Latest news from FE Week

Up Pompeii

Shane Chowen looks into the fallout for FE from the Brexit vote.

I wanted to start my column this week with the line ‘now that the post-referendum dust has settled’ but, much like Pompeii in 79 AD, the country will be beset with poor foresight and a somewhat toxic atmosphere for some months to come.

At the time of writing, Jeremy Corbyn’s parliamentary Labour Party has turned against him, David Cameron has passed responsibility for leading Brexit negotiations to his successor, and social media timelines are full of commentary on a divided country.

Above all that though, and far more worryingly, are reports indicating a significant rise in racially-motivated hate crime since the referendum.

Right here in Leicester, where the Learning and Work Institute’s head office is based, disgusting racist abuse has been hurled at kids in the same streets where all communities came together to celebrate the Premiership win, only last month.

I can’t be the only one from the world of FE feeling like our national values are being put to the test right now.

In a previous column, I wrote about how the government’s upcoming Life Chances Strategy provided the FE and skills sector with an opportunity to make its case and showcase our success.

In particular, in providing people, often facing multiple disadvantages, with routes to success they would otherwise not be afforded, particularly students with health conditions and disabilities and those from the most deprived postcodes in our country.

There are now reports that the Life Chances Strategy, announced in the Queen’s Speech earlier this year, has been shelved.

So before we have a new Prime Minister to begin the process of our departure from the European Union (or not) and/or potentially repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011 to seek a fresh new mandate through a general election, where should our focus be?

Your students still want high quality teaching and learning and your local economy still has skills needs

All signals from the government so far certainly indicate business as usual.

The Skills Minister confirmed last week that even though there are delays in publishing new apprenticeship funding rates, the levy is still set to be introduced in nine months-time.

Officials still anticipate the go-ahead to publish the Sainsbury Review of Technical and Professional Education, and indications are that Department for Work and Pensions continue with developing the Work and Health Programme as planned.

FE is fundamentally important in delivering several powerful policy drivers, which I don’t anticipate being rowed back under a new Conservative prime minister.

Key among them is achieving full employment, halving the disability employment gap and achieving three million apprenticeship starts.

Alongside that, your students still want high-quality teaching and learning, your local economy still has skills needs and your governors still expect to see improvement and financial sustainability.

I try not to make these columns too policy-heavy where I can help it.

But I do think the sector will have to up its lobbying activity around European Social Fund replacement funding in the months and years to come — especially in areas of the country like Cornwall and large parts of the north-east, which are some of the most deprived areas in Europe and often overlooked by Westminster.

The morning after the vote, higher education site WonkHE issued a rallying cry to leaders of that sector and lobbyists to ‘get the next train from St Pancras to Brussels’ and seek answers to questions over the future of EU funded research — a massive income stream for many universities.

I am hopeful we can do the same to rally behind our interests.

Finally, returning to the images and videos we’ve seen showing the rise of racism and hatred and fear, we absolutely must make sure our extraordinary, and often extraordinarily diverse, institutions remain safe spaces for all students and staff.

The area review process should be about much more than sustainability

Alun Francis, principal and chief executive of Oldham College, explains what the recently completed Greater Manchester area based review has meant for his institution and for the region overall.

Having just completed the area based review process in Greater Manchester, we believe that for our college and our town, we have an excellent outcome.

We are part of a proposal to merge three colleges to form a new organisation in East Manchester.

The proposal has been formed collaboratively and led by professionals within the sector, but working closely with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, local authorities, employer organisations, the FE Commissioner’s team, The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and the Skills Funding Agency

This approach has for us been universally positive, and has meant that we have balanced local, regional and national priorities with educational, economic and community imperatives.

Although the area review process is primarily about sustainability, it should be about much more than this.

Post-16 education and skills does need an overhaul, and in our region, this is all the more urgent if Greater Manchester is going to meet its ambitions around devolution and the Northern Powerhouse.

This is why we believe that the combined authority was right to insist that the area review be managed under the broader umbrella of the “Stronger Together” strategy of the city region.

Of course, this does mean that the process has not been without its challenges.

The reform of FE is still an unfinished masterpiece, especially in terms of resolving the “dual mandate” of general FE colleges (the tension between second chance provision and high achieving vocational education) and even more so, in terms of the status and structure of “academic” and technical and professional routes.

Furthermore, FE organisations, having developed within a rather confusing and rapidly changing policy landscape, are heterogeneous, and their tendency, in a market driven system, is to defend their territory rather than engage in collaborative system redesign.

This does mean that the area review process can descend into either stasis or opportunism, when what we need is clear vision and strategy.

However, these obstacles should not prevent us from shaping a new forward facing system.

While it is not perfect, the area based review process is an opportunity to build the foundations of a new organisational infrastructure which can support the trajectory of reform.

By working together, through the partnership structures which Greater Manchester is well known for, we are proposing a new organisation, ready and willing to focus on building stronger technical and professional specialisms, shared across a wider geographical area, and able to deliver these on scale in both classroom and work based settings.

While small is beautiful in educational delivery, especially around the performance management of staff and students and engagement with local stakeholders, big is much better for the strategic engagement of employers and in terms of our capacity to respond to the wider economic opportunities and regeneration challenges of the city. This is what a restructure can help to achieve, alongside improved efficiency.

We expect to see a debate about who is going to take responsibility for the 20% of school leavers who lack even basic English and maths skills

Structural reorganisation is only the start of the story, and it will need to be supported by a host of further developments, from the professional development of staff, through to the continuing reform of inspection, funding and curriculum content.

We also need a proper debate in this country about the distinctive character of vocational pedagogy. However, the value of the combined authority is that, as the area review is completed, we retain a strategic partnership for addressing these issues.

We are expecting that the skills white paper later in July will provide added impetus for the direction we are moving in.

It is probably helpful that, having been given the opportunity to merge and reorganise with their GFE cousins, sixth form colleges here have opted en masse for academisation.

This invites a more robust debate about our relative roles and our distinct and specialist contributions – issues which we believe the Sainsbury Review is going to help us grapple with.

We expect to see a debate about who is going to take responsibility for the 20 per cent of school leavers who lack even basic English and maths skills, and a debate about the extensive number of “blended” pathways which are neither properly academic or properly vocational.

These are the big issues which we need to resolve and we are pleased that in Greater Manchester, the area review has initiated the process of structural and organisational reorganisation needed to make this happen, and that with the combined authority and employer stakeholders, we have a framework for partnerships working which will ensure that we don’t stop here.

Ward Warning – get data right else face funding clawback

The Skills Funding Agency has written to all colleges and independent learning providers to make sure they are aware of data compliance with funding rules.

Dawn Ward (pictured), chair of the SFA’s data and management information advisory group, sent the letter as part of a new in-year financial assurance monitoring process.

Just before Christmas in 2014, more than 700 FE providers were outraged when they were warned by the SFA’s deputy director Una Bennett that they faced a shock clawback on that year’s funding after the agency “identified some provision that has been incorrectly claimed”.

But following outcry on the funding agency’s Feconnect online forum, where some stakeholders claimed the warning had caused “sleepless nights”, SFA director Keith Smith issued an apology for the letter.

Subsequently, nearly 100 providers were asked to repay funding, with the remaining 601 providers who had been contacted spared from a reclaim.

In this week’s letter, Ms Ward wrote: “It is important that as a sector we now make sure our data is accurate before the end of the funding year 2015/16.

“If the SFA has identified records in a monitoring area, you must review this data and determine whether you need to make any data corrections. You should make these in your next ILR submission.

“You must ensure that you have the evidence to justify the funding claimed where the data is correct, including your subcontractors’ data.”

Ms Ward said the SFA must have “confidence” in funding claims and are taking this action to “ensure we work effectively together to reduce the volume of data errors” at the end of the year.

She added: “If you have data errors at the end of the funding year following the closure of R14 ILR return, the SFA may recover funding and conduct assurance visits for specific issues.”

The SFA said records must be corrected before the close of the R14 ILR data submission on October 20 this year.

The SFA has also published the key findings from its Provider Financial Management and Assurance work in 2015/16.

One of the most significant findings from the report was that providers were unable to evidence the delivery of learner support for which they received funding.

Apprenticeship levy pilot helping employers make the most of their levy funds

Tanja Kuveljic, chief executive of the charity Believe in Young People, discusses one approach to matching young people with the right options for work and helping employers to make the best use of the apprenticeship levy.

It is less than 12 months until the introduction of the government’s apprenticeship levy, and there are still a great deal of unknowns.

We’d been promised more information this month, but with Brexit, this has been delayed. Employers, including many FE institutions, are still unclear how they can maximise the opportunities it will offer or costs it will incur.

We are all acutely aware that hiring young people can be resource intensive – with inductions, training and investment needed from the start.

I am privileged to work for the charity Believe in Young People (BiYP), which brings together educators and employers to develop and prepare young people for future employment through an integrated curriculum programme.

The programme provides personalised information, advice and guidance (IAG), employer-led workshops, careers talks, mentoring and structured work-experience placements alongside their curricular studies, so that young people leave school with the much needed skills and behaviours to enter the world of work.

A recent Institute of Education evaluation credited BiYP with providing colleges and schools with an alternative model for careers advice which integrates the approaches currently used by different institutions before and after the age of 16. Using our digital platform, employability skills testing and feedback is carried out by teachers, employers and learners so that progress is measured and understood.

This systematically matches the learner with suitable employment opportunities, pinpointing the skills which learners need to be hone the most.

Ultimately, when learners take on entry level jobs or apprenticeships, they’re ready to work and less burdensome for employers. This has been demonstrated by BiYP’s programme so far, which has seen employers achieve up to 80% recruitment cost savings whilst taking on more work-ready youngsters.

Despite the uncertainty many employers currently have, they will have decisions to make about how to spend their levy funds and will undoubtedly be looking to make efficiencies in the process of hiring young talent. Employer needs will have to be increasingly reflected in the way educational institutions implement careers guidance.

When BiYP employer partners use their levy funds to take on apprentices, they will be able to take on more high quality apprentices, and schools and colleges will be key partners in achieving this.

Over the next year, BiYP is leading an innovative pilot, aimed at demonstrating the value of delivering employer-led careers guidance and structured work experience placements at secondary school level so that young people are more prepared for taking on an apprenticeship when they leave.

Employer needs will have to be increasingly reflected in the way educational institutions implement careers guidance.

The pilot brings together large UK employers, schools and colleges and is supported by organisations including the Confederation of British Industry, Association of Employment and Learning Providers, National Union of Students, Association of Teachers and Lecturers and University College London. BiYP will deliver and measure the programme, with UCL leading on a research study which will include a series of employer, educator and young people case studies from the participating partners.

The pilot will measure the transition of young people from the BiYP programme into apprenticeships and their retention and productivity as apprentices.

This in turn will provide a significant insight into the financial feasibility of the levy for employers, and provide a comparison of the economic impact on employers in different UK target regions.

Nick Boles, the minister for skills, recently announced to the House of Commons that ‘apprenticeships are for everyone’.

If this is to be true, the system for how apprentices are employed needs to be more comprehensive, pulling together employers, educators and young people. Only with this collaboration will apprentices be truly valuable to young people and employers and be worthwhile for schools and colleges to recommend as a route to employment.

Post-Brexit views from delegates

An FE Week Twitter poll on the opening day of the AELP conference asked whether Skills Minister Nick Boles should announce that apprenticeship reforms would continue or not post-Brexit.

Of the choices available, most opted for scrapping them — which was not a view shared by the delegates we spoke to (see below).

Mr Boles then indicated in his speech to delegates that the government planned to press on with plans for the levy due in April, and wider reforms.

We also asked conference delegates, and a selection of sector leaders, for their wider views on the British public’s decision to leave the European Union through the referendum on June 23.

See vox pops pdf.

VOX POP QUESTION:

Is the government right to plough on with apprenticeship reforms? Or should it pause – or even scrap them altogether?

David Phillips
Director of product marketing,
City & Guilds

“I think pausing very briefly and just reconsidering the implications of Brexit. I don’t think it will make any difference; I think we’ll carry on. But now is a good time, if any, just to do a sense check.”

Claire Buckland
Head of Uni@Work,
Coventry University

“More than ever we need to have the opportunity for young people to be invested in. The timescales are very tight, but people are starting to gain momentum behind it now, and it would be foolish to abandon it at the last minute.”

Jeanette Rosato
Finance director,
TSP Learn

We’ve completely geared up for this; we’ve been talking to employers for months, we’ve been raising expectations – we can’t now go back and say, “actually everybody, what we’ve been talking about, that’s not going to happen.”

James Bishop
Managing director,
TSP learn

“There is certainly a lack of consistency in some of the messaging, so for that reason: stay on course, stay on target.”

Professor Daniel Khan
Principal,
St Patrick’s College

“Now that we voted to leave the EU there’s even more crucial demand for skills training, because a lot of the employment opportunities filled from abroad will now have to be filled by local people.”

Anne Wright
Operations director,
Workpays

“We’ve waited long enough – we all need to keep the momentum going with our own teams and keep our own workforces stable.”

Neil Smith
National sales manager,
Blackpool and the Fylde College

“I think in the wake of all the uncertainty over Brexit, the sensible thing to do is to press on with policies you’ve already put forward.”

Julie McCracken
Social inclusion team leader,
Genius Within

“It helps to mitigate against panic reaction, and it’s a really
good thing that we’re going to be focusing on growing our own talent.”

Sue Wright
Director of employer services and partnerships, Huntingdon Regional College

“The apprenticeship reform is unaffordable in the long term without that kind of employer contribution, but I’m still worried about the timing.”

Sharon McCluskey
Employer and learner engagement officer,
Children’s Link

“I think we’ve known this is coming for a while and – while there is resistance – now we’re on that journey, I think abandoning or pausing it now would only throw everything into more tumult.”

Click image to view pdf

Boles upbeat over area reviews, despite continued delays

Post-16 education and skills area reviews have so far gone “surprisingly well”, according to Nick Boles, who has admitted he expected them to be “more painful, more quickly”.

The skills minister’s positive comments to the Association of Employment and Learning Providers conference on Monday however contrasted with his plea two weeks earlier, for colleges to co-operate more with Greater Manchester steering group chair Theresa Grant, following a string of FE Week revelations about clashes over possible mergers.

All bar two of the first wave of area reviews are now thought to have finished – although not all have published their outcomes (see table).

The earliest steering group meetings for wave one were held way back in September.

Guidance published by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills at the time gave a typical timescale of three to four months for each review – but this was extended to four to six months when the guidance was updated in March.

Only one area from the first wave actually managed to complete by the six-month deadline – Birmingham and Solihull, which ended in early March, proposing one merger.

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers subsequently branded it a waste of time and money, because it had only resulted in “limited change”.

Tees Valley’s review completed in May, seven and a half months after it started, with three proposed mergers.

Sheffield City became the third area to announce its outcomes last month – almost nine months after its first steering group meeting – which included just two merger proposals.

FE Week understands that both the Solent and Sussex reviews have held their final steering group meetings, but the recommendations from these reviews – which both began on November 5 – have not yet been published.

A statement issued on June 24 by Ms Grant said the Greater Manchester review was in its “final stages” – but it did not include any recommendations, nor did it say if the review had held its final steering group meeting.

Mr Boles was forced to urge the colleges involved to take her comments on board and “grasp the [merger] opportunities more boldly”, during a parliamentary debate on FE in the area on June 15.

The West Yorkshire area review, which began on November 16, is expected to hold its final meeting in July, according to a spokesperson for one of the colleges involved.

Martin Doel, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, challenged Mr Boles’ optimism about the area reviews.

He said there had been some “concerns” about the early reviews; “late and inaccurate data was presented to colleges, along with weak administrative arrangements and lack of analysis to support any options being put forward by the FE Commissioner’s team.”

He also warned of the “significant risk” that colleges involved in the later waves would be “preoccupied” by the reviews “when they should be preparing for apprenticeship growth and other policy developments”.

James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association, said that sixth form colleges had dealt with the reviews “incredibly well”.

But he said that timing had been “one of the biggest challenges” to the process, and called for more flexibility through both the review process and the implementation phase.

“Rushing colleges through a four-month process is not conducive to sensible, long-term decision-making,” he said.

BIS has now announced all the colleges involved in the first three waves of the reviews, as well as indicative areas for the fourth and fifth waves.

All area reviews are expected to be completed by March 2017.

Exclusive Cornwall College principal Amarjit Basi resigns

The principal of Cornwall College has resigned, according to a statement from the chair of the board of governors exclusively revealed to FE Week.

Amarjit Basi, who has been principal and chief executive of The Cornwall College Group since 2013, will leave his post on July 31, when his deputy Raoul Humphreys will become acting chief executive and principal until a new permanent replacement has been found.

FE Week has seen a statement from Philip Rees, chair of governors at Cornwall College, about Mr Basi’s resignation, and expects the information to be released to staff and stakeholders at the college shortly.

It said: “It is with regret that the board of governors of Cornwall College has accepted the resignation of Amarjit Basi.

“Amarjit has been the principal and chief executive officer of the college for the last three years, during which he has led the college to change its direction and structures, delivered a very good Ofsted inspection outcome and overseen the merger with Bicton College.

“We wish him well with the next stage of his career in further and higher education.

“The Board of Governors will immediately put in place the process of recruiting a new principal and CEO, and in the meantime has asked Raoul Humphreys to become acting CEO and principal from when Amarjit leaves on 31 July 2016 until that process is complete.”

Cornwall College has been plagued with funding troubles in recent months, receiving a notice of concern from the Skills Funding Agency for in financial concern in April.

A spokesperson for the college told FE Week at the time: “The college was required to give a three year financial forecast, which has been in place since last summer.”

Then in May, FE Week reported that the University and College Union (UCU) had called on Mr Basi to take a pay cut to show solidarity with up to 60 staff set to lose their jobs through cutbacks at the college.

The college told FE Week that the cuts were “part of reductions to back office and management to reduce our cost base, as well as some teaching posts, which are affected due to reduced recruitment on some courses”.

FE Week has also seen a comment from Mr Basi on his decision to leave Cornwall College, saying: “I have found my three years at the College both rewarding and challenging, and throughout my time I have been privileged to work with many outstanding colleagues.

“At the same time, those who are close to me will recognise that the past few months have highlighted for me, that my true passion lies in teaching, learning and organisational development, and it is this direction that I wish to pursue the next stage of my career.”

Mr Basi’s leadership has been singled out for criticism in the past, on top of the recent challenges faced by Cornwall College.

In 2015, a report from the FE Commissioner condemned what was described as his “expansionist policy” while at the helm of his previous place of work, New College Nottingham (NCN).

Sir David Collins, who visited NCN in February last year, said: “During its recent history in each year since 2006/07, the college had delivered an underlying surplus until 2013/14 when it recorded a significant deficit, the magnitude of which was not anticipated by the senior management team and not communicated to governors.

“There were a number of reasons for this deterioration in the college’s financial position but the key ones were the expansionist policy of the previous principal, which involved diversification into a number of unprofitable non-core activities.”

During Mr Basi’s time as principal, NCN became a founding member of The Gazelle Group, an association of colleges which cost £35,000 a year in membership fees.

Martin Doel: ‘FE providers mustn’t slag each other off’

The outgoing boss of the Association of Colleges has launched into a plea for sector unity — after warning providers to be careful when they “slag off” the opposition.

Martin Doel (pictured), who will be replaced by the current Learning and Work Institute chief executive David Hughes from September, pulled no punches during his speech to the Association of Employment and Learning Providers conference on Monday (June 27).

He warned that infighting would cause the whole sector to “suffer”, just a week after the AELP’s boss Mark Dawe told FE Week that financial assistance for colleges could put “apprenticeship organisations in direct competition with independent training providers”.

Addressing a packed conference room, Mr Doel said: “I have quite often have the experience of colleges thinking that they are gaining the benefit by criticising other colleges and I’ve heard of independent training providers criticising other ITPs, and ITPs criticising colleges.

“For what it’s worth on my reflection, short-term that might give you some advantage; long-term all of us suffer in the training and education market, because we are destroying value in our own industry, which is a shared industry.”

He added: “Be careful when you’re seen to slag off the opposition in order to win.

“It’s a kind of Mourinho moment [the Chelsea manager who was sacked last season after losing the support of his players], in terms of actually concentrating on how well your team plays and actually competes in that market.”

Despite Mr Doel’s comments, the AoC was not subsequently willing to give any examples of the criticism between providers that he described.

He spoke out after the AELP claimed last month that 76 per cent (378,170 of 499,900) of all apprenticeship starts in 2014/15 were shown to be delivered by ITPs rather than colleges.

The association published the analysis using Skills Funding Agency data, obtained through a freedom of information request.

Skills minister Nick Boles spoke on the matter at the AoC annual conference last November, asking principals: “Why on earth are you letting these guys [ITPs] nick your lunch?”

But after hearing the AoC chief executive’s conference speech, Mr Dawe was keen to stress his organisation was focused simply on equal treatment, and did not support backbiting.

He told FE Week: “There is nothing to be gained for any type of provider to be critical of another — especially when there are official government measures, inspections and data to provide an impartial judgement of performance.

“We have also said many times that the best delivery involves a strong partnership between a college and providers meeting the needs of their local employers.

“Our concern is that the government itself may be trying to tilt the playing field away from independent providers in the face of the challenges now affecting the sector as a whole.”

Mr Dawe previously discussed the issue with FE Week before the conference, when he explained that he wanted a “level playing field” for public and private providers.

He said at the time: “We are concerned that the government is providing financial assistance to colleges to help set up apprenticeship organisations in direct competition with independent training providers.”

Angela Rayner appointed as third shadow education secretary in a week

Angela Rayner, the MP for Ashton-under-Lyme and a former care worker and union representative, has been appointed the new shadow education secretary, FE Week understands.

Sources in the Labour Party have exclusively confirmed to our sister title FE Week that Rayner, who entered Parliament at the 2015 general election, has been promoted to the role at the head of the opposition front-bench team. She is the third politician to serve in the role since Sunday.

Rayner previously served as an opposition whip and shadow pensions minister in Labour’s frontbench team, but was promoted to the role of shadow women and equalities minister on Monday following a mass-exodus of MPs unhappy with Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.

Lucy Powell, who had served as shadow education secretary since September, was one of 11 shadow cabinet members to resign on Sunday, and her replacement Pat Glass stepped down on Wednesday after just 50 hours in post.

Before she entered Parliament, Rayner worked for Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council as a care worker and subsequently served as convener of UNISON North West.