A plea for cuts caution after unannounced qualifications cull

Vocational education seems to be viewed as a soft option for public funding cuts, but it’s a view that has far-reaching consequences for the economy, says Kirstie Donnelly.

There’s a theme emerging around a lot of the policy changes in the FE sector of late — cuts.

First, there was the announcement of a 17.5 per cent funding rate cut for 18-year-olds, described by Education Secretary Michael Gove as the ‘least detrimental’ scenario. But for who? Certainly not young adults, who see vocational qualifications as a way of getting on the skills and employment ladder.

Then, the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) announced plans to cut funding for almost 1,500 qualifications that fall below the 15-credit threshold.

We weren’t all aware the threshold had increased from 12 to 15 credits, but for the most part we were prepared for something — we just didn’t know the full extent of it, or how it might impact on all would-be vocational learners.

While there is logic in de-cluttering the system — something we welcomed from the Whitehead review — this goes too far.

It looks like random cuts are being made to compensate for a funding hole elsewhere, and sadly the adult vocational market is not seen as a priority, but rather an easy target.

This latest announcement is cutting funding for the sake of it without considering the wider, longer-term impact of the changes.

We know youth unemployment remains high, stubbornly so.

Don’t just cut back and ‘cleanse the system’ without considering all the evidence and all the facts. Don’t make any more snap decisions

We also know that employers are facing skills gaps in certain industries, which could destabilise the UK’s economic recovery.

And yet we’ve surely all seen research detailing employers’ fears that young people aren’t prepared for the workplace.

To me, vocational qualifications are the solution. They give people the chance to develop the skills and confidence they need for the workplace.

They enable future progression or specialism within an industry. Ultimately, they bridge the gap between education and employment.

The government needs to think carefully about any further changes it makes to the system — particularly when it comes to funding cuts.

First and foremost, employers and their needs must be the focus of any changes and developments. After all, they’re the ones who hire people in the first place. But I doubt they have been consulted.

Some of the qualifications that will cease to receive funding on the back of the SFA announcement may indeed have less value to employers.

But equally, we can’t assume that just because a qualification is niche to a certain industry, or has limited take-up, that it is worthless. In fact it could be the complete opposite.

We also need to consider how different sectors operate. Some require more specific or atomised learning. This blanket approach cannot work for all industries.

Employers aside, we mustn’t forget the impact on the learners themselves, particularly adult learners or the long-term unemployed. Or even the likes of ex-service personnel or those leaving prison.

Many won’t have the skills or confidence to jump straight into a long-term programme of study. Shorter courses can help them to learn the ropes and act as a stepping-stone onto further learning.

And what about those already in work who want to enhance their skills further? Does
the government realise it could be denying them the opportunity to further their careers? This surely this goes against everything vocational education and training stands for.

I urge the government, the SFA and others to proceed with caution. Don’t just cut back and ‘cleanse the system’ without considering all the evidence and all the facts. Don’t make any more snap decisions. Think about the future impact this will have on the economy. Think about the individuals this will affect.

Vocational pathways can and do deliver quality results. It’s about time this country recognises that, instead of treating them as the poor relation that can be cast aside whenever the purse strings are tightened.

Kirstie Donnelly, UK managing director,
City & Guilds

 

Building a skilled construction workforce between the gaps

While the building trade is a big employer of apprentices, the wider construction industry suffers skills gaps elsewhere. But Laing O’Rourke has teamed up with FE and skills bodies, including a number of colleges, to boost the development of industry-needed skills, explains Alison Lamplough.

he construction industry is a major UK employer and, as well as being one of our essential sectors, it has also been a major exporter for nearly a century.

Yet the industry is facing up to a ticking time bomb — caused by a skills shortage and an ageing workforce.

Apprenticeships have long played a part in the building sector of the construction industry.

But on the civil engineering side, the demand and attractiveness of formal apprenticeships has not been strong.

Coupling this with the demographic timebomb of an aging workforce means unless urgent action is taken, the problem of a skills gap is about to hit home.

It is anticipated that over the next decade the UK will see an increase in investment in major civil engineering infrastructure development.

Projects such as Crossrail have already shown we have skill gaps in areas such as tunnelling and civil engineering specific trades.

Unless the skills gap in the workforce is addressed, UK contractors will have to look to Europe to meet the skill requirements.

In the past, the industry has used major projects such as Terminal 5 at Heathrow and the London Olympics as catalysts for improving skills.

Laing O’Rourke, as a direct employer, is fully aware of these skill gaps.

Unless the skills gap in the workforce is addressed, UK contractors will have to look to Europe to meet the skill requirements

Last year, the company won funding from the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, under the Employer Ownership Pilot, to develop a new level two apprenticeship for steelfixing — identified nationally as one of the gaps in core skills.

Laing O’Rourke selected a group of colleges to deliver the formal training component. These were Bridgwater College, Gateshead College and the National Construction College.

After a full tendering process the company appointed awarding organisation NOCN to support the development of the qualification. Its managing director, Graham Hasting-Evans, is on the UK National Steering Committee for the Build Up Skills programme, a UK initiative backed by the European Commission which aims to support closing the training and skills gap in the UK workforce to enable it to meet the EU 2020 energy efficiency targets.

In February 2013, at NOCN’s offices in London, Laing O’Rourke brought together a team to develop both the qualification and how the apprenticeship would be delivered.

The development also included input from operational staff, Laing O’Rourke’s suppliers and BAM Nuttall as a representative of other major contractors.

The team defined the employers’ standards, the quality control requirements, the knowledge qualification, workplace learning (NVQ), the approach to up-skilling, the training exercises and delivery of the apprenticeship.

The process was undertaken in line with the Richard Review principles.

A full package has been brought together including Functional Skills, ERR and trainee/pre-apprenticeships pathways at entry and level one. A level three is planned for team leaders in order to give a full pathway. The local enterprise partnership and local agencies are involved in recruiting potential apprentices and the apprenticeship has been approved by Ofqual and is on the Apprenticeship Framework.

The initial trainee programme has started and the first cohort of apprentices is planned to begin the level two apprenticeship in March.

A quality control group with the employers will oversee the new style apprenticeships.

The qualification has been designed in such a way as to also provide a framework for up-skilling the existing workforce and introduce the use of new technology into site based work.

Bringing everyone together in this way is an innovative approach to the development of employer-led apprenticeships and qualifications. All involved have enjoyed this collaborative approach and see this as an excellent way of working. It’s the way of the future for employer-led apprenticeships and qualifications.

Alison Lamplough, head of operational training, Laing O’Rourke

 

Are rural business communities being let down in the training stakes?

Employers in big town and city locations make an attractive proposition for young workers and providers who, claims Salena Dawson, are becoming less interested in rural provision. She looks at whether such communities are being let down by businesses and providers.

I am a small business owner in a rural Norfolk market town. I am passionate about my community and, like many small independent business owners, I want to be integral to its continued existence.

Unfortunately, we the community (both business and residential) do not seem to be inspiring our young people to stay local.

Losing our young people or failing to attract younger people into our market town will have a detrimental effect on the prosperity and sustainability of our community and in the long term the loss of young people will impact the economic viability of local businesses like mine.

Like many market towns we have seen an expansion in population, but mainly on the outskirts of town.

This makes the accessibility to the nearest city shopping mall a better shopping experience than our high street with its many vacant retail units, or occupied shops — none of which sell young people’s clothes, shoes or jewellery.

We have no cinema, public swimming pool, bars or anything remotely extreme sport-orientated to entice our young people to remain local.

Quaint we are, cosmopolitan we are not.

We have an academy, but with no sixth form college. Those lucky enough to make the GCSE grade are shipped out to a shiny new world spending their pounds elsewhere.

Those not wanting FE are left often to find their own way — NEET [not in education, employment or training]. Aspiration in these young people remains low.

However, what we do have locally is around 1,000 small independent businesses, all with potential employers who could give work experience, employment, and mentoring to our younger people.

But we don’t.

It beggars belief that small businesses in market towns seem to be invisible providers

I have sat on the local chamber, been a member of the local partnership and even sat as an independent governor at the local school.

But more and more I become frustrated at the lack of communication between these groups to act to assist young people into local business. Instead we leave our young people to simply leave.

With the growth in apprenticeship schemes we would expect better communication by commercially-minded providers, but it beggars belief that small businesses in market towns seem to be invisible providers.

We small business owners find it onerous and time-consuming to proactively seek the right candidate.

There is a plethora of providers and the information at times is overwhelming.

Further time is wasted by mismatched candidates being sent for interviews because the provider is trying to pigeonhole candidates into unsuitable placements or into careers the candidates do not want.

Is it any wonder that small businesses give up trying to access the apprenticeship scheme as a viable way employing young people?

So how do we keep our young people local? We create an educational environment which sustains young people locally beyond the age of 16.

We provide better communication between schools and the business community by appointing a local business leader to be the conduit between the two. We start giving impartial careers advice.

We start making apprenticeship providers more accountable — it’s time for them to not only make the quick easy placements to large business, but also to take the time to know local business and match the candidate accordingly

Without retaining young people locally our community dies. It is incumbent on us in business to seek to retain skills locally and to create an environment where young people want to remain. To survive we need to pocket their pound too.

I remain passionate about my community and I hope to be integral in providing an environment which nurtures young people to one day feel this passion  about their community also.

Salena Dawson, solicitor, Dawsons Law, Watton, Norfolk

 

Peter Marples, director and owner, Aspire Achieve Advance

In early 2006 Peter Marples, fresh off the back of a merger between his provider Assa and training giant Carter & Carter, was vaunted in national press as “one of the least known and more powerful people in further education”.

When I tell him this, he laughs and describes it as “an inappropriate comment by an exuberant journalist”.

“It’s certainly not true now,” he says.

The claim may not be true, but current venture Aspire Achieve Advance certainly has some clout.

As of last month, it held subcontractor contracts worth £5.8m, according to the Skills Funding Agency, and works with around 1,500 apprentices.

However, one of Marples’s biggest regrets is the Assa deal (which he pitches more as a sale than a merger) despite the fact it resulted in his appointment to the role of business development director at Carter & Carter.

He had been managing director of Assa when the deal was struck in August 2005. The £24.2m Carter & Carter paid for Assa made Marples — who had led a management buyout of the transport, aerospace and food and drink industries provider just two years earlier — a multi-millionaire almost overnight.

But, he says: “I think the timing was not right to sell Assa at that point.

“I think the business could have gone on independently to probably have been now the biggest and best provider in the sector.”

He chose to go ahead with the deal partly, he says, because of a “genuine belief that being part of something bigger would have helped us grow faster”.

But Carter & Carter’s subsequent demise meant his dreams for Assa were not to be.

Inset: Peter Marples with wife Sarah at a Radio 2 driving experience in aid of Children in Need
Inset: Peter Marples with wife Sarah at a Radio 2 driving experience in aid of Children in Need

Carter & Carter had begun life in 1992 with a contract to improve the accident and repair division at the Vauxhall car firm. Five years later it moved into training, winning the British Audi Academy contract.

In 2005 Carter & Carter was floated on the stock market with an £80m valuation before Assa was acquired and by April 2007, Carter & Carter shares were trading hands for more than £12 each, valuing it at £550m-plus.

But the growth strategy came to an abrupt end with the tragic death of founder Phillip Carter, who died along with his 17-year-old son, Andrew, in a helicopter crash in May 2007.

Within eight months the 27,000-learner company was in administration with shares tumbling to 85p before they were suspended.

It was eventually bought out in the main by NCG (formerly Newcastle College Group). The deal was thought to have helped save the jobs of around 1,500 of Carter & Carter’s 2,200 staff.

“It was very difficult personally because I should have been with Phil in that helicopter — the company lost its charismatic leader,” says Marples, who resigned following the tragedy.

He adds: “I had an allegiance to Phil and respected his vision and drive and I didn’t trust the vision and drive of those who replaced him.”

Despite this, he tells me he was “of course” surprised the company declined so rapidly. He is also defensive about the huge growth of Carter & Carter.

“It was part of a strategy that the board fully supported and that business would have continued to prosper with Phil at the helm,” he says, refuting any suggestion that the growth had made the company unstable.

“There isn’t a negative perception of so much growth at NCG or at Vision West Notts, or at Learndirect,” he adds, defiantly.

The attitude betrays “an entrepreneurial streak” that Marples, now 49, says first evidenced itself during his childhood in the village of Wirksworth, in the Derbyshire Peak District.

His mother and father, Jean and Walter, ran the local Post Office where Marples tells me he was bought up sitting on the counter, counting money from the age of three and his choice to go into accountancy was, he says, down to his mother.

There isn’t a negative perception of so much growth at NCG or at Vision West Notts, or at Learndirect“

“My mother said I was no good with my hands, so I was either going to be a bank manager or an accountant,” he says.

Marples took on an accountancy apprenticeship at Derbyshire County Council at 16, before joining the Audit Commission in 1987 and then being “head-hunted” by consultancy firm KPMG in 1990.

After nearly 13 years he left to join Assa and then, helped by profits from the company’s sale to Carter & Carter and in true millionaire style, he led a consortium that bought Derby County Football Club in 2006. It was, he says, “probably the craziest thing I’ve done”.

“I felt I could run it like a business, and make it successful using business principles,” he says.

But he quickly found that running a football club was not like running a business.

“It’s one of those things that you get caught up in the emotion of buying your club you support, and when you get into it you realise it’s not quite what it seems,” he says.

Under Marples, the club made it to the Premier League, something he is evidently proud of, but in 2008 he decided to sell the club.

His next move was to set up Aspire Achieve Advance with former West Nottinghamshire College principal Di McEvoy-Robinson.

“I didn’t need to do it, but I’m very driven by trying to be successful at whatever I do — and apprenticeships are something that’s really important to me,” he says.

Though nowhere near as large as Carter & Carter, Aspire Achieve Advance has also grown quickly. In September 2012 it teamed up with City of Liverpool College to buy the “majority” of business from First4Skills — a provider behind around 10,000 apprenticeships across the country that had gone into administration.

But  Marples insists there should be no concern about over-expansion.

“We spend a lot of time on the quality side and… talking to employers, learners and staff about how we can continuously improve that quality,” he says.

Marples, who is married to the Aspire Achieve Advance quality and compliance director Sarah and has two children, Thomas, aged 20, and Samantha, 23, is reticent about his life outside of work.

He seems to be someone who does not switch off easily, although he’s clearly committed to his charity work with Children in Need and Frazer’s House, which helps parents of children suffering with brain tumours.

“Being successful brings lots of different types of rewards,” he says.

“It’s not about writing cheques. Anyone can write a cheque and walk away. It’s about putting your energy and the skills you’ve got into those sorts of things.”

No FE question time on Question Time

Further education figures were left disappointed by a lack of sector talk as Skills Minister Matthew Hancock and Professor Alison Wolf both appeared on BBC Question Time.

Professor Wolf, whose government-commissioned review of vocational education for 14 to 19-year-olds was published in early 2011, and Mr Hancock answered a broad range of questions — but nothing was raised about the FE and skills sector.

They were quizzed about anonymity in rape cases in light of the acquittal of Coronation Street actor William Roache and whether workers in essential services should have the right to strike, among other issues.

Sue McLeod, principal of MidKent College, where the show was filmed, was one such disappointed viewer, tweeting that the show was “feisty but lacking in #FE relevance”.

Still no end in sight to SFA software nightmare

There remains no end in sight to the problems faced by providers trying to use new funding software to calculate how much government cash they are due.

Skills Funding Agency (SFA) deputy director for programme delivery and performance Rich Williams and deputy director for funding systems Una Bennett (pictured) spoke in a webinar hosted exclusively by FE Week publisher Lsect, presented by FE funding consultant Nick Linford. They spoke about ongoing issues with the new Funding Information System (Fis) software.

I cannot say we have fixes for every one of the [25] known issues for FIS but we are working very hard on that.”

It should have been available in August last year, but was not released until November — and providers say it is still giving unreliable funding data reports.

Mr Williams admitted Fis was still creating inaccurate data and could not say when the issues would be resolved.

He said: “I cannot say we have fixes for every one of the [25] known issues for FIS but we are working very hard on that.”
A spreadsheet on the Data Service’s website has listed more than 70 problems with Fis.

A report issued this week by the SFA also conceded Fis was producing inaccurate data in five out of 12 key reporting areas.
The government’s Learning Aim Reference System (Lars) online search engine should also have been available by last August.

It is supposed to help providers’ management information system (MIS) officers check whether qualifications are eligible for funding, and how much per learner providers should receive.

However, it is still not available and providers are having to use Lars Lite instead — a temporary downloadable database from the SFA that providers claim is also producing unreliable data.

When asked when Lars will be released, Mr Williams said: “Any date I give I would be making up, so I’m not going to give you a date.”
When asked if development of Lars had been paused while the other funding software issues were being resolved, he added: “The focus has been elsewhere, absolutely.”

Many in the sector have claimed the problems with Fis and Lars Lite corrupted key information in the Statistical First Release published on January 30.

A note in the report itself stated: “There is evidence of increased data lag for the first three months of 2013/14 compared to the same period of the previous year.”

Jobcentres steer teens away from traineeships

Jobcentre Plus (JCP) advisers have been told not to direct 18 and 19-year-olds to the government’s flagship traineeship scheme because it would put their benefits at risk, FE Week has learned.

Documents seen by FE Week show staff in a number of JCPs are being instructed to ignore the work experience and employability programme — even though the rule affecting benefits is due to be by-passed.

In the Autumn Statement, Chancellor George Osborne promised trainees would be exempt from the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) rule preventing anyone working or training for more than 16 hours a-week claiming Job Seekers Allowance (JSA).

However, there has been no further announcement, although FE Week understands the exemption could be in place within a month.
In the meantime, an email sent to advisers and managers in one JCP from regional managers said: “Following conversations this week with the DWP, they have said they are currently not promoting traineeships to 18 and 19-year-old JCP customers who are in receipt of JSA. This is because… this group of people would lose their entitlement to benefits.”

Kevin Ayton, managing director of provider KSA Training and Development Ltd, told FE Week that traineeship referrals from JCPs had “dried up by 100 per cent”. He said: “We’re struggling at the moment because the JCPs are bulging at the seams with people who would be ideal for a traineeship but aren’t being offered them.” He added that it didn’t seem to be limited to 18 and 19-year-olds.

“The JCP take on this seems to be a blanket rule until clarification [on the 16-hour rule exemption] from DWP is received,” said Mr Ayton. “A 21-year-old learner who had seen our flier attempted to enrol on our programme but was told by JCP to not do that as her benefits would be in jeopardy.”

Two further JCPs have confirmed that they were following similar ‘ignore traineeships’ guidance.

The email saying not to promote the programme went on to say DWP had raised the JSA issue with the Treasury and was hopeful it would be resolved “quickly”.

It added: “In the interim the advice to advisers and providers is to ensure that any 18 or 19-year-old’s benefit entitlement is checked with their local JCP office prior to starting a traineeship.”

Since the traineeship programme, aimed at 16 to 24-year-olds, was introduced in September, it has suffered with lower than expected uptake and this latest development will do nothing to ease concerns.
A DWP spokesperson said traineeships were “an important part of the government’s long-term plan to create a stronger, more secure economy”.

He added: “Traineeships have the flexibility for providers to design them so jobseekers can participate without it affecting their benefits.”

He said where traineeships offered more than 16 hours a week “it is appropriate that Jobcentre Plus advisers make claimants aware of this and for the provider to consider reviewing the design of the programme.”

However, last month, Andrea Webb, director of traineeship provider Profile Development and Training, told FE Week that designing traineeships around the 16-hour rule was “limiting” and prevented them offering “a meaningful experience”.

Meanwhile, the Association for Employment and Learning Providers (ALEP) had, according to director of employment and skills Paul Warner, “a very productive meeting” met with DWP officials.

He added: “The signs are hopeful that the proposed change with regards to the 16-hour rule as applied to the study element of traineeships will take place shortly.”

————————————————

Editorial 

Keep the flagship afloat

Traineeships should have no enemies and yet there’s been much talk that they’re simply not taking off.

To what extent this has been the case we can’t say as traineeship data did not feature in the most recent statistical first release, despite promises it would be.

Regardless, it’s been clear for some time that the problem has been benefits.

The programme is simply not attractive to learners who stand to lose their Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) — to take part in a scheme that more often than has no immediate financial benefit.

This has been brought home by the email to Job Centre Plus advisers, who are told to steer teenagers clear of traineeships while the wait for the promised JSA exemption for traineeships goes on.

Why isn’t Nick Clegg stepping in and banging heads together? Isn’t the DPM supposed to be sorting out youth unemployment schemes? We know that every day a young person is out of work the harder it will be for them to secure a job.

The FE sector is willing and able to make a success of traineeships, but unnecessary barriers outside of their control put the whole scheme at risk.

Removing these barriers is perhaps the only way to ensure it really is a flagship policy, as opposed to a sinking one.

Chris Henwood, editor (chris.henwood@feweek.co.uk)

Gove attacked over excellent ‘extra-curricular’ claims

Funding for “expensive and untested” free schools should be used to improve extra-curricular activities at existing institutions, Sixth Form Colleges Association (SFCA) deputy chief executive James Kewin has said.

How can they possibly expect the same level of education when resources across the sector are so different?”

His comments follow a speech by Education Secretary Michael Gove at the London Academy of Excellence on Monday, February 3, in which he said he had “never visited a school that excelled academically, which didn’t also excel in extra-curricular activities”.

Mr Kewin hit out over the comments, saying the Department for Education had cut funding for extra-curricular activities by 10 per cent in 2011 and made further reductions which could see some sixth form colleges lose a third of their funding by 2015.

Mr Kewin said a recent £62m investment in nine new free schools for 16 to 19-year-olds would be better spent on existing sixth form colleges.sixth-form-stats_E92

He said: “Mr Gove gave us no indication of how state sixth form colleges are supposed to provide the sort of extra-curricular activities available in the independent sector with just a third of the funding.

“Some of the funding required for these activities could be found if the government stopped lavishing funding on new, more expensive and untested free school sixth form colleges while existing sixth form colleges are being forced to cut courses and reduce the support they can offer to students.”

Ian MacNaughton, principal of Sixth Form College Colchester, said: “In December 2012, Michael Gove said government funding cuts had happened by accident and not by design.

“We have had no sense of rectification, but rather a further deterioration with the funding cuts for 18-year-olds.

“How can they possibly expect the same level of education when resources across the sector are so different?”

 

Boss speaks out over payments ‘dispute’

The managing director of a London-based independent learning provider has defended his firm after details of an alleged subcontractor payment dispute emerged.

James Clements Smith, of Prevista Ltd, a lead provider allocated £3.8m by the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) this academic year, confirmed there was an issue, but claimed to have paid all subcontractors “in line with conditions”.

It comes after several of its subcontractors wrote to other companies with a warning about alleged payment problems, and the SFA confirmed it had received “correspondence” about the issue.
But Mr Clements Smith told FE Week: “The company has paid all sub contractors and partners in line with negotiated and agreed service level agreements [SLAs], in line with funder requirements and in line with our audit practices. All legitimate outcome payments have been passed to our supply chain.

“I understand there is a letter circulating from a group of suppliers. All of whom have under-delivered to beneficiaries and on their SLA agreements with Prevista by some considerable margin.

“The dispute, if there is one, is with these suppliers who are all subject to audit and compliance issues related to their delivery across government funded programmes.

“Audit and compliance is underway across all of our funded programmes and as part of our annual audit cycle. Any dispute which may arise will be subject to legal proceedings.

“Prevista has a strong balance sheet, has been in the market for close to 20 years, has a strong cash balance and has firm contract value for the foreseeable future across a range of funding streams.”

Nine providers held SFA contracts, totalling £1.87m, through Prevista at the start of 2013/14, but other organisations outside the SFA’s remit also subcontract for the organisation.

Among Prevista’s current SFA subcontractors were Westminster Kingsway College and EXG Ltd.

The college has a £166,860 contract with the organisation, and confirmed an issue with payments had arisen, but would not go into detail.

A college spokesperson said: “We can confirm that the college has worked in partnership with Prevista and we are in discussions with them regarding some payments.”

And EXG Ltd, which had a £106,693 contract with Prevista at the beginning of the 2013/14 year, confirmed it ended its working relationship with the firm “earlier than planned”, but would not say why.

It comes after Prevista was rated as grade four, inadequate, in all areas following an Ofsted inspection last June.

The report said that the proportion of learners successfully achieving their qualifications was too low, and that planning and delivery of teaching, learning and assessment did not “provide an effective learning experience”.

The report added there was not enough focus on learners achieving functional skills qualifications, which was undermining success rates for apprentices.

But Mr Clements Smith insisted improvements were being made and claimed Ofsted had since revisited.

An SFA spokesperson said: “The chief executive of the SFA holds a contract with Prevista as the lead provider.
“It is not appropriate for us to get involved in any contractual disputes between a lead provider and subcontractors.
“We have received correspondence on this matter and have passed on the concerns raised to Prevista.”