The Government has been branded “cynical” by the Sixth Form Colleges’ Association (SFCA) after responding to a long-running campaign to scrap members’ VAT a day before Parliament was dissolved.

The SFCA’s e-petition to bring sixth form colleges in line with school sixth forms, which do not pay VAT, reached the 10,000 signatures needed to trigger a government response on January 9, and was handed to Education Secretary Nicky Morgan with a letter of support from the Education Select Committee chair Graham Stuart that day.

However, her response, explaining the DfE “cannot afford” the scrap the tax, was only given to Mr Stuart on Friday and published this morning, the day Parliament was dissolved ahead of the general election on May 7.

SFCA deputy chief executive James Kewin (pictured above) said: “Issuing this response on the morning Parliament was dissolved was a cynical move.

“Almost half of the 93 Sixth Form Colleges in England are in marginal constituencies and this announcement was obviously timed to minimise the damage to candidates in those seats.”

Because sixth form colleges do not receive a refund on VAT in the same way that school sixth forms do, they are left with, on average, £335,000 less to spend each year, according to the SFCA.

The Government response said it had “explored the possibility” of refunding sixth form college VAT and “understood” the arguments in favour of the move.

However, it added the estimated cost of the refund would “be in the region of £31m per year”.

“The DfE cannot afford to cover the costs of doing so in the financial years 2015-2016.”

Mr Kewin accused the government of ignoring “the pleas of parents, students and teachers that have signed the petition and the cross-party group of MPs that have lent their support to the campaign”.

“We hope an incoming government will move quickly to address this longstanding anomaly to ensure young people receive the same level of investment in their education, irrespective of where they choose to study,” he said.

As well as gaining more that 10,000 signatures on the e-petition, the campaign against sixth form college VAT has drawn support from celebrity former sixth form students including actor Colin Firth and TV presenter Dermot O’Leary.

The Association of Colleges (AoC) has demanded an inquiry by MPs in the next Parliament into a “waste of scarce funds” after figures revealed the government’s employer ownership of skills pilot has resulted in just 37 per cent of desired starts.

A review of the early stages of the £340m pilot, which aimed to involve employers in the design of skills training by giving them public money to combine with their own investment, has revealed that starts were at 37 per cent of the 10,000 apprenticeships and 90,000 non-apprenticeship qualifications originally planned in grant offer letters from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).

The review, commissioned by BIS and carried out by CFE Research, the University of Sheffield and Qa Research, has led to criticism of the project by the AoC and Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), with AoC chief executive Martin Doel (above) calling for a Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigation.

Mr Doel said: “We’ve always had considerable doubts about the employer ownership pilot, and it gives us no pleasure to note that the recruitment of students to training was only just over one-third of that which was expected.

“Financial contributions to skills education or training from employers were also mostly in-kind and the project’s sustainability is an ongoing concern.

“We hope the next government learns lessons from this expensive failed project, which was based upon unsubstantiated assertions and unrealistic assumptions rather than hard evidence.

“This project should be scrutinised by the new PAC, not only in relation to the waste of scarce funds but also the approach to policymaking that it embodied.”

As well as disappointing numbers in terms of starts, the review also revealed that five of six projects with targets higher than 300 apprenticeship starts were led by an intermediary rather than a single employer or group of businesses, and three of these achieved just 4 per cent of their target.

The report continued: “Only a minority of projects met or exceeded their target for both apprenticeship and non-apprenticeship provision, which shows that recruitment of learners has been a key challenge across all of the projects.

“Data from the interviews suggest the majority of employer investments were in-kind (mostly in staff time).

“Moreover both government investment and employer contributions are behind the expected expenditure profile, which is a direct consequence of the under-recruitment of learners.”

AELP chief executive Stewart Segal (left) said: “We have been calling for a review of the Employer Ownership Pilots for some time.

“We know there were a number of issues in setting up these pilots and the results are disappointing.  Some of the pilots have been successful but overall they have delivered only a third of the results that were set out in the projects.

“There are a number of lessons that can be learned from the projects including the fact that delivering to those aged 16 to 24 has been even more difficult for employers. We should also understand that most of the contributions from employers have been in kind and these are large companies.

“We should learn this lesson when looking at the proposals for the apprenticeship programme. In our view the funding for these pilots should be included in the mainstream support for apprenticeships and traineeships rather than setting up expensive pilots which have not delivered.

“The £340m set aside for employer ownership pilots would have made a big difference to the apprenticeship programme where one of the biggest barriers to growth is the budget.”

Any investigation by the PAC would have to be commissioned by the new committee, which will be elected by the new Parliament following next month’s general election.

New legislation around apprenticeships and training will be one of the first bits of work for a Labour government, with a bill expected in the first 100 days of the next parliament if the party wins, Tristram Hunt has said.

The shadow education secretary made the comments to journalists following his speech to the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) annual conference in Liverpool today.

He did not say exactly what would be included in the new legislation, but his party’s pledges for FE so far in the election campaign have included overall protection of the education budget, including for 16 to 19-year-olds, new technical institutions and apprenticeships for every learner who “gets the grades”.

He also said the Department for Education (DfE) and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) would work together on the bill and work more closely generally if Labour forms a government.

Mr Hunt said: “Within the first 100 days you will have a Labour education bill about vocational education, apprenticeships and training.

“It will be a joint DfE and BIS bill because, once again, we are moving away from the isolated vision of the DfE. The DfE is going to work once again with BIS on apprenticeships and training.”

Mr Hunt also used his speech to announce “far-reaching reform” of Ofsted and plans to introduce a peer review improvement system by 2020, claiming the current system was too focused on a “target-driven, exam factory model” of education and had “reached its end stages”.

Mr Hunt said: “There can be no doubt in my mind that Ofsted has been an extraordinarily progressive force for improving this country’s educational outcomes and spreading equal opportunity to areas of historic disadvantage.

“But I also believe we may have reached the tipping point. The moment when our inspection system begins to choke something far more precious.

“When the joy, wonder and beauty of schooling risks being buried in the avalanche of bureaucracy that emerges out of the increasingly byzantine demands of inspection. Or at least the frazzled, insecure interpretation of those demands by some head-teachers.

“So whilst I believe Ofsted has been a vehicle for progress in our education system, it too must surely evolve.”

He added: “I want to see an end to the nonsense of FE experts inspecting primary schools, and other equally absurd misallocations.”

 

The election period officially begins today — and last week saw the leaders of the two largest parties being put on the spot by Jeremy Paxman and a studio audience on Channel 4’s Battle for Number 10.

Opinion was divided over who came out on top — but whoever it was, there were plenty of questions left unanswered for the FE sector.

So FE Week spoke to figures across the sector to ask them what three FE and skills questions they’d like answered by the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats in the run up to the general election on May 7 — as well as a bonus question on a subject of their choice.

All of our panel’s questions have been put to the three main political parties and we’ll share their responses with you shortly.

Which questions would you like to see politicians answer? Let us know on Twitter with the #FEelectionQs hashtag.

 

 

April Carrol, principal of New College Stamford

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– Will FE be funded at all in the future and if so, for what?
– Will colleges be appropriately funded to deliver English and maths?
– How do you envisage the provision for learners requiring “second chances “ if students have not succeeded in the school system?

What else?

– Are you going to address tax avoidance?

 

Jean Duprez MBE, manager of K&M McLoughlin Decorating

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– What would you do to ensure that government funded training leads directly to a job outcome?
– Why do providers get hit by a charge of 30 per cent top slice for form filling and would you stop this happening?
– What are you going to do to make sure schools are giving young people the information about apprenticeships?

What else?

– What will you do to tackle bogus self-employment in construction, thus creating a two tier employment system, which not only is illegal but also discriminatory with a direct link to the now ever increasing skills shortage?

 

 

Crawford Knott, commercial director, Hawk Training

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– How can we ensure that vocational pathways have real parity with their academic counterparts?
– How do you intend to address the lack of effective careers guidance in our schools?
– What do you think of the introduction of vocational pathways in schools for those aged 14? What do you think it would look like?

What else?

How best can we address the imbalance of the UK economy and ensure that it does not continue to become increasingly London/South East-centric?

 

 

Marc Pate, former apprentice Stonemason and WorldSkills competitor, now production manager at Wells Cathedral Stonemasons

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– What are you going to do about careers advice?
– How are you going to address the relationship between university qualifications and vocational qualifications and make sure their contribution to the economy is equally recognised?
– What are you going to do to support skills competitions and help continue the great work they do for young people who are involved with them?

What else?

– What are you going to do to help support young people who have found themselves in difficult situations with the law or unemployment to turn their lives around and get into jobs?

 

 

Dominic Ceraldi, head of HR at Pimlico Plumbers

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– How does Government plan to better help employers financially to achieve its plan to place all school leavers, without a job or college place, into an apprenticeship?
– What does the Government intend doing to help build better relations between schools and businesses, in order to prepare school leavers for the workplace?
– The standard training provision supplied by colleges is often not relevant to the industry. How will Government address this issue?

What else?

– Will voters be given the democratic right to recall failing MPs during the next parliament?

 

Jim Sims, development manager at Buckinghamshire and Thames Valley Lep

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– What will you do to break the current ‘top down’ nature of the skills funding system, to put more power in the hands of the customer (employers)?
– How will you support the FE Sector to generate more income to replace the 24 per cent reduction in Adult Skills budgets?
– What will you do to overcome the inherent mismatch between young people’s career aspirations and the skills needs of industry?

What else?

– What will you do to make apprenticeships and higher level apprenticeships the educational pathway of choice?

 

 

Phil Hatton, former Ofsted inspector, currently lead consultant with the Learning Improvement Service

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– Rather than put increasing pressure on colleges and independent providers to improve the English and mathematics skills of our young people, how are you going to address the poor teaching in schools that is the main reason for the problem?
– What are you going to do about ensuring independent careers advice?
– How are you going to help the FE sector in raising the vocational skills and qualification levels achieved so we can compete in the world market in the face of yet more cuts?

Any other questions?

– To bring back respect for politicians should MPs not be allowed to have a ‘second job’ and should their salaries simply be linked to the cost of living index like so many others are?

 

Dee Stephenson, NCFE futures team leader

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– As funding for adult education decreases by 24 per cent for the 2015/16 academic year, how do politicians expect adult education to be supported in the future?
– All of the political parties have ambitious plans for increasing apprenticeships but funding support alone will not achieve this — how do you think the reforms will help to achieve these Apprenticeship targets?
– What effect has raising the participation age had on young people not in education, training or employment?

What else?

– What’s the best and worst thing about being a politician?

Andrew Gladstone-Heighton, policy leader, NCFE

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– Could you commit to protecting spending on adult skills outside of apprenticeships?
– Would you accept an evidence-based approach to education and skills, rather than a constant cycle of reform based around the parliamentary calendar?
– What are your plans to ensure that the current apprenticeship standards being written will be reviewed and maintained by the sector?

What else?

– Could we focus on reducing corporate (and personal) tax avoidance as a deficit reduction measure, rather than burdening it on the vulnerable in society?

 

Mervyn Ross, electrical installation lecturer at College of North West London

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– How are you going to support FE by ensuring that by the time students come to us at 16 they are already equipped with the English and maths they need?
– What are you going to do to ensure there is parity between the way academic expertise and vocational expertise — which can be up to degree level — are recognised?
– How are you going to make sure that opportunities for adults to change or develop their careers don’t decline due to lack of funding?

What else?

– What are you going to do about careers advice in the compulsory education system?

 

Dr Sandra McNally, director of the Centre for Vocational Education Research at the London School of Economics

What three FE and skills questions would you like politicians to answer before the election?

– By how much would you cut the adult skills’ budget?
– What measures will you introduce to improve basic skills in the working age population?
–  How do you think the quality of apprenticeship programmes should be monitored?

What else?

– What measures would you take to improve UK productivity?

Concerns that two official internet search engines for apprenticeships were causing confusion among potential applicants are expected to be resolved when the old website is taken down in just over a month.

The Skills Funding Agency (SFA) has kept the old National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) vacancy matching website running while its replacement, which went live in December, is tested and developed.

The SFA was unable to give FE Week a firm date three months ago for when the old site would be taken down, saying that it would be “after April”.

But an SFA spokesperson said today “the new ‘Find an apprenticeship’ system will run as NAS’s sole search facility for apprenticeship vacancies from May onwards”.

She added: “People using the old apprenticeship vacancy system will be redirected to the new site, where they will be encouraged to create a new account, from May.

“In the meantime, developers will continue to work closely with candidates and careers advisors to continuously improve the service.”

It comes after FE Week reported in January on concern among users about the two sites throwing up different search results.

And an example search on the old site today uncovered 2,180 apprenticeship vacancies in London compared to just 727 on the new site.

An SFA spokesperson said the differing figures were down to the old apprenticeship vacancies service automatically searching for vacancies within a 10-mile radius of the requested location.

The new site, however, operates a five-mile radius default, unless users change the radius. The default radius on the new system had been two miles in January.

David Hughes, chief executive of the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (Niace), said: “I’m pleased that any confusion [over the two websites running simultaneously] will now be cleared up.

“It is good news for people searching for apprenticeship opportunities that the website search system is being modernised and improved, but it is important to remember this is just one of many ways that need to be looked at of helping people navigate their way towards adult training.”

A spokesperson for the Association of Employment and Learning Providers said: “It is good that there will only be one website search engine from May, as it will stop any potential confusion and hopefully direct more people to apprenticeships than ever.”

Click here to use the new search service.

Awarding organisations (AO) have warned about the “significant impact” of a delay in finding out whether hundreds of qualifications will be publicly-funded next academic year.

The SFA has split the process of notifying the sector about which qualifications will be exempted from the public funding axe due to a “high volume of submissions” from AOs making the case for continued funding.

The SFA was originally supposed to confirm how many of all 779 submissions had been approved for funding on April 1, and while an announcement on the 360 qualifications at level two and above remains expected on that date, news about the 419  entry and level one, plus QCF English and maths, submissions is not due until just over three weeks later at  worst.

The delay is a cause for concern among AOs who may have to watch provider customers, keen to plan their 2015/16 curriculum as soon as possible, opt for alternative qualifications already earmarked for public funding.

Among them was Pearson, where a spokesperson told FE Week: “We know colleges and training providers will be keen to know which qualifications are eligible for planning purposes for this coming academic year.”

Policy leader for NCFE Andrew Gladstone-Heighton (pictured right) said the delay over funding confirmation for the level two and below qualifications was an “important issue”.

“While we understand the SFA are under a great deal of pressure due to their own resource constraints, we’re keen to hear as soon as possible which qualifications have been approved for funding as any delays have a significant impact on our customers who are planning their curriculums for next year,” he said.

“They need to know which qualifications are eligible for funding as a matter of urgency.”

A spokesperson for NOCN (previously the National Open College Network) said it was waiting for the SFA to rule on its submissions for eight level two and above qualifications and 17 below level two.

He said: “As a leading AO we are aware of the current situation with SFA-funded qualifications.

“We have been fortunate in that the majority of our adult qualifications will be funded for 2015/16 [as they have already been cleared for funding by the SFA]. We currently have 123 funded adult qualifications [approved for 2015/16].”

The submissions include applications for new qualifications and exemptions for existing qualifications which do not meet the SFA’s new business rules published in February but for which AOs still hope to secure funding.

The business rules set, for example, a minimum credit value for qualifications and state that they “must have a clear statement of purpose” explaining how passing them will lead to an apprenticeship, higher education course, improved literacy and numeracy, or employment.

The SFA told AOs in an email on March 26, which FE Week has seen, of the delay. The email said: “Where these qualifications [below level two] are approved they will be added to an additional update of the Simplified Funding Rates Catalogue which we intend to publish no later than April 22.”

But the email provoked an angry response from AO staff on Twitter.

Warren Cresswell, FE funding and stakeholder manager for the Council for Awards in Care, Health and Education (Cache), tweeted that it was “poor resource planning again from the SFA.”

Chris Brown (picture left), chief executive of AptEd, also tweeted: “It’s not very helpful at all is it, [the SFA] can’t cope with their own rules but expect us to.”

An SFA spokesperson said: “Splitting the feedback into two stages allows us to deal with the high volume of submissions received in March and also ensure that the feedback we offer is of a more detailed nature.”

When asked by FE Week how many of the submissions would be approved for funding, he said: “Those figures won’t be available until we’ve told the AOs.”

College governors should be on the look out for warning signs of financial trouble or performance problems, FE Commissioner Dr David Collins has said.

Dr Collins (pictured below right) has written to all boards, principals and chief executives with a list of potential early warning signs within an FE institution, and said the signs had been present in the “20 or so” colleges he has visited since taking up the job in November 2013.

The document is aimed at getting colleges to be more aware of their weaknesses instead of waiting for a financial notice of concern from the Skills Funding Agency or an inadequate Ofsted rating.

He said: “Few people, if any, would argue against the fact that prevention is better than cure and in the twenty or so assessments undertaken to date warning signs have been apparent well before an intervention has been triggered.

“So what might boards be looking for in particular to suggest that a financial notice of concern or an Ofsted ‘inadequate’ report might be on the way?

“The following list is not exhaustive but highlights some of the areas discovered to date where an early questioning of the principal and/or senior team might prevent the situation from becoming worse.”

Dr Collins outlined 20 areas, under headlines including financial and organisational. He said boards should be wary if financial forecasts were repeatedly “significantly different” to outurn, if management accounts showed significant swings or variations or if borrowing as a percentage of college turnover exceeded 60 per cent.

Other warning signs flagged up in the letter included staff costs in excess of 65 per cent of turnover, a lack of “systematic” engagement with employers, attendance rates below 85 to 90 per cent or if student surveys or focus groups show levels of satisfaction below 90 per cent.

More generally, Dr Collins said board members should be wary if they were discouraged from formally meeting and discussing the college’s performance with students and staff or if minutes and ensuing actions from senior management team meetings were not published or did not cover the key issues faced by the college. He also said “annual rather than occasional” restructuring should set alarm bells ringing.

It comes after the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) said principals would have to wait for more struggling colleges to emerge successfully from the FE Commissioner process before guidance on how his intervention ends would be published.

A report published on March 25 by BIS, entitled An Evaluation of the Further Education Commissioner-led intervention process summary report, made a number of recommendations as to how college underperformance and checks by commissioner Dr David Collins (pictured above) could be improved.

The report called for “more clarity” surrounding how intervention, which includes “stocktake” progress reports by the commissioner and a Case Review Group to consider ending the process, might be brought to a close.

It said that “to date, only one college [City of Liverpool College] has been removed from intervention. As the circumstances for each intervention differ from case to case it is agreed that more definition or clarity around ending intervention by the FE Commissioner would be welcomed”.