts at Levels 2 and 3, there is a real concern that students are not being offered any progression to opportunities for higher level and degree level apprenticeships.

And with a worrying fall in apprenticeship completions, down from 76.4% in 2010/11 to 68.9% in 2013/14, the number of people who start apprenticeships does not tell the whole story.

Unless students are fully completing their apprenticeships, they will not be getting the skills they need to begin working life and to fully meet all their aspirations.

The Office for National Statistics has shown that the economies of Germany, France, and the USA are each around a third more productive than the UK economy.

We cannot hope to close that widening productivity gap unless we work more closely with businesses especially those working in high-tech sectors.

For too long, apprenticeships have been seen as a second-class, second-best option

We need to incentivise large businesses, and those in high-tech sectors, to train additional apprentices, and place them within both their own supply chain and with other SMEs in the local area. This will help more young people develop the skills they need, and provide support for SMEs to grow and develop. This will support both students and businesses, and help deliver the skills and economic growth that Britain needs.

It is only by working closely with all our partners, in business, and throughout the education sector that we can deliver the skills policy that our country needs.

We want to see a new approach to apprenticeships. For too long, they have been seen as a second-class, second-best option.

We need to change this attitude and work hard to raise public perceptions of their value.

Britain faces a massive skills shortage. We can only fill that gap, if we change our thinking and change our approach on apprenticeships.

As a country, we should be lauding the apprentice electricians, joiners, engineers, plumbers and business administrators of the future. Post Brexit, they will be absolutely essential to how Britain makes its way in the world.

As Shadow Secretary of State for Education, I will be working with my colleagues right across the House to build a coherent, cross-cutting approach to deliver high-quality apprenticeships for our country, which will equip our young people with the skills they need for the 21^st century.

Angela Rayner is Shadow Secretary of State for Education, Women and Equalities

Ofqual fines Pearson £85,000 over widespread certification failures

An £85,000 fine set to be waged on Pearson will be Ofqual’s second financial penalty against an awarding organisation.

The Ofqual notice explained that in May 2012 Pearson notified Ofqual that it had acquired Education Development International PLC, and “intended to cease registration of all EDI branded qualifications by January 2014 and complete certification for those qualifications by January 2017”.

But the awarding organisation admitted last April that an “incident” had occurred with the transfer of data — including learner results — about active EDI centres to a new online delivery platform, known as Qualification Management Application release 2, or QMA.

Ofqual said that Pearson had confirmed in March and April 2016 that, as a result of the incident, it had issued 1,566 vocational qualification certificates which recorded incorrect results; 41 certificates which incorrectly recorded a learner’s name; and 551 incorrect results.

It also conceded that 10,851 certificates had been issued outside its published timescale; and 1,648 results were “late, other than through the issue of a certificate”.

A Pearson spokesperson told FE Week: “We have agreed to pay a penalty in the sum of £85,000, with regard to failings arising from the migration of data to the QMA which is used to administer a small proportion of Pearson’s qualifications.

“We recognise the adverse impact this has had on our customers and learners and reiterate our apology to them for this incident.

“Our consistent focus has been on rectifying this situation and ensuring that the highest standards of service to our customers and learners are swiftly and consistently achieved. The QMA system is now working as intended.

“Ofqual has recognised our good record of operational effectiveness, our full cooperation in respect of this incident, and the extensive steps we had taken to rectify and mitigate problems and to compensate our customers.”

The qualifications and exams regulator published a notice today of the action it plans to take, which follows a £38,000 fine given to City & Guilds in July.

Ofqual’s own guidance on its fines regime for awarding organisations states: “We can impose a monetary penalty (a fine) on an awarding organisation if it appears, on the evidence available to us, that it has breached a condition of its recognition.

“A fine may be for an amount up to 10 per cent of an awarding organisation’s annual turnover. This limit applies to each fine we decide to impose and is not a cumulative limit for a financial year.

“We will decide what the appropriate amount of the fine should be taking into account all the circumstances of the case.”

Our first day in Parliament to #SaveOurApprenticeships

The government announced in August that from next May they will be cutting some 16-18 apprenticeship framework funding rates by over 50% in the most deprived parts of the country.

Well, when I say announced, what I mean is they published a searchable spreadsheet with the new rates, so I had to work out the implications myself.

FE Week published the analysis on 19 August, which – with the help of over 50 MPs – found its way into the Guardian, Independent and Mirror.

On Wednesday we launched our first official campaign in parliament, with the simple ambition to encourage the government to rethink this part of their reforms.

For all those that sent in their support, or anyone in any doubt of our ability to mobilise around a worthy cause, the following is an account of how the day unfolded.

Before midday, during an Education Select Committee, the Secretary of State for Education, Justine Greening, was quizzed by Catherine McKinnell MP about “very serious concerns” to 16-18 apprenticeships rate cuts. Ms Greening responded, “It’s a consultation. And we need to get on with the apprenticeship levy” and also added “we need to try and make sure we get it right.”

Reference to a consultation was a promising start to the day, as the government had barely acknowledged the cuts. Until this point they had been holding the line that there would be much more apprenticeship funding overall and they were just simplifying the system.

Ok, so the three-week consultation might have officially ended on 5 September, and change to the rates didn’t feature as a consultation question, but at least there was an acknowledgement now that the government was listening on this specific issue.

Less than an hour later, the Prime Minister came to the dispatch box – literally – for her weekly question time. To her surprise, she was asked by Richard Burden MP about the 30 to 50 percent apprenticeship rate cuts and her view on the Institute of the Motor Industry (IMI) “car crash” criticism.

The PM responded to say she didn’t recognise the situation, which promoted an independent fact-checking charity, Full Fact, to take a look.

They agreed with the analysis, concluding “some popular apprenticeship schemes for 16-18 year olds could receive between 30% and 50% less funding for each apprentice”.

As for the IMI, well, their boss was less than impressed, going on record with FE Week to say it was “typical of this administration. They are either deliberately misunderstanding or, like a drunk man in a china shop, they are unaware they’re about to break everything,”

Shortly after PMQs, the official #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign event began in a parliament committee room, as well as online, where it was at one point trending on Twitter as the fourth most used hashtag in the whole of the UK.

Even before my welcome, the event started with the new Skills Minister Robert Halfon encouraging me to get over 100 people into the committee room early and he then shook everyone’s hand personally.

So, Mr Halfon, prove you can be persuaded by measured and evidence-based debate

I had invited the minister to address the room, given he holds the key to undoing the rate cuts, but he was of course not supporting the campaign, which runs against his own policy.

However, on the specific purpose of the campaign, to reverse the rate cuts, he conceded: “We need to look at all of those figures and we are, that is the purpose of the consultation, I expect that there will be some people who are concerned but again, as I say, that is the purpose of the consultation.”

You can read a full transcript of what he said here as well as his related opinion piece in FE Week here.

At the end of his speech he directly addressed Gordon Marsden and David Lammy, who had helped organise the launch event, and said: “I am not annoyed by what Gordon and David are doing, I actually welcome it because it helps us with our thinking. If I were them, I would be doing exactly the same thing.”

So, where does that leave us?

It leaves us with nobody in any doubt, right up to the PM, that this is an issue many MPs are now campaigning about.

The impact on 16-18 funding rates first reported by FE Week has now been verified by a fact-checking charity, so who would dispute that left unresolved, it will damage the government’s credibility around boosting social mobility and justice?

So, Mr Halfon, this is perhaps your first opportunity as apprenticeships minister to prove consultations can be influenced by measured and evidence-based debate.

To date, you’ve said all the right things, now do the right thing and put an end to any apprenticeship funding cuts that hit the youngest and most disadvantaged hardest.

Tech in FE

FE Week Technology Supplement – click here to download.

With the Association for Learning Technology (ALT) holding its annual conference earlier in September, we thought this was the perfect time to take a look at all things technology-related for the FE and skills sector. The title of this supplement – Connect, Collaborate, Create – is taken from the theme of the ALT conference. On the next 16 pages we look at some of the many ways that colleges and other providers are working together to create innovative tech solutions to the challenges facing the sector.

On page three, Bella Abrams gives her unique insight on those challenges from her perspective as both a trustee for ALT and head of innovation and technology at Hull College Group. There was much to learn for FE delegates at the ALT conference, held from September 6 to 8 at the University of Warwick. We’ve pulled together a round-up of some of the highlights on pages four and five. No discussion of technology in FE would be complete without mentioning the FELTAG report – so on pages six and seven we speak to a number of people including Maren Deepwell, ALT chief executive, about how the FELTAG agenda has moved on since its publication in 2014.

One of the biggest challenges facing the sector at the moment is undoubtedly the area reviews of post-16 education and training. On pages 14 and 15 we look at the role that technology is playing in the review process, as well as some of the support that’s available to colleges to help them to make the most of technology during and after the review process.

It’s also important to keep tabs on what providers think are the biggest recent developments with tech for FE over the past year – so we dedicated a double page spread to provider responses to our survey on this issue, in the hope that others working in FE will pick up some good tips. These include Daniel Scott from Barnsley College, who won individual learning technologist of the year at the ALT awards this month. The supplement also reports on an exciting new research project, overseen by former Association of Colleges chief executive Martin Doel, that aims to be the first to provide hard evidence of the benefits of blended learning, and tech implications for FE and skills area reviews.

A full house for FE Week’s #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign

The #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign against devastating cuts in apprenticeship funding was launched at the Houses of Parliament to a packed gathering of sector leaders and senior politicians — including the minister tasked with implementing the plans.

It was standing-room only in Committee Room Nine on Wednesday (September 14), as editor Nick Linford kicked off the event.

The atmosphere was buzzing from the off, as Theresa May had just been questioned on the issue during Prime Minister’s Questions — responding that she “does not recognise” that there will be cuts of 30 to 50 per cent, as exclusively exposed by FE Week research.

In his speech, the new apprenticeships minister Robert Halfon called for apprenticeships to be viewed in the context of a better “new world” – after the switch from frameworks to standards, and next April’s levy launch.

However, he conceded, “we need to look at all of those figures and we are”.

“I’m really pleased to be here on behalf of FE Week, which is an incredibly important publication,” he added. “I went on my honeymoon in August and was literally reading past papers on the mountains in Brazil.

[slideshow_deploy id=’50570′]

“The way I think of Nick and his incredible team is that they make the social media life of a new minister intolerable, but complacency impossible.”

More than 50 MPs, led by Tottenham’s David Lammy, have signed a letter urging Mr Halfon to reverse the cuts.

Mr Lammy delivered a rousing speech at the launch, saying: “It’s an absolute scandal for the PM to say she doesn’t recognise the figures. It’s her funding agency, they’re her figures.”

FE Week’s exclusive analysis revealed funding for 16- to 18-year-olds in some of the most deprived areas of the country would be slashed by up to 50 per cent.

“They are launching a two-tier system. If you are 16 to 18 in Tottenham, if you live in poorer areas, you will get a very different product indeed from those living in the leafy shires,” said Mr Lammy.

But, he insisted “we will force a U-turn.”

We will force a U-turn

Gordon Marsden, the shadow HE and FE minister, who hosted the event, warned that the cuts are “an elephant trap in his [Mr Halfon’s] in-tray”.

“If this goes wrong, not only will ministers have egg on their faces, but faith in the whole new system they want us to take part in will be undermined,” he said

Education secretary Justine Greening had dodged a question about the way that proposed cuts might affect social mobility during an education select committee hearing that morning — before the issue was raised again in a sub-committee session featuring the CBI’s director for people and skills, Neil Carberry.

The chair of the education committee, Neil Carmichael, and one of its members, Catherine McKinnell both spoke passionately at our launch.

“I asked her [Ms Greening] specifically about this campaign and whether she shares concerns that the particular approach they are taking to funding will impact on her ambition for social mobility,” Ms McKinnell said. “The right funding needs to get to the right people.”

The right funding needs to get to the right people

A variety of sector leaders also spoke out about their concerns, including the College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London’s vice-principal for curriculum and learner experience, Kurt Hintz.

“I thought it was important to explain exactly what this means for a provider on the coalface,” he said.

“The impact on us is an average 38-per-cent cut for 16- to 18-year-olds. That represents £700,000. For our health and care 16-to-18s, it is 45 per cent. That is just not doable; we can’t deliver.

“Someone asked me the other day, ‘what is it you do for 16- to 18-year-olds that costs so much money?’ We got them the jobs. They didn’t get them themselves.

“We have a team of eight sales execs whose job it is to go out and seek the apprenticeships with employers, and then get those young people ready for their first job.

“Once we’ve got them that, the subsequent pastoral care is also huge.”

Paul Warner, director of policy and strategy at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, warned: “It is completely self-defeating to cut funding, because that is just preventing disadvantaged young people from getting on.”

Kirstie Donnelly, managing director at City and Guilds UK, added: “We must take stock with apprenticeships, because clearly as it stands the funding for many new frameworks may not work, which would be a tragedy.”

Graham Briggs, the apprenticeship manager at Greene King, said: “We have made a commitment to take on 10,000 apprentices over the next three years.

“The lack of testing on both the new standards and digital voucher system alongside the new funding rates means we are concerned about the impact this will have on our programme.”

____________________________________________________________

#SaveOurApprenticeships day in Parliament

11.15

Secretary of State for Education Justine Greening quizzed by Catherine McKinnell MP about the 16-18 rate cuts during an Education Select Committee hearing in the Grimond Room

12.20

Prime Minister Theresa May in PMQs challenged about the 16-18 rate cuts by Labour MP Richard Burden on the floor of the House of Commons

12.45

Apprenticeships Minister Robert Halfon addresses the FE Week #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign launch in committee room 9

15.10

Director for People and Skills at the CBI Neil Carberry talks to MPs about the effects on per-apprentice funding at an Education Select Committee hearing on apprenticeships in committee room 16

17.50

Full Fact, an impartial fact checking charity, look into the issue after the question to the PM, and agreed “some popular apprenticeship schemes for 16-18 year olds could receive between 30% and 50% less funding for each apprentice, depending on their circumstances.”