Learners who used the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (Ucas) to apply for higher education courses at FE colleges were wrongly signed up to advertising, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has ruled.

The ICO has told the organisation to change its application form following an investigation sparked by a story in the Guardian in March which drew attention to the fact learners were signing up to commercial marketing for fear of opting out of receiving key information from providers.

The watchdog found that the form only allowed applicants to opt-out of receiving marketing from commercial companies if they un-ticked three boxes covering marketing emails, post and text messages.

But the wording also meant applicants were opting out of getting information about career opportunities and education providers or health information, and the ICO ruled that it meant applicants had “felt obliged” to let Ucas use their information for commercial purposes, in breach of the data protection act.

ICO head of enforcement Stephen Eckersley (pictured) said: “Ucas has a responsibility to ensure that applicants can make free and balanced choices.

“By failing to give these applicants a clear option to avoid marketing, they were being unfairly faced with the default option of having their details used for commercial purposes. Our guidance is clear that consent must be freely given and specific.

“We are pleased that Ucas has agreed to address this issue and will now update their form so that people can make an informed decision on whether they are happy to receive marketing, or not.

“This can only be a good thing for our aspiring students by helping them to keep up-to-date on the information they want, while avoiding the hassle of unwanted marketing.”

A spokesperson for Ucas, which handles applications for higher education courses at most British universities and FE colleges, said: “Ucas takes its data protection responsibilities extremely seriously.

“We have agreed with the ICO that we will amend the wording on the Ucas application to provide greater clarity to students about the additional information they can choose to receive from us.

“This will give applicants greater flexibility about information they are sent on other education, careers and health information separately from commercial products and services.

“This does not affect the information which applicants receive from Ucas about their higher education applications. Students who opt out of additional mailings will continue to receive everything they need to manage their applications to university as well as information about other course and study opportunities, available via Ucas.”

Ucas Progress, a service which links learners with apprenticeships and other vocational courses at colleges and other providers, was not affected.

Creative teaching and the role of research were discussed at the New Bubbles Learning Revolution Conference, which also saw calls for Ofsted to be abolished.

Delegates heard from TV scientist Professor Robert Winston, a range of academics and principals as well as current and former Ofsted inspectors at the lively conference near Heathrow, London.

Among the speakers was also Professor Frank Coffield, of the Institute of Education, who attacked the education watchdog’s “much-vaunted independence” as a “joke”.

He said the sector should “abolish or transform Ofsted”.

“We are wasting £156m of our money on Ofsted,” he said.

“The role of Ofsted at present is to force teachers to comply with government policy.”

“[Sir] Michael Wilshaw thinks the big question is ‘Is the FE system fit for purpose?’… he should be asking is, is Ofsted fit for purpose? Because I don’t think it is.”

Education management consultant Trevor Gordon was more cautious but acknowledged the current inspection system meant “increasingly creativity is being stifled”.

He said when he visited providers “I look at the creative component and competence, and the technical competence”.

He said: “I don’t knock Ofsted but because of some of the impositions on teachers, there’s an over-preponderance of technical and not a lot of creativity.”

Ofsted inspector Paul Joyce, however, rejected the idea that Ofsted was failing to reward teaching which developed learners beyond the qualification.

In his advice to providers on securing an outstanding grading, he said providers should ensure teaching, learning and assessment were “of the highest quality” but they should also “develop the whole person, including literacy and numeracy skills, and wider skills learners need to help them progress to their next steps”.

“Don’t simply focus on delivering to enable students to achieve a qualification aim,” he said.

Professor Winston agreed that “inspirational” teaching was important to raise the aspirations of learners.

Despite being a geneticist, Professor Winston said in teaching, nurture was really better than nature.

“It’s partly personality, it’s partly gender, it’s partly ethnic background — a whole range of issues which come into that nurture equation,” he said.

“And it stands to reason a standard learning is not going to be suitable for all those personalities.”

He added: “The inspirational teacher, the research shows, actually makes a very big difference to how young people learn.

“What we have to do is to try to persuade ourselves and those people who measure us, that that’s actually rather more important than some of the other measurements which are generally in the public sector.”

He warned unless changes were made, UK education would be “fixed into a system which actually can’t deliver what we would be capable of delivering”.

He added: “It’s crazy in government, we have two departments looking after education which don’t talk to each other — BIS [the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills] and DfE [Department for Education] and they’re both dysfunctional and that’s a big issue for us.

“What they do is set these sorts of targets without thinking of the underlying mechanism.

“And that’s what we fundamentally have to change in education, because what we’re leaving young people with is a lack of aspiration and that gets bred in and built into the system that we have.”

Professor Susan Wallace, of Nottingham Trent University, said a lack of imagination could often account for poor performance.

She said: “Historically some of the attitudes about social class and curriculum that were prevalent in the 19^th Century have thrown a very long shadow and we’re still living it in FE,” she said, warning this attitude could still be seen in the modern-day focus on employer needs.

“If the right people aren’t forming the curriculum, there is a danger that the vocational curriculum does become something that’s sterile, that’s made to serve the needs of industry of the economy, but not the needs of the learner.

“And it may be that which lies beneath some of the disengaged and disaffected learners that we meet.”

Teaching expert Geoff Petty pointed to his own research to back up the other speaker’s comments on teaching.

“Using the best methods of teaching can double the impact an average teacher has on student results,” he said.

He added: “We’ve got leadership in education wrong. We should be thinking of them as teachers.”

He highlighted a list of features of a teacher-leading style, including interpreting test scores along with teachers, insisting teachers expect high proportions of their students to do well on learning outcomes and knowing that class atmosphere was conducive to learning, which he said research showed would have four times the impact of a more “hands-free” approach.

Looking to the uncertain future of FE, Mr Petty dismissed the traditional notion of FE as the “Cinderella sector”.

“We’re not the Cinderella sector,” he said.

“We’re the goose that laid the golden egg and pretty soon they’re going to realise that.”

Dr John Lea, of Canterbury Christchurch University, said research like Mr Petty’s could help to make the case for the sector.

“It’s one of those sectors where you can be really optimistic about something one moment, and really down the next,” he said.

“If we’re going to stay buoyant about FE we need to have evidence by our side, we need to be clear about why we believe what we believe and we need to keep pushing that argument forward based on the evidence.”

The event took place on Thursday March 26.

 

A grade four Coalition

Professor Frank Coffield turned the tables on the government during his animated discussion, inviting around 150 delegates to rate the Coalition using Ofsted ratings.

“What Ofsted grade would you give the government’s performance on the FE sector?” he asked.

Of the delegates there, none voted to give the government an outstanding or good grade, three attendees said it required improvement while the majority of other candidates slapped it with an inadequate grade.

If you were an inspector, what grade would you give the government? Let us know on Twitter via @FEWeek.

A toolkit aimed at helping colleges and independent learning providers comply with new government rules on preventing radicalisation has been launched by two FE sector bodies.

The 157 Group and Association of Employment and Learning Providers have launched the document, which is aimed at helping providers implement the government’s “prevent duty” guidance, which was published last month.

The prevent duty guidance sets out the requirements of FE institutions which became law under section 26 of the counter-terrorism and security act 2015 in February. The act places a duty on providers to have “due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism”.

Although the law change does not “confer new functions” on providers, they are still required to consider the potential for radicalisation alongside other safeguarding issues, and the toolkit explains how FE institutions can do that.

Speaking about the duty, home secretary Theresa May has previously said: “Tackling the radicalisation of young people is not and cannot ever be the sole responsibility of the government and law enforcement agencies.

“The new prevent duty means universities will have a legal obligation to play their part, and I hope they do as fully as possible.”

Dr Lynne Sedgmore, executive director of the 157 Group, said: “We have had many questions from colleges and other providers of further education about what the prevent duty means in practice.

“As with all important guidance, education professionals are always concerned to make sure they are doing the right things for their learners, all the more so when the guidance concerns such a key area of focus for our society at the moment

“The case studies and advice contained in this toolkit are not meant to be prescriptive: instead they serve as a reminder of the way in which education and training providers regularly come up with innovative solutions that have, at their heart, the interest of the communities they serve.

“In FE colleges, we understand Prevent as another form of safeguarding our learners, in this case from the risk of radicalisation. Many of the organisations that have contributed case studies to this toolkit are based in priority areas for Prevent and have been working around this agenda for several years.

“We are grateful to them for sharing their experience, which we hope will help those organisations newer to this issue. At the time of publication, the new Prevent duty has not yet been clarified in its final terms, so this document will be very useful as an interim resource.”

The toolkit was designed by the two bodies with the help of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). It also includes case studies from Highbury College, Leicester College, Birmingham Metropolitan College, Coleg Cambria, Hull College Group, Leicester College and Stoke on Trent College.

In his foreword to the toolkit, Stewart Bembridge, BIS policy adviser on preventing violent extremism, said: “All colleges and education and training providers understand the need to safeguard their learners from harm, and the risk from radicalisation of any type is no different.

“However, how radicalisation is tackled can vary from place to place and from organisation to organisation. The aim of the prevent duty and accompanying guidance therefore is to set out the activities that provide a clear framework that all organisations should follow in order to minimise the risk and protect their learners.

“While the 157 Group and AELP do not wish the case studies and information provided in this toolkit to be deemed prescriptive or the sole means of implementing the prevent agenda, the toolkit gives a helpful and timely illustration of how different education and training organisations are tackling extremism, and demonstrates a variety of approaches that address the requirements set out in the prevent duty.”

An independent learning provider that has seen just one learner achieve an apprenticeship since it started running the programme almost two years ago is having its government funding withdrawn after it was branded inadequate by Ofsted.

Kats Learning Ltd, a Hampshire-based company with 118 apprentices on hairdressing, business management and customer services frameworks, was issued with a grade four rating by the education watchdog following inspection in January.

Kats, which has provided government-funding training since 2008 and has a current Skills Funding Agency (SFA) allocation of £334,080, was previously rated as good by Ofsted, but fell to a grade four following its most recent visit, in which inspectors noted that just one apprentice had achieved their goal.

Now the SFA has confirmed it will withdraw the provider’s funding and help it to transfer learners elsewhere.

An SFA spokesperson said: “We have formally notified Kats Learning that we intend to terminate their contract. This decision was taken in line with our ‘Approach to Intervention’, following an inadequate Ofsted inspection.

“We will be working to transfer learners to other providers. This is to ensure continuity of training for learners and employers and to minimise any disruptions.”

The Ofsted report said outcomes for learners were inadequate, adding that since Kats received a contract to deliver apprenticeships in May 2013, only one learner had achieved their apprenticeship.

It said: “A small minority attained the competence element of the programme but too often learners leave before successfully achieving all aspects of the apprenticeship framework.”

In its report, Ofsted also said too many learners made slow progress towards the completion of their apprenticeships and that learners did not make sufficient progress in developing English and maths skills.

It added that strategies to improve teaching and learning were not having sufficient impact also warned that teaching, learning and assessment were inadequate, going on to claim that most tutors did not use pre-course assessments to identify learners’ starting points or needs accurately.

It criticised monitoring of learners’ progress and “poor” target setting, resulting in learners making inadequate progress. It said advice and guidance failed to provide the significant majority of apprentices with “appropriate information to ensure that they and their employers are aware of all aspects of the learning programme”.

The report criticised feedback given to apprentices on their work, which it claimed did not help them improve, and said quality assurance and performance management arrangements were inadequate. It added that the development of learners’ understanding of equality and diversity and their application to the workplace were “weak”.

Kats Learning director Chrisy Kemp claimed the Ofsted inspection result contradicted positive comments from learners collected by the watchdog during the inspection.

She told FE Week: “People should read some of the answers to our learner survey and also take a look at the survey results that were carried out during the Oftsed inspection. These are held on the news page of the website.”

The Skills Funding Agency has relaxed its rules on new traineeship subcontracting to allow all grade three-rated and non-inspected providers to work with a grade one or two lead to deliver the programme.

Thanks to the changes, brought in this month, grade three-rated (‘requires improvement’) providers and those not inspected by Ofsted can draw up traineeship agreements with grade one (‘outstanding’) and two (‘good’) lead providers they have no previous contractual relationship with.

Previously, new traineeship agreements could only be established if the provider already had a relationship with a grade one or two lead provider dating back to before the 2013 introduction of the youth employability scheme. To set up a new traineeship agreement between unconnected providers, both the lead and the subcontractor used to have to be either grade one or two.

Grade three subcontractors also had to have been on the SFA subcontractors’ list before June 2013. But, as providers are only registered on the subcontractors’ list once they are delivering more than £100,000 of provision, smaller subcontractors were excluded from offering the programme. This restriction has now been lifted.

Funding rules for 2015/16, published by the Education Funding Agency (EFA) said: “If you want to enter into a new sub-contracting arrangement with a new sub-contractor for traineeships then as of April 1, 2015, the original requirement that traineeship sub-contractors have to be graded Ofsted one or two has been removed on the basis that the lead provider has to be (and remain) at these grades. The sub-contractor can be Ofsted three or no grade.”

The move comes as the government also said all 16 to 19-year-olds would be able to continue receiving job seekers allowance (JSA) while participating in a traineeship.

A separate announcement in the SFA’s update newsletter said 16 to 19-year-olds, who had previously been prevented from claiming JSA if they were on a traineeship programme for more than 12 hours a week, would now be allowed the benefit.

The SFA said the change, which came in on Friday, would “increase access” to traineeships and “enable all young people to benefit from full-time participation while maintaining entitlement to their benefits”.

A spokesperson for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), which oversaw the benefit change, said: “Traineeships are important in giving young people the skills they need to move into work which is why we are ensuring that all young people continue to receive their JSA while in full-time training.

“This will also give providers and employers greater flexibility when they are designing their traineeships.”

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), which has campaigned against the restrictions on grade three providers since there were introduced in May 2013, welcomed the news.

An AELP spokesperson said: “This is a big step forward but the initial restriction of only allowing Ofsted grade one and two-rated lead contractors to deliver traineeships should also be reviewed.

“A provider that has evidence it can deliver a high quality traineeship programme should be allowed to deliver.

“Many of these providers have existing relationships with employers currently not involved in traineeships and have established apprenticeship programmes.

“They can make those links and ensure the programme can be expanded leading to more employers seeing the benefit of providing these important first work opportunities.”

AELP has previously argued Ofsted grades were “too blunt a tool” by which to measure providers.

Teresa Frith, senior skills policy manager for the Association of Colleges (AoC), said: “It’s clear that the Coalition Government listened to the concerns raised by ourselves and others that the restrictions around Jobseeker’s Allowance for 16 to 19-year-olds and Ofsted grades for sub-contractors reduced access to traineeships.

“It is far more important for the college to have an Ofsted grade one or two and to monitor the quality of the traineeship, rather than expecting a sub-contractor to have that grade. Traineeships are supposed to increase a young person’s ability to get a job, but preventing 16 to 19-year-olds undertaking traineeships from claiming JSA made it more difficult.

“We would, however, like to see even more flexibility in the pre-apprenticeship offer to help prepare young people for a job with training.”

157 Group exectutive director Lynne Sedgmore said: “Anything which widens access to traineeships is to be welcomed so these announcements are both very positive.

“We remain concerned, though, that the same rules regarding Ofsted grades are not applied to all types of provision and continue to press for an equitable approach which enables young people to access traineeships wherever they are in the country”.

Lewisham Southwark College has been given the ignominious honour of becoming the first FE and skills provider to be branded inadequate by Ofsted twice in a row.

In a report on an inspection in February, which was released today (pictured above), the college was mauled by the education watchdog over the pace of improvement and a failure to raise standards after it was first given a grade four rating in January last year following a visit by inspectors in November 2013.

The 17,943-learner general FE college, which has a current Skills Funding Agency (SFA) allocation of almost £24m, actually got an even worse result than last time with grade fours across the headline fields as opposed to two fours and two threes last time (see below).

It is believed to be the first to receive two inadequate ratings overall in a row under the current common inspection framework.

In its report, Ofsted warned that governors, senior leaders and college staff had “not made enough progress in improving key weaknesses identified at the previous inspection”, including poor provision in both English and maths.

It added that teaching, learning and assessment were improving too slowly, with too few learners experiencing good teaching, and described attendance and punctuality as poor.

It said: “Since the creation of the college in 2012, leaders and governors have failed to raise standards and expectations of both teachers and learners.

“The college’s curriculum does not currently meet the skills needs of local employers, and progress to resolve this weakness has been far too slow.”

Carole Kitching (pictured), who is due to take over as principal and chief executive of the college in the summer from interim principal Jo Lomax, said she was disappointed with the outcome.

She said: “Clearly the outcome of the Ofsted re-inspection is a disappointment to everyone but the report makes many references to recent improvements and ‘green shoots’.

“Over the next few months I will be working with the interim team to drive forward the pace of change and to ensure the hard work of everyone who works at the college bears fruit for all our students.”

The report also raised concerns about the college’s “precarious” financial position, which Ofsted said limited its ability to improve provision “swiftly”, in contrast with Ofsted’s first full report last January which made no mention of the financial position.

The rating comes after four Ofsted monitoring inspections since the first inadequate rating, and three visits by FE commissioner Dr David Collins, who identified some weaknesses in the governance and leadership of the college following a visit last January.

After a second visit in July, following the departure of former principal Maxine Room and the appointment of ex-Warwickshire College principal and former 157 Group chair Ioan Morgan to the position of interim principal, Dr Collins praised the progress of new leadership. He also visited in January this year. His follow-up findings have not been made public.

Lewisham Southwark College, previously named Lesoco, was formed in 2012 when Lewisham College, which had been outstanding in 2006, merged with Southwark College, which was branded inadequate in 2011.

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and SFA are yet to comment on whether further intervention, including a revisit from Dr Collins, would take place.

Two FE colleges have defended their dealings with a religious school chain denounced as a “cult” by former members and under investigation by the Department for Education (DfE).

City College Coventry and Barnet and Southgate College both held contracting agreements, as leads, with Focus Learning Trust, an independent school chain run by the Exclusive Brethren (also known as the Plymouth Brethren), until last year.

Focus Learning Trust’s subcontracting arrangements are being “looked at” by the DfE  and concerns were reported in The Times last month over the trust’s teaching practices, which allegedly included banning certain books and refusing to teach about evolution, sex or homosexuality.

The Brethren, a Christian sect which believes members should live separately from the rest of the world to avoid being corrupted by non-believers, has been condemned as “a cult” by former members over its practice of exiling defectors and preventing them from seeing their families.

However, City College Coventry principal Steve Logan defended the college’s relationship with a group, which held an £80,000 a-year contract to deliver A-level provision for around 20 students at the trust’s Coventry school and briefly at its Gloucester school.

Mr Logan told FE Week: “I am only able to comment on our experience of the extremely good provision delivered at the Copsewood School in Coventry. On that basis, I must question the validity and accuracy of the comments made in the press.”

The arrangement had been in place for 10 years, added Mr Logan, but concluded in 2014.

The trust also had a £475k agreement in 2013/14 with Barnet and Southgate College, where a spokesperson said the arrangement was “subjected to the full and usual contracting due diligence”.

“Where necessary, this included seeking specific assurances on eligibility from relevant agencies. In accordance with funding rules the contract was covered by in-year quality control processes,” she said.

“The sub-contracting arrangements were concluded in July 2014, reflecting the changes to college funding allocations and revised strategic objectives.

“The college has, therefore, no relationship with Focus Learning Trust in 2014/15. The college has been in contact with the EFA and has received assurances about its historical position and Focus.”

A spokesperson for the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, which runs Focus Learning Trust, said the arrangement with Barnet and Southgate College had been “legitimate and approved”.

She added: “Some Focus Learning Trust schools have in the past entered into approved sub-contract arrangements with City College Coventry and Barnet and Southgate College.

“Our own in-house FE provision is evolving and improving and there are currently no sub-contract arrangements in place.”

A DfE spokesperson said: “We are looking into the arrangements between Focus Learning Trust and other institutions to ensure they meet our strict subcontracting standards.

“These partnerships can be used to give students access to facilities they may not otherwise have.

“Our guidance is clear that if subcontracting arrangements are not meeting these standards then they will be investigated. In extreme circumstances, we will not hesitate to terminate a funding agreement.”

The Exclusive Brethren is already facing investigation by HMRC over multimillion pound gift aid claims to fund its schools and is being questioned over whether it should count as a charity and so can be eligible for tax breaks.

A Brethren spokesperson said the issues HMRC was looking into “derive from uncertainty about the correct application of the rules” and said other faith schools were also being investigated, although HMRC declined to confirm this.

*** Hands up if you fell for it? Yes, this was our April Fool’s Day 2015 prank story, and thanks to Dr Lynne Sedgmore for playing along.

Thanks too, to Martin Doel and Stewart Segal.

“We may have played a joke — some fun amid the gloom — but we are clear that  the severity of cuts facing the sector is anything but a joke,” said Dr Sedgmore.

“And on a serious note we do pay homage to all the dedicated FE professionals who continue their excellent work and their commitment to students.”

_____________________________

The FE and skills sector is set for its own Poet Laureate later this year with outgoing 157 Group executive director Dr Lynne Sedgmore CBE the first to take up the newly-created role, FE Week can reveal.

It is understood the post will feature in the Queen’s Speech on May 27 having already been agreed as a biennial appointment.

And, in a break with Queen’s Speech protocol, details of the first Poet Laureate were released today by the first incumbent — Dr Sedgmore, who is already a published poet. Her first collection “Enlivenment” was published in 2013 by Chrysalis Press.

The appointment is set to be made official with Dr Sedgmore’s retirement from her 157 Group post later this year following the appointment of her successor, for which a date is yet to be set.

However, she has already penned her first poem for the role. It is entitled “A Farewell Ode to FE” and has been released exclusively to FE Week — see below to read Dr Sedgmore’s poem.

Dr Sedgmore described her appointment as “ground-breaking”.

“For a sector to have its own official Poet Laureate is quite an achievement and I was overwhelmed to learn that I would be the first post-holder,” she said.

“The schools and higher education sectors do not have an equivalent post and so I hope to raise the profile of FE and skills through words to heights the likes of which have hitherto never been imagined.

“This is a ground-breaking role and I hope to do justice to not only the sector but also poetry as an art form.”

The new post, and Dr Sedgmore’s appointment, was welcomed by Association of Colleges chief executive Martin Doel (pictured right).

“FE will benefit from having its own bard,” he said.

“I’m sure that Lynne will be able to translate the emotional attachment that we all have for our sector into words, capturing the highs and lows of working with students, principals, governors and government, as well as other representative bodies.”

Meanwhile, Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief executive Stewart Segal (pictured left) said Newcastle-under-Lyme -raised Dr Sedgmore’s poetry would be more accessible than the works of, for example, Charles Baudelaire, William Morris and Lord Alfred Tennyson for modern workplace learners.

He said: ‘”This is a very important appointment when we are looking at the attainment of good GCSE or Functional Skills within the context of vocational programmes.

“Nineteenth Century poetry is not enough to arm young people with the skills for today’s workplace, so the Stoke Bard’s take on modern life will make a huge difference to their prospects.”

Five former A4e workers have been jailed for their parts in a back-to-work scheme fraud that cost the taxpayer nearly £300,000.

A further five former employees were handed suspended sentences at Reading Crown Court  for a plot that involved creating faked records of welfare-to-work learners.

Between 2008 and 2011, the defendants submitted fraudulent paperwork for learners on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Aspire to Inspire programme, claiming to have found work for learners who either did not exist or who remained unemployed.

Four people were convicted following the 13-week trial at Reading which finished on January 14, with sentencing taking place yesterday.

Former account manager Ines Cano-Uribe, aged 39, of Madrid, Spain, was sentenced to 18 months in prison for two counts of forgery.

Former contract administrator Zabar Khalil, 35, of Slough, received a 12-month sentence suspended for two years, 150 hours’ unpaid work and £2,000 costs for one count of forgery.

Former deputy business manager Matthew Hannigan-Train, 31, of Bristol, was sentenced to 12-month sentence suspended for two years, 200 hours’ unpaid work and £2,000 costs for one count of forgery.

Former recruiter Hayley Wilson, 27, of Milton Keynes, was handed a 12-month sentence suspended for two years, 200 hours’ unpaid work and £2,000 costs for one count of forgery.

Six other defendants pleaded guilty to their part in the scheme at earlier court hearings.

Former recruiter Dean Lloyd, 38, of Milton Keynes, was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment for 13 counts of forgery.

Former recruiter Julie Grimes, 52, of Surrey, was jailed for 26 months for nine counts of forgery.

Former recruiter Aditi Singh, 31, of Slough, was given a 10-month sentence suspended for two years, 150 hours’ unpaid work and £530 costs for three counts of fraud and forgery.

Former recruiter Bindiya Dholiwar, 28, of Slough, received 15 months in prison for seven counts of forgery.

Former recruiter Nikki Foster, 31, of Workingham, was sentenced to 22 months’ imprisonment for eight counts of fraud and one of conspiracy.

Former recruiter Charles McDonald, 44, of Surrey, received a 40-month sentence for six counts of fraud and one conspiracy.

The defendants worked at A4e branches throughout the Thames Valley.

Although the money claimed from the DWP was given to the company rather than to the fraudsters themselves, they received bonuses for helping people into work and meeting targets.

When the Department of Work and Pensions audited the contract and asked to see 21 files in March 2011, Cano-Uribe, Hannigan-Train and Wilson were all involved in making the files appear to be in order, including fraudulent ones.

A4e helped 558 people find jobs on the £1.3m Aspire to Inspire contract for Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire, but staff fraudulently claimed for a further 167 people.

The fraud came to light when Grimes confided in a new member of staff that she had forged signatures, who reported it to senior staff.

However, defence lawyers claimed that fraudulent practices were “entrenched” within the company itself which, they said had a “culture of dishonesty” and put “unrealistic demands” on its staff. A4e rejected the claims.

Andrew Dutton, A4e group chief executive, said: “We note that the judge in her sentencing remarks dismissed claims that a culture of dishonesty existed within our business.

“We also note that those who made these claims raised no concerns about workplace practices or culture until they were confronted with the proof of their own dishonest behaviour.

“Their claims do not reflect the way this company operates, or the values of our 2,100 staff, whose honesty and integrity are much valued.”

He added: “A4e has a zero tolerance policy towards fraud and took this case extremely seriously.

“The sentences bring a conclusion to the investigation that was started by A4e in 2010, when we uncovered some irregularities in a small contract in the Thames Valley, and we co-operated fully with the Department for Work and Pensions and police to bring this case to court.

“These convictions relate to a single contract which ended four years ago and represented only 0.24 per cent of our annual business at that time, and to people who no longer work at A4e.

“We are obviously disappointed and sorry that there were people working for us on this historical contract who behaved dishonestly, and in doing so let down the customers we had intended them to help and the taxpayer.

“A4e long ago set aside the money to pay back the DWP the amount it received as a result of the unsubstantiated claims and we have ensured that the taxpayer will have lost nothing from the conduct of the people involved.

He added that A4e had made “far-reaching” improvements to its control system.

Detective Inspector Gavin Tyrrell, from the Thames Valley Police’s Economic Crime Unit, said the offences had “targeted vulnerable people who had been out of work for long periods and were trying to find jobs during what was a very difficult employment climate”.

“I hope the convictions send out a clear message,” he said.

“Thames Valley Police takes offences of this nature seriously and makes every effort to ensure offenders face the consequences of their actions.”