The government has consistently underspent on a scheme to boost awareness of T Levels despite chronically poor understanding of the qualifications, new figures show.
Officials have failed to recruit enough T Level ambassadors, tasked with publicising the courses and encouraging take-up from businesses and students, and have spent just three quarters of the allocated budget for the ambassador network.
In March, the National Audit Office (NAO) cast doubt on the scalability of T Levels after finding that student number forecasts were missed by three quarters. This resulted in an underspend of almost £700 million from the qualification’s launch in 2020 to 2024-25.
To achieve revised student enrolment numbers the Department for Education (DfE) “recognises it must do more to improve awareness”, a follow-up report from Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said this summer.
The DfE told MPs on the PAC that despite T Levels being in their fifth year of delivery, only half of school students and a third of employers knew about them.
The T Level ambassador network was set up in 2021 to “advance the recognition and adoption” of T Levels. New figures obtained by FE Week through a freedom of information request show that the DfE has failed to spend its budget for this network in each of the past four years.
Of the network’s £360,000 total budget since its inception, three quarters (£258,000) has been spent. While a £102,000 underspend is small compared with the full T Levels budget, it raises questions about the DfE’s efforts at raising awareness of the qualifications.
Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said the figures were disappointing.
“Lack of public awareness of these qualifications is one of the key challenges that we face in embedding them in post-16 education and it is vital that awareness-raising initiatives are delivered,” he told FE Week.
Missed milestone
The ambassador network has recruited over 1,000 providers, students and employers as volunteers. But it has missed a key target for employer ambassadors to make up 65 per cent of the network by June 2024.
Documents released by the DfE show that as of February this year, just over one third (313) of the 861-strong network were business representatives.
Industry placements are a key part of T Levels but there are concerns that there are not enough employers willing to offer work placements when T Levels are fully rolled out. T Levels suffer from a high-dropout rate, in part because employer placements have not been secured.
A report by the Edge Foundation last year found that while industry placements were a major draw for T Levels students, the reality had been “polarising”, with some students blamed when work experience could not be obtained.
Imran Tahir, senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said: “I think that is one of the big issues with scaling up a qualification like T Levels … they need buy-in from local employers to actually make them possible.”
The government launched a T Level Employer Support Fund in 2023 to incentivise employers to host the mandatory 45-day industry placement. But an FE Week investigation found that nearly half of the £8.5 million available was clawed back.
In June the DfE launched a fresh £6.3 million fund to incentivise employers to provide T Level industry placements, but only in construction and health for large companies and all subjects for small employers.
Offline ambassadors
Budget figures obtained by FE Week show that the main annual expenditure of the T Level ambassador network was hosting and sending ambassadors to events as well as establishing the T Level ambassador national conference.
In March 2023 the DfE injected £10,000 into an app for ambassadors to talk to each other and share ideas.
Documents of app usage data, which cover November 2023 to January 2024, show the number of users increased over the quarter but activity dropped. By early 2024, 192 of the entire cohort had downloaded the app, but only 19 were active.
Shifting responsibility for skills between two government departments risks further destabilising the “sofa surfing” policy area, experts have warned.
The surprise announcement that skills will move from the Department for Education to the Department for Work and Pensions came last Friday after Angela Rayner’s resignation triggered a Cabinet reshuffle.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer appointed trusted problem-solver Pat McFadden as work and pensions secretary under an expanded brief.
McFadden reportedly told DWP staff he will be “expanding” access to skills training to tackle stubbornly high numbers of young people who are not in education, employment, or training (NEET).
However, it remains unclear which skills budgets this new growth-boosting “super ministry” will hold alongside employment and welfare.
Neither the DWP, DfE, nor Downing Street would comment on how skills programmes and budgets will be carved up between departments.
However, FE Week understands the adult skills fund (ASF), skills bootcamps, and other DfE policy levers for getting adults into work are likely to move to the new department, while decisions are yet to be made on who has responsibility for apprenticeships and Skills England.
The government has confirmed that Jacqui Smith will continue as skills minister but her role will straddle both the DWP and DfE, where she will retain responsibility for higher education and elements of FE that will stay at the DfE, such as 16-19 funding and college oversight.
Realignment or upheaval?
Experts and sector leaders see the move as an opportunity to tackle unemployment rates with a long-needed alignment of skills training with employment support, reinventing the role of Jobcentres, and reducing “frustrating duplication” between some DWP and DfE training programmes.
Sector leaders have been speculating about how the government plans to rapidly align work and welfare policies with skills in a way that will impact growth, productivity and employment rates.
Former skills minister Robert Halfon said the move will have “pluses”, such as creating a “coherent, focused approach” to tackling unemployment and removing “frustrating duplication” caused by two departments running parallel training schemes.
But he warned that “another upheaval” in government, soon after the launch of Skills England, risks “confusing the policy landscape” for learners and employers.
Moving the brief risks the government being distracted by “moving the furniture around” rather than important issues such as achievement rates and recruitment of FE staff, he added.
Tim Leunig, ex-government adviser and director at Public First, said: “My own view is that ‘machinery of government’ changes are a nightmare, and usually lead people to think about internal issues, not the real issues in the country.
“Things like incompatible data storage systems, analysts and policy people who need to be divided into two, teams who are based in a DfE location that has no DWP office and have to commute a long way, or seek a new job, sometimes with a real loss of expertise.”
Joined up policy dreams
Working-age benefits are projected to rise from £48 billion to more than £70 billion by 2030 and more than 900,000 young people not in work or training.
Having direct control over skills funding could bolster DWP’s efforts to target youth NEET numbers, which have so far been limited to funding pilot-style regional programmes known as ‘youth guarantee trailblazers’ with a relatively small overall budget of about £45 million per year.
Stephen Evans, CEO at the Learning and Work Institute, said that moving skills is an opportunity to “genuinely join things up” by offering training to the estimated 4.5 million out-of-work people who have low numeracy and literacy skills.
Figures within the sector note that skills has been part of six different government departments in the past 30 years.
“[Skills] has been around the houses, it’s the sofa surfing policy area… but what matters really is what you do,” Evans added.
“I would say the risk is that just we carry on as we are in a different building – the opportunity is to genuinely join things up a bit.”
This could include rationalising the various training programmes aiming to help people gain skills for work and merging the array of plans to improve skills, employment, and growth that local areas are now required to produce.
Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes added: “The big risk with this shift is that senior officials spend lot of their time negotiating the change and implementing rather than getting on with the day job.
“The opportunity is that we’ve got another secretary of state fighting for and advocating for funding for post-16, skills, apprenticeships and the adult skills fund.
“So I think the positives outweigh the negatives for me. Isn’t it great that someone wants it and really thinks they can do something?”
‘Avoiding the trap of short-termism’
The skills policy control shift comes at a busy time for FE, as Labour continues to turn the apprenticeship levy into a growth and skills levy offer, and ahead of a post-16 white paper expected before Christmas.
Without apprenticeships, the work and pensions secretary will gain limited extra funding from taking over skills, as about two thirds of both adult skills fund and skills bootcamps are dished out to mayors and local authorities to manage.
Ben Rowland, CEO at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said apprenticeships are critical for Jobcentres to be able to get people “onto a more productive path”.
He added: “If they’re keeping apprenticeships in the DfE, it doesn’t give Pat McFadden tools he needs – he needs to have apprenticeships, short courses and [higher technical qualifications] at his disposal.
“Otherwise, it’s a non-significant announcement.”
For Halfon, who first became skills minister when the policy brief moved from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) in 2016, the reorganisation has potential to deliver a “long-needed” joined up approach to skills and employment.
He added: “But success will depend on avoiding the trap of short-termism and ensuring that quality apprenticeships and skills programmes remain at the heart of our national mission.
“The stakes are high: get this right, and we can transform lives and boost productivity. Get it wrong, and we risk undermining years of progress in skills development.”
Starts on level 7 apprenticeships have surged, prompting warnings about a “totally predictable” run on the stretched apprenticeships budget before government funding is axed.
FE Week analysis of official figures reveals a 24 per cent spike, year on year, between August 2024 and April 2025.
The figures, based on the latest available data from the Department for Education (DfE), show that new starts rose by 5,000 to reach 25,799 for the first three quarters of the last academic year. There were 1,939 more starts than for the entire 2023-24 academic year.
The biggest surge came this spring, when starts rose by 65 per cent year-on-year, while in March alone they more than doubled, from 1,457 in 2024 to 3,023 this year.
Monthly spikes in starts are expected to intensify further this autumn as employers, training providers and universities scramble to beat the levy cut-off in January 2026.
The ‘big financial headache’
The DfE recorded its first overspend on the apprenticeships budget last year. Despite a record £3.075 billion allocated for 2025-26, ministers are relying on headroom saved from axing level 7s for over 22-year-olds to fund new schemes such as foundation apprenticeships for young people and short non-apprenticeship ‘growth and skills’ courses in priority sectors.
Tom Richmond, an education policy analyst and former adviser to DfE ministers, said the growth in level 7 provision had “placed a huge strain on the apprenticeships budget for years”.
He added: “If, as these numbers suggest, many providers have piled into level 7 apprenticeships before the axe falls next year, then it will present ministers and officials with a big financial headache.”
Baroness Alison Wolf called the rush “totally predictable” and said she was “astonished DfE didn’t move to prevent it”.
She told FE Week: “It will put huge extra pressure on the budget at a time when NEET numbers are high, and when apprenticeship openings for the young have been falling fast.
“Many of the organisations increasing their senior leadership numbers could be creating openings for young people and should be ashamed of themselves.”
Level 7 data deepdive
Much of the level 7 surge has been driven by senior leader apprenticeships, which climbed from 5,866 starts in the first three quarters of 2023-24 to 8,670 over the same period this year – a 48 per cent rise so far. By April, there were already 1,500 more senior leader apprentices than in the whole of last year.
Accountancy and taxation professional apprenticeships also grew by just over 1,000 starts. The only major programme to shrink was the advanced clinical practitioner, down by 539.
Data covering the final quarter of academic year 2024-25 isn’t due until November, and the picture for August 2025 to December 2025 won’t be clear until March 2026.
Individual training providers have seen a significant increase in level 7 starts.
Corndel started 1,334 level 7 apprentices in the whole of 2023-24, but had already enrolled 1,875 in the first three quarters of 2024-25. Comparing year-on-year for quarters one to three, its numbers jumped by 993 extra starts. FE Week asked Corndel how it was resourcing the training for such a large increase in level 7 apprentices, but it declined to comment.
Ian Prentice, CEO of Fuel Learning, which grew from 8 to 162 senior leader starts year-on-year, is confident his learners experience no drop in quality. He told FE Week growth was “always planned” with employers, enabling him to recruit facilitators, coaches and learning managers he needed.
“We will reach a point where we won’t take any more. It’s not possible to grow by thousands and maintain quality,” he said.
Petra Wilson, policy director at the Chartered Management Institute, which does the vast majority of the end-point assessments on senior leader apprenticeships, was confident CMI could scale its operations to meet rising demand.
“We do not foresee any challenges in meeting the needs of education providers and learners who are embarking on senior leader apprenticeships,” she said.
The Department for Education said it will “not hesitate” in intervening if a provider’s quality falls short.
A spokesperson said: “Apprenticeship starts by young people under 25 fell by almost 40 per cent over the last decade. That’s why through our plan for change we have asked more employers to invest in upskilling their staff aged over 22 at level 7, to enable levy funding to be re-balanced towards young people and training at lower levels.
“All current level 7 apprentices and any who start before 1 January 2026 will be funded through to completion. We gave this degree of notice because employers and providers needed time to plan their future skills provision.
“We will continue to hold providers to account through our rigorous apprenticeship accountability framework, and where performance falls short we do not hesitate to intervene.”
The Department for Education has promised to “capture views” before determining new intervention triggers for colleges and training providers from reformed Ofsted inspections.
A new style of report cards comes into force from November 10, with no routine inspections of FE and skills providers in the first half of the autumn term.
The DfE this week published a refreshed school accountability regime alongside Ofsted’s final plans for how the report cards will look and work.
But there has been no word on how post-16 intervention, accountability and oversight policies will change when the new inspection process is rolled out.
Until now, training companies receiving an ‘inadequate’ grade in an inspection, either overall or for a sub-judgment, faced contractual penalties. These range from enforceable requirements to improve and suspensions to learner starts through to contract termination.
The DfE extended Ofsted performance rules to independent providers with back-to-back ‘requires improvement’ this August.
Colleges have also been kicked out of the apprenticeship delivery market if they received Ofsted’s lowest possible judgment.
From November, there will be no overall headline judgments for FE and skills providers. Instead, there will be a new colour-coded five-point grading scale which will be applied across up to 16 areas and grade providers as either ‘urgent improvement’ (red), ‘needs attention’ (orange), ‘expected standard’ (green), ‘strong standard’ (dark green), or ‘exceptional’ (blue).
The DfE told FE Week it will soon start engaging with the FE sector to update intervention and accountability policies in line with Ofsted’s new methodology and grading.
Officials said this will involve determining new intervention triggers which will be published and communicated to the sector “prior to Ofsted commencing inspections using the renewed framework evaluation areas”.
The DfE added that it is planning a series of stakeholder engagement activities with the sector over the next month to set out proposals and capture views.
Officials made clear, however, that where provision is “clearly of poor quality, our response will remain firm” and added: “We will continue to act where judgements in the new framework highlight serious concerns about quality.”
The DfE said it recognises the sector’s concerns around increased complexity and rushed implementation timing, and committed to taking a “pragmatic, proportionate approach, particularly during the first 12 months, ensuring decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, with the learner experience at the core”.
Report cards will ramp up leader anxiety
Ofsted commissioned Sinéad Mc Brearty, CEO of the charity Education Support, to carry out a wellbeing impact review as part of its proposed report card reforms.
Published this week, Mc Brearty warned that stress related to inspection is “unlikely to materially change whilst the ‘high stakes’ consequences remain broadly intact” despite the reforms.
Ofsted’s revised framework will also require leaders to “evidence impact across a larger number of evaluation areas, which may drive new forms of bureaucracy and data collection” in providers.
Chris Todd, principal of Derwentside College, said the education sector needs a “paradigm shift” on inspection instead of “another rebrand”.
“Colleges are complex organisations, and reducing them to short, high-stakes judgments risks oversimplification,” he said.
“Research shows inspection can increase stress, narrow the curriculum, and contribute to staff attrition – outcomes that run counter to genuine improvement.
“The truth is, politically, our thinking on inspection is still too narrow. What we need is not another rebrand, but a genuine paradigm shift, one that places improvement, collaboration, and trust at the heart of the system.”
Unions have been quick to slam the watchdog’s reforms.
Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “The tweaks made to its proposals following the consultation period are minor and cosmetic changes to a flawed rationale.”
He warned the “consistency” of Ofsted judgments will continue to be “unreliable” and the new inspection system will place a “huge amount of stress on school and college leaders and their staff because they will face so many judgements across so many areas”.
“Let’s remember that this entire process began with the suicide of a headteacher under the previous inspection system. Yet here we are with a reformed system which appears to be even worse. We are gravely concerned about the welfare of leaders and teachers as well as the impact on recruitment and retention,” Di’Iasio added.
ASCL is considering whether to recommend Ofsted inspectors that are members “withdraw their services”.
Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union, said Sir Martyn Oliver “has failed” in his attempt to bring in a system that reduces pressure.
“Removing the single word judgment was meant to be a powerful revolution, but this makes things much worse. More of the same. More pressure. More ranking and competition. More labels.”
Both the Association and Employment and Learning Providers and Association of Colleges said they were concerned about the speed of implementation of Ofsted’s reforms.
“We’re all ships on a turquoise tide, headed ever closer towards winning the next general election”, began Nigel Farage as he strode on stage and gazed out at a sea of thousands of jubilant faces at Reform UK’s party conference last weekend.
Moments before, a sparkly jumpsuit-clad Andrea Jenkyns, the former skills minister who is now one of Reform’s regional mayors, declared Farage to be “our last chance to truly save Britannia” and led the audience in chanting “Nigel will be prime minister”.
Whether you find their anti-immigration rhetoric to be unhinged scaremongering or the inspired thinking that’s needed to fix “broken Britain”, recent polling suggests Reform could well form the next government. They claim to be the fastest-growing political party in British history.
Mayor of Greater Lincolnshire, Dame Andrea Jenkyns singing at the Reform UK annual conference
Skills policy vacuum
Finding out what they could have in store for our skills and further education system wasn’t easy.
The conference featured sessions on cryptocurrency and the car finance scandal, but none on education. It is not a priority for its supporter base. When Reform supporters were asked in a recent poll to pick the biggest issues facing the country, “education and childcare” came fifth from the bottom out of 17 issues, garnering three times less support than “social care for the elderly”.
Similarly, when asked who the government should protect most when making spending decisions, so-called Reformers rated teachers bottom of 13 categories – below “rich people” and “big business”.
Gawain Towler, who sits on Reform’s board and has been described as Farage’s right-hand man, told FE Week that the party is currently in the process of drawing up a skills policy – creating a window of opportunity for the sector’s lobbyists to help shape their policies. The Association of Colleges sent a representative to the conference, but not the Association of Employment and Learning Providers.
Nigel Farage at Reform UK party conference
Curbing immigration
Currently, theonly mention in Reform’s policy papers to ‘skills’ is to clarify that the only exceptions to the strict limits they would put on immigration would be for those with “essential skills, mainly around healthcare”.
Reform’s head of policy Zia Yusuf, told FE Week that cutting migration would create “issues” around recruiting the engineers needed to meet another of its goals – to “proliferate small modular reactors across the country at unprecedented speed”.
But he indicated that Reform was prepared to pump more money into reskilling British workers.
Visas for skilled migrants would “only ever be sanctioned if we are simultaneously launching the most audacious and unprecedented scale-up process to upskill and train British people in those jobs…and yeah, that will take funding.”
The “challenge” of plugging skills gaps currently filled by migrants was why Reform would consider scrapping the two-child benefit cap.
“You can tell we’re serious about cutting net migration to zero because at least because we’re talking about such policies,” he said, adding that they have “a little bit of time to put this stuff together”.
Towler indicated that a Reform government might use more bursaries as incentives to train people to fill critical skills shortages. He claimed that when the nursing bursary was cut under George Osbourne as chancellor, 50,000 fewer British people trained as nurses and the same number then had to be imported from overseas. (FE Week could not corroborate those figures).
“We made it harder for British people to do these things,” he added.
Zia Yusuf on the main stage at the Reform UK party conference
More ‘trade’ skills
Towler said that “underpinning our agenda” was getting young people to “learn a skill” rather than getting “a big debt” for “something that’s going to be killed by AI”.
He claimed that the advance of AI would make Surrey “like Cornwall was when the mines closed”, as “middle-ranking white collar work is fucked”.
“It’s going to be a long time before AI can do your gardening, landscaping, smaller engineering, mending, fixing, making things work. So there will be a lot of positivity in that direction.”
Similarly, Farage said: “Let’s start teaching kids at school trades and services” and quipped that “one thing that AI will not replace is the local plumber”.
He wants to set up new regional technical colleges for plumbing, electrical trades and industrial automation in Wales if they win power there next year.
The first such college in England appears to be planned by Lincolnshire mayor Jenkyns, who told FE Week she is committed to opening “the biggest and best trade college there, which can serve the country” and where “young people can learn building, plumbing, welding and other trades that are the backbone to rebuild our nation”.
One Lincolnshire principal told FE Week, “I thought we already were”.
Jenkyns is taking inspiration from the “amazing” CATCH, an industrial skills centre near Grimsby.
“I’ve never been to a college with such cutting edge facilities, and industries pay for that. Isn’t that a great model? We know that colleges are struggling. Can you imagine if we get industry talking to colleges, investing so that they have got school and college leavers with the right skills to go to a job in their area?”
She described her plan for Lincolnshire as a “Reform blueprint” to create “a microcosm of what Reform can do in government”.
As skills minister, Jenkyns said she had been “disgusted that literacy and numeracy has been on a downward spiral for the last decade,” and believes this “might be to do with closing of a lot of colleges.”
She had wanted to “bring a parity of esteem between vocational, technical, academic and trades” as “for too long, colleges have been seen as the poor relation”.
She will be “trying to push” for that parity on Reform’s decision-making board which she was appointed to last month.
Andrea Jenkins at Reform UK party conference
HE ‘waste of time’
Universities’ current financial pressures might just implode under a Reform government.
The party has pledged to limit the number of undergraduate places to “well below” current levels, enforce minimum entry requirements and mandate all universities to offer two-year undergraduate courses.
Yusuf said there were “way too many young people taking on degrees”, some of which “do not make them more employable [or] earn more”.
Towler sees “a lot” of higher education as “a complete fucking waste of time” and launched a tirade against Blair’s government for expanding university provision. “We now have…people who are highly educated doing basically grunt work. [It’s] a disaffected population, as people feel entitled to something marvellous when there’s nothing marvellous there.”
Jenkyns – who said she was “torn” as a single mother over whether she would want to be skills minister or education secretary under a Reform government – when asked whether she would bail out bankrupt universities, responded: “Do we need as many universities, or do we need a more diverse climate?”
Mayor of Greater Lincolnshire, Dame Andrea Jenkyns at the Reform UK annual conference
‘Woke’ curricula
The most vehement anger was directed at the education system’s “communist” biases.
Yusuf said the party had to “stop schools from becoming indoctrination camps”, with universities being “even more so indoctrination camps”.
The curriculum and assessment review, currently poised to make its recommendations to government, has pledged to “look across the curriculum to examine where opportunities exist to increase diversity in representation”.
This might jar with Reform’s own pledge to allow “no discussions on gender-questioning, transitioning, or pronoun swapping” in schools, and to teach history in a “patriotic way”.
Jenkyns said the UK should “stop being ashamed of our history…we weren’t perfect, and certain things we should not have done, but it’s about learning from the past…not about trying to silence the past or apologise”.
Reform also wants to cut funding to universities that undermine free speech.
Yusuf claimed his inbox was “absolutely full” with emails from “not just worried parents but kids…admonished by teachers” and “asked to stay behind in class” for saying they “like Nigel Farage”.
“We’ve got to look very seriously at that,” he said.
Climate sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton, who believes there is a “sporting chance” he would be made “the Secretary of State, not ‘for’ but ‘against’ the climate change nonsense” under a Farage government, was particularly militant in his views.
Claiming that parents have “absolutely no idea what nonsense is being drip fed into their child’s mind by these wretched communist teachers”, he said there should be a “sound feed for every class, available for every parent of that class” so “the communists will no longer be able to get away with that propaganda without at least the parents finding out about it and raising a stink”.
He also called for making every university lecture, seminar and tutorial “filmed as well as recorded and made publicly available to everybody at all times and permanently for ever”.
Similarly Mansfield MP Lee Anderson, claiming some teachers were “brainwashing our kids”, said that Reform would “root these teachers out and hold them to account”.
“The more you try and indoctrinate children, especially young boys, the more they’re coming to us now, 15-16 year old boys…it’s great.”
George Finch, 19-year-old leader of Warwickshire Council, referred to the “communist conveyor belt of universities” and described how he had dropped out of Leicester University after finding it “depressing”.
“If you want to succeed, you have to keep your head down and be quiet and not say anything. But that’s where I was a bit different. I did say I was a Reform member. Didn’t make many friends.”
But he believes “the world’s changing”, which is why it is “really important” for Reform to take on this agenda.
The other item on Reform’s education agenda is to not only “undo” what Yusuf describes as “the vandalism” this government has done through its pledge to charge VAT on private school fees, but also offer a 20 per cent tax relief on fees.
Devolution disarray
Whereas the last two governments have been in favour of devolving powers to regional areas and reorganising local government, Reform’s central commandbelieves that the country may have bitten off more than it can chew and is reticent about the benefits of devolution.
Towler described the devolution process as “incoherent” and said his party was “not really comfortable with” mayors, despite the party now having two of its own with Jenkyns in Lincolnshire, and Luke Campbell in Hull and East Yorkshire.
He believes that “the idea of governing at Westminster” was a “driving force” for Brexit.
Devolution has been an attempt (by Labour-controlled areas) to “strip from national democracy that electoral authority created at general elections… making it more difficult for [the government] to prosecute their policies right the way down”.
Reform will win mayoralties next year in Essex, “probably” Suffolk/Norfolk and “may well win” Sussex and Hampshire too, which was “was not in the plan” for Labour. “They have now built in whole areas of the country that are going to be run by people in this room today,” he told a panel session.
Meanwhile, “the rapid change” involved with local government reorganisation was “very, very confusing for the average punter”.
Andrea Jenkins on stage with Hull and East Yorkshire mayor Luke Campbell
Governance: reform and suspicion
This time last year, Reform had eight local councillors across the country; Towler, then Reform’s head of communications, predicted they “might win four councils” in the local elections; “I’m an optimist”.
It now has over 900 councillors and leads on 12 councils.
This has created a “problem of rapid success”. Reform is now “rapidly trying to fill those holes”.
It has formed a ‘Reform Council Association’ to help newly elected party councillors learn from each other.
But there is much suspicion over the intentions of officials in all tiers of government.
Jenkyns said she had already sacked one of her officers and has a “close eye” on another, but also lamented that she was the only mayor in the country without her own special advisor and has “no team”. She is “literally doing a lot of case work myself” which has been “difficult”.
She felt officials at DfE when she was skills minister were often politicised and unavailable, with around six in eight of her private office often working from home. She is insisting on her current staff working from the office.
Highlighting her lack of trust for officials, she said as a DfE minister she had been asked to sign off a £2 million package for a failing college, with £1 million for management consultants; she refused, and civil servants then got it signed off by the Secretary of State.
Calling for people with experience of government to join their mission, Farage said the party was “beginning to see already through the county councils that we run certain obstructions from the civil service being put in our way”.
“I imagine if we win the next election, we may face similar barriers to the kinds of real change that this country needs.”
In his main-stage speech, Farage said having government departments run by MPs “doesn’t work, does it” pledging to recruit “ministers of all the talents” from outside the Commons and “to hell with convention”.
Over in the Lords, Towler said the first act of a Reform government would be to create about 500 peers, which would be “utterly essential” to govern.
Warwickshire Council’s Reform leader George Finch
Doge days
Reform has been parachuting Elon Musk-style ‘Doge’ units into the areas it runs, on a mission to root out wasteful spending.
Councils’ pressure to make savings, combined with the recent six per cent cut to the adult skills fund, is putting the survival of some adult education centres under threat. Reform-led Derbyshire Council is closing a third (five) of its adult education centres this year and Kent is closing one in Gravesend and consolidating its provision. Its leader Linden Kemkaran told FE Week that “adult education as a whole is something that unfortunately is being cut back because we have no money. We have to slice things where we can.”
With SEND costs ballooning, Reform has hinted that it would cut SEND-related entitlements. Richard Tice said “there is a level of abuse” of the SEND system which will “bankrupt most councils within the next three years”, and Farage has touted “significant” cuts to the welfare bill.
When asked whether she supported restricting the issuing of education, health and care plans, Jenkyns referred to the “need to teach in a different way, because we haven’t got a never-ending pot of money”.
Finch said Warwickshire Council has a SEND deficit of £87 million with SEND transport pressures escalating it next year to £147 million. “We do need to look” at why demand was increasing for SEND services, he admitted.
Zia Yusuf speaking to Michael Gove at the Reform UK party conference
“Freebies” for migrants
The party’s hardline stance on immigration does not bode well for ESOL provision. As part of cutback plans Kemkaran has launched an investigation into cutting ESOL classes for migrants, suggesting they could use the app Duolingo on their phones instead “for nothing”.
With the investigation “ongoing”, she told FE Week: “if you come to this country, you should learn English. You shouldn’t necessarily expect someone else to pay for that.”
Finch took a similar stance, saying that if migrants were coming here “legally and it’s done properly, then they should already be speaking English…why are we bringing people in who can’t speak English? They’re already not supporting the economy because they can’t communicate.”
There is strong support among Reform supporters for making the requirements for British citizenship more stringent: 96 per cent of Reform supporters endorse the view that immigrants should be required to pass strict language and culture tests before they can become citizens.
Lincolnshire mayor Andrea Jenkyns took aim at the City of Sanctuary network, which helps refugees feel more welcome and which many FE colleges are members of.
“Some of our towns are being pitched to become sanctuary cities for migrants – you know the type – freebies for migrants. But we at Reform say no freebies,” she said.
City of Sanctuary denied that “freebies” are being handed out, pointing out that asylum seekers live on as little as £9 a week. They described English classes as “essential for survival and early integration”.
City of Sanctuary is pausing work with new colleges in 2026-27, after inflammatory narratives about its programmes were widely shared on social media, putting its team under strain.
In just under a month’s time, Ofsted will roll out its revised Education Inspection Framework (EIF) for further education and skills providers. On paper, it looks like progress: the single overall judgment is gone, replaced by multi-domain report cards. And the proposal for a five-day inspection notice period championed by the Fellowship of Inspection Nominees (FIN) has been retained. The framework also upholds the principles of belonging, thriving and inclusion, which is commendable.
But dig a little deeper and some cracks appear. While the revisions are well suited to full-time study programmes delivered by colleges, they fall short for apprenticeships or employment-focused provision that serves learners of all ages and at all stages of life. Apprenticeships are no longer a second-best alternative to university; they are, for many, the preferred route: debt-free, valued by employers and offering a purposeful journey to career progression. Skills bootcamps and short employer-led courses similarly can provide efficient, impactful routes into employment. Yet the framework does not pay enough attention to these realities and misses the opportunity to lean into this optimism and create a futureproofed framework.
One key reason may be the limitations of the inspection workforce itself. Inspectors are trained in education, not industry. Their expertise equips them to assess teaching, learning and basic employer engagement, but they often lack the foresight to understand industry needs, workforce planning or the wider economic impact of training programmes. Ofsted has acknowledged the need to address this but feedback from the pilots suggests that we still have a long way to go before this fundamental flaw is rectified and it certainly won’t be fixed before November.
FIN supports the new emphasis on inclusion but in our submission, we asked for a definition of inclusion, a statement on what constituted “barriers to learning” and clear guidelines to ensure fair assessments across all types of providers. While the new toolkit includes a response to this, it has not sufficiently recognised the challenges faced by independent training providers in this regard, particularly as these providers don’t receive the same level of funding support allocated to other institutions.
This brings us to the data which Ofsted looks at. The inspectorate has much to say on learner achievement; it says it will consider learner progress and an individual learner’s starting point. But for FIN, there is too much emphasis on achievement rather than progress. As someone providing governance and oversight for multiple providers, including those rated outstanding, I see the value of data scrutiny. However, the balance here has tipped in the wrong direction. The framework is now more about producing numbers for the government than capturing the full impact of FE and skills on learners and employers.
On the issue of governance, Ofsted have again disappointed. Inspection reports will name the chair of governors. But in our case for stronger oversight, we called for evidence that a college or provider board included members who were impartial or independent. This requirement has not been forthcoming.
The new framework could have been an opportunity to address better:
Employer satisfaction: Are businesses gaining skilled staff through work-based learning?
Return on investment: Do programmes improve productivity and retention?
Career progression: Are learners advancing in roles and qualifications?
Inclusion: Are providers driving inclusion through proactive support systems, not surveillance?
Post-16 choices: Are Ofsted reports offering clear information for learners and employers choosing between providers?
Although LSIPs don’t get a mention (but inspectors consulting employer representative bodies do), all providers will now be assessed under the five-grade system for their local and sector impact.
The revised framework is a step forward in transparency and fairness, particularly for colleges delivering full-time programmes. It is also right that the toolkit retains scrutiny on maths and English for learners without level 2 attainment.
But for apprenticeships, employer-led training and other employment-focused programmes, it is still a missed opportunity. Until inspections reflect the realities of the workplace, the economic value of FE and skills, and the preferences of learners choosing apprenticeships over university, the framework will remain incomplete.
Anticipation and trepidation surround the government’s forthcoming white papers on SEND reform. DfE has been unusually quiet, with only its adviser Dame Christine Lenehan’s indication of substantial changes to Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) filtering through. What’s clear is a significant push on ‘inclusion’. Ofsted will include an ‘inclusion’ judgement for educational settings from the Autumn, and numerous committees and panels have been convened to develop inclusion as the key to solving the SEND crisis.
Yet, ‘inclusion’ is a loaded word and a difficult concept to discuss, primarily due to our inability to agree on a shared definition. The term can sound a lot like acceptance, and who wouldn’t want to be accepted for who they are? But if that acceptance leads to a loss of support, or disruptive change in provision, this seemingly positive concept loses its meaning for young people and their families.
The term ‘inclusion’ is complex because it lacks a shared definition. For some, it is place-based (all children and young people in the same school or college), while for others, it is needs-based (all needs met in the most appropriate setting). However, to truly understand and implement inclusion from a system perspective, we must actively seek and integrate voices from every part of that system, especially where success is already evident. Policymakers, in their attempts to define and implement inclusion, are ironically creating exclusive panels and taskforces with a distinct lack of lived experience, and no specialist setting or FE leaders on these crucial bodies.
These omissions carry significant risks, undermining the very goal of true inclusion:
Throwing the baby out with the bathwater by overlooking what already works well in our current system, particularly the successes found in the FE sector.
Being exclusive in the thinking around inclusion by focusing solely on a narrow, place-based idea (i.e., everyone in a mainstream school or college), rather than valuing the diverse pathways and expertise of specialist settings.
Failing to genuinely hear from children, young people, and their families about what they truly need and aspire to. Without their voices, the system remains predicated on assumptions rather than realities.
First, let’s address the exclusion of the FE sector. Consider this: 90 per cent of young people with an EHCP attend a mainstream further education setting, with just 10 per cent on roll with a specialist setting. In contrast, 41 per cent of children and young people with an EHCP attend a special school or setting. Why is it that a much greater proportion of young people with EHCPs are successfully integrated and progressing within mainstream FE settings? The broader FE sector already shows effective models of support and inclusion for young people with varied and complex needs. To convene a national inclusion group without significant representation from the FE sector is not merely an oversight; it’s a missed opportunity to genuinely understand where inclusion is already thriving and how those lessons can be scaled across the system.
Next, the conspicuous absence of voices from specialist settings. This can’t be solely about mainstream school placement; true inclusion means ensuring every young person, regardless of their needs, can thrive and lead a fulfilling adult life beyond their education. Leaders of special schools and specialist colleges understand the young people they support and the ways in which other settings might adapt to meet more of their needs. Without their insights, the ultimate goal appears to be simply everyone attending a mainstream setting, potentially at the expense of individual need. There will always be a need for specialist settings for young people with the most unique needs; they’re an essential part of a truly inclusive system. Specialist settings have always worked alongside their mainstream counterparts to improve understanding and share expertise. As mainstream settings develop their capabilities, specialist settings continue to specialise, working with greater complexity. We need to support this collaboration, not stifle it.
Perhaps most importantly, the lived experience of young people with SEND and their families is vital. We need to understand their experience of a system which remains predicated on failure. Real inclusion is about feeling valued and understood in a setting, and then having agency in decisions that affect their future. It is about an equitable system that adapts to their needs, rather than expecting them to fit into a pre-defined mould, and one where their unique contributions are recognised and celebrated.
We invite policymakers and expert panels to engage with the full breadth of experience across the SEND sector, particularly within specialist and FE settings, because these voices offer unparalleled insights into effective practices and truly person-centred support. By doing so, we can collaboratively build a truly equitable and effective SEND system.
Team UK reached the midpoint of the EuroSkills competition with a sigh of relief today.
Some competitors had to undergo hours-long tasks involving stress and time management while others found themselves up against some experienced peers who were involved at WorldSkills Lyon last year.
Going into the final day, Team UK members told FE Week they were pushing through some tiredness to make it to the end but with a dash of positivity.
Grace Longden, 18-year-old health and social care competitor has luckily come to Herning already riding the high of a win.
Longden, who is a triathlete representing Great Britain in the 16-19 age group, won gold in the Asia and Europe triathlon in Istanbul two weeks ago.
“It was a tough race,” she said, adding that the swim in the Bosphorus River was “one of the best swims” she’d ever had.
Coming to Denmark for EuroSkills, the Macclesfield College alumnus said there is “always” the hope of a medal.
“We’re competing against the best in Europe. Everyone is so well trained, so competent,” Longden said.
“Being on the younger age [bracket] of my skill, I have got some tough competition,” she added.
Health and social care competitor Grace Longden
Longden is up against Croatia’s Dino Brkić and Germany’s Anna Telle, both of whom won a Medallion for Excellence at WorldSkills Lyon last year, showing they met the international benchmark.
She said: “Going into the day one, I did feel quite nervous, because there were quite a few crowds about and we had to be microphoned up as well. Going out on stage was quite daunting the first time, but it got easier and easier throughout the day.”
“The second day, I came into a bit more confident. […] I was happier than I was yesterday.”
Today, Longden had to treat a breast cancer patient coming to terms with a diagnosis and teach a stroke patient how to use a walking frame.
“I’m starting university next week in physiotherapy, so that was one of my strengths,” she added.
Longden will be attending Keele University next week after receiving a distinction grade in her T Levels.
Meanwhile, Katie Sime, 20-year-old hairdressing competitor with Reds Hair Company, had to undergo a five-hour task of working on both a men’s and women’s cut and colour.
“It’s a lot of time management, working out what you’re going to do first and then, because obviously, once you’ve then got one colour on, you have to stop what you’re doing to take that off. So it’s a lot to think about.”
“It’s long and quite stressful, but, yeah, I was happy in the end,” she said.
Katie Sime, hairdressing competitor
Tomorrow, Sime and her peers are facing live models, which she is a tad nervous about.
“We don’t know what their hair is going to be like until they arrive so that adds a bit of extra stress onto it but hopefully it’ll all be good, and I’ll be happy,” she added.
Sime also had some advice from last year’s Medallion for Excellence winner Charlotte Lloyd to “have a good time and come away with good memories”.
Sime has already come away with a shot of confidence since the new experiences of competing on an international stage, but it has also made her closer to her teammates in Team UK.
“I think at the boot camps, although you spend a lot of time together, it’s only for like, a couple of days, and people just come and go, I think. But I think this week has been really nice, and everyone seems to be getting along really well.”
A college in Lincolnshire has appointed a new boss following the retirement of its principal.
Lynette Leith (pictured above) will take on the top job at Boston College from November 1, joining from Hull College where she was vice principal for curriculum and skills.
She replaces Claire Foster, who has worked in further education for 30 years, serving the last five years as principal of Boston College.
Leith said: “It’s a privilege to be appointed as principal and CEO of Boston College. The college has a strong reputation for supporting its students to achieve their ambitions and for working closely with its communities and employers to drive skills, opportunities and growth.
“I look forward to working with the corporation, staff, students and partners to build on this success and to lead Boston College into an exciting future.”
Before Hull College, Leith held roles at Uxbridge College, Hertfordshire Regional College, Loughborough College and Chesterfield College. She is also currently a governor at Bradford College and was awarded an OBE in the New Year’s Honours 2025.
Boston College enrolled over 5,000 students last year, is judged ‘good’ by Ofsted, holds a ‘good’ financial health rating and employs more than 400 staff.
A spokesperson for the college highlighted multiple milestone achievements under Foster’s leadership, including the completion of a £20 million major estates development.
Claire Foster
Foster first worked in further education in 1995. Before joining Boston College in 2020 she held leadership roles at Grimsby Institute and North Lindsey College.
Foster said: “After 30 rewarding years in further education, I am announcing my retirement from Boston College with immense pride in what we have achieved here together.
“We have transformed our college campuses while never losing sight of what matters most – putting students at the heart of everything we do, creating powerful partnerships and serving our communities across East Lindsey, South Holland and Boston. I am particularly proud of the dedication, commitment and hard work of my exceptional team.
“It has been the privilege of my career to be part of this remarkable institution and to witness firsthand the positive impact we make every single day.”
