Local employer needs are not being met by the FE and skills sector, according to this year’s Ofsted annual report.
Despite higher expectations of students and improved teaching and learning providing “grounds for optimism” about the sector, it was delivering “too much provision that is not responsive to local employment needs”.
“This provision is therefore inappropriate for young people, regardless of the quality of teaching,” said the report, launched on Wednesday (December 11).
It said there was no structure, accountability measure or system of incentives to ensure that FE and skills provision adapted to local economic and social needs.
“If the government is committed to raising employment through better skills and to secure economic competitiveness, it will need to fill this gap in strategic accountability urgently,” said the report.
It added: “The ability to judge the true effectiveness of provision will depend, among other things, on the availability of robust data on learners’ destinations.”
Ofsted director of FE and skills Matthew Coffey told FE Week: “The one clear message from this year’s annual report is about local accountability. It’s about meeting the needs of local employers — that’s got to be the number one priority.
“Providers need to look at their curriculum — does it match the local needs and how can you demonstrate that it does?”
Ofsted Regional map. CLICK HERE FOR FULL SIZE
The report went on to reveal plans for a review of how provision meets local needs and a Data Dashboad to “ensure governors have accessible data to hold leaders and managers to account”.
It also called for greater sector representation on local enterprise boards (Leps), saying: “Only around one third of all Leps had a direct representative of FE and skills on the Lep board.”
Mr Coffey said: “Last year we were very critical about the quality of teaching in particular. It wasn’t good enough. It wasn’t consistent enough within an individual institution, but across institutions the variability was also marked. We identified 13 providers that were judged to be inadequate and we had no outstanding ones — that was the benchmark of last year.
“And our new inspection framework focussed even more on teaching and learning so I’m delighted that this year we’ve identified a number of outstanding providers and they’ve all got outstanding for teaching, learning and assessment. So there are grounds for optimism.”
But the report also pointed to a number of large colleges that had fallen from good or outstanding over the last year. Such colleges would include Liverpool, Coventry and Bristol. “These must be a priority for the new FE Commissioner,” said the report.
Meanwhile, a review of study programmes, including traineeships as a “bridge to apprenticeships,” was also announced in the report, which said apprenticeships were not taking off for young people. “Many young people are applying for an apprenticeship, but are not sufficiently employable,” said the report, adding: “Too many providers do not work closely enough with employers and, consequently, apprentices fail to get the right training. This year, we judged 9 per cent of apprenticeship provision to be inadequate — this is far too high.”
It continued: “Employers must … be supported in committing a greater number of apprenticeship places, especially for those under the age of 19.”
See feweek.co.uk for an exclusive annual report interview with Mr Coffey.
Tia Riddle spent her teenage years in care and hit rock bottom when she almost died from a drugs overdose. But she has turned her life around with the help of a local college, writes Paul Offord.
n award-winning student who was expelled from five schools before her sixteenth birthday said college had “saved” her life.
Tia Riddle, aged 20, capped off a whirlwind 11 months in FE by triumphing in the Prince’s Trust London and the South East Celebrate Success Awards.
She was given the Breakthrough Award for her impressive work on the Team programme, a 12-week course run by the trust at City College Brighton and Hove, which aims to boost the skills and confidence of unemployed young people.
The glamorous surroundings at Arsenal Football Club’s Emirates Stadium, where the ceremony was held, emphasised how far Tia had come in such a short space of time.
She endured a traumatic childhood which saw her placed into care when she was 12 years old.
She lived with a string of foster families and was expelled from five schools, before leaving education without any GCSEs at the age of 15.
Her life descended into a cycle of unemployment, depression and drug abuse and she hit rock-bottom when she overdosed a year ago on a potentially toxic combination of drugs, including cocaine.
Salvation came when she moved from Northampton to Brighton and started at City College in January.
Tia said: “Approaching the college basically saved my life. I stopped using cocaine and other drugs and they advised me to start on the Team programme.
“It was the first time I had been in a classroom for five years. That was a bit of a shock at first, but mixing with other students helped rebuild my confidence.”
Tracy Hill, Team programme manager at the college, said: “Tia became one of the strongest and most responsible members in the group. Her patience, positivity, self-confidence and time-keeping improved dramatically.
“She is a lovely young lady who has come a very long way and is still looking to better herself. We are very proud of her.”
The course allowed Tia to improve her CV through work experience at an old people’s home and community work repainting a boxing gym.
She has now started a traineeship at the college, which involves her working on reception at the college’s front desk and in its beauty salon.
She is also studying GCSE maths and English one day a week as part of the course.
Tia said: “I had a difficult start in life but I finally came to the realisation that I wanted and needed an education, a routine, stability and confidence.
“I used to struggle with learning. You have to sit with me and explain things and I didn’t get that in a class of 30 people. When I didn’t understand,
I would misbehave.”
She added: “College has been very different from school, where the teachers didn’t try to understand why I was acting the way I was.
“They can see the challenges you are facing here and try to help.
“I always found that the only job I could get without any qualifications was as a cleaner and I didn’t want to do that all my life.
“Going back to college has given me a chance to change things for the better.”
Main photo: Tia Riddle at the ceremony with Steve Reay from HSBC, which sponsored her award
The move towards greater employer involvement in FE and skills is gaining momentum. But with employer providers having come in for less than inspiring Ofsted gradings of late, should we be questioning the wisdom of such a shift?
It’s just over a year ago that former Dragons’ Den investor Doug Richard (pictured left) said apprenticeship funding should go straight to employers, who can spend the money on training as they see fit.
His recommendations prompted a government review that Skills Minister Mathew Hancock indicated would conclude in his favour.
And that came before Chancellor George Osborne, in his Autumn Statement, confirmed employers would be directly funded for apprenticeships through Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.
Is it really realistic for employers to drive development and delivery of apprenticeships?
Just last month too, BAE Systems group managing director Nigel Whitehead (pictured) said employers should be more involved in the design of qualifications, after all, they know what they require of learners.
Even without mention of the government’s Employer Ownership of Skills (EOS) pilot and the recommendations of Labour’s Skills Taskforce, it is safe to say there is cross-party agreement that employers should be more actively involved in the training of tomorrow’s workforce.
But is there a warning in the business philosophy of the late Apple chairman and chief executive Steve Jobs? He is said to have been of the opinion that it was better to do one thing well than to do dozens of things poorly.
Is Kwik Fit, for example, better off repairing cars and vans than thinking about how best to teach apprentice mechanics English and maths?
Or would it be wiser for G4S to concentrate on fulfilling its security contracts instead of developing the latest apprenticeship framework?
And the results of Ofsted’s six employer provider inspections since September are a cause for concern about quality as the FE and skills sector heads towards (EOS).
Government contractor G4S Care and
Justice Services and Intercontinental Hotels Group Services Company, which incorporates Crowne Plaza and Holiday Inn among others, were branded inadequate, while Kwik Fit requires improvement, as do Priory Central Services Limited, Staffline Recruitment Limited and Housing 21. The overall grades reflect the respective ratings on apprenticeships delivery.
That’s nearly 1,300 learners whose training is less than good.
Phil Hatton (pictured below), learning improvement consultant and former Ofsted inspector, said: “Writing qualifications and training materials well, to reflect employer needs and to give transferable skills, is not as easy as many obviously think, nor is delivering the training effectively.
“Given that the government will also want maths and English included, and schools have only 60 pass rates for GCSEs, is it really realistic for employers to drive development and delivery of apprenticeships?
“Kwik Fit clearly know its business well, but has just dropped from outstanding to requires improvement, yet it would be a key employer in developing qualifications for its industry — one which includes many smaller employers who will not have the experience of delivering training.”
Terry Barnett, managing director of Hawk — the first grade one independent learning provider under Ofsted’s current inspection regime, said: “This [EOS] could be devastating. Somebody needs to blink — the baby is about to be thrown out with the bathwater and the plumbing, too.
“It could create a situation that would take a decade to sort out. Lots of people out there don’t want this — the system’s not as broken as people think it is.”
It’s a concern not lost on Association of Colleges president Michele Sutton (pictured right). Opening the association’s recent annual conference in Birmingham, she said: “If we compare this year’s marked improvement for college Ofsted outcomes, to some employer-led apprenticeships outcomes, I think there should be some questions to ministers around the fitness for purpose of some large employers to be a lead position in the new employer-led landscape.”
But there is interest in getting involved in skills from the business community.
Neil Carberry, Confederation of British Industry director for employment and skills, said: “The idea you can meet the apprenticeships challenge without businesses themselves ensuring the training is commercially-relevant to the firm is a fallacy.
“The way to do this is by giving employers the power to procure high quality training through a vibrant and well-regulated market. A command economy, driven by the government, won’t raise standards.”
And Alexander Jackman, head of policy at the Forum of Private Business, said: “The Ofsted results may well be indicative of some of the larger employers.
“But I would like to think that the smaller ones, who are doing things on a much smaller scale, are able to offer something a little more bespoke. They too need government support in this area.
“Employers know best what skills gaps they have in their organisations so the movement towards funding them directly is the right one.
“However, this is a big shift in how funding works so the EOS will take time to get right.
“We would ask that government continues to support businesses to make sure they adapt to the new system and make it a success.”
And it would be unfair to tarnish all employer providers with the ‘less-than-good’ brush.
After all, before September there were a dozen good ones, plus an outstanding one, dating back to September last year (although there were a further six grade threes and three more grade fours).
And in the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, it seems EOS has powerful friends.
So where does that leave us? Only time will tell, but if the experience of Mr Hatton — joint author of the first NVQ — is anything to go by, then caution is needed.
“Back in 1987 when the first NVQ was being developed the first attempts written mainly by employers were all over the place and rejected as not fit for purpose,” he said.
Do employers even want to take ownership of skills?
There are three big problems with the government’s plans to give more responsibility for the skills agenda to employers — also known as employer ownership of skills (EOS for short).
The first is the assumption that employers actually want to take ownership of skills. Pilots overseen by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills suggest they do.
But the funds involved are small compared with the overall skills budget, and only a tiny minority of employers have got involved so far.
David Harbourne
The majority of employers — especially small firms — have stayed away in droves. Given the choice, I have no doubt that most businesses would prefer colleges and training providers to carry on managing both the funding and the form-filling on their behalf.
It’s worrying that in September and October six successive Ofsted reports produced grade three and four results for employer providers
Second, employers that contract directly with the Skills Funding Agency to deliver apprenticeship training don’t always achieve outstanding results.
It’s worrying that in September and October six successive Ofsted reports produced grade three and four results for employer providers.
Third, apprenticeships are meant to be a three-way partnership. Employers get people with skills to do jobs right here, right now. Apprentices get that too, plus transferable skills, knowledge and experience to help them move up the career ladder. The tax-payer gets a skilled workforce which boosts productivity and GDP.
By putting one of the partners in the driving seat, EOS risks silencing the voice of the apprentice, and ranking short-term employer interests over the long-term interests of the economy as a whole. And that would be a real mistake.
David Harbourne, director of policy and research, Edge Foundation
The Education Funding Agency has announced plans to save £150m by paying 17.5 per cent less for the full-time education of 18-year-olds in comparison with 16 and 17-year-olds.
The current, unweighted, funding rate for 16, 17 and 18-year-olds is £4,000. The new rate for 16 and 17-year-olds is expected to be announced in March, but at the current rate 18-year-olds would be funded at £3,300.
The agency said the Spending Review for 2015-16 meant that savings were required from the 16 to 19 participation budget that year.
It said the cut would come into force for 2014/15, by which time, it argued, most 18-year-olds would not need “as much non-qualification provision within their study programmes” because they will have already benefited from two years of post-16 education.
But it is estimated that the move would affect 100,000 18-year-olds in colleges, plus those in school sixth forms and studying foundation course in universities.
It has angered Association of Colleges chief executive Martin Doel, who has raised the issue with Education Minister David Laws and said: “By definition these are the students who need extra help, not less.”
Nevertheless, it would, it is believed, save the agency — and the Department for Education (DfE) — around £150m.
A letter from the agency outlining the cut said: “Because we are operating within a fixed budget, we will confirm the national funding rate per student for 2014/15, and the flat rates for disadvantaged students without GCSE Grade C or above in English or maths in March, when we know the total student numbers we need to fund in 2014/15. In order to realise the required savings for 2015-16, it is necessary to make a start in 2014/15.
“Ministers have decided to make the savings required in 2014/15 by reducing the participation requirements for full-time 18-year-olds, as defined by their age at the start of the academic year.
“Most 18-year-olds will already have benefited from two years of post-16 education and will not therefore need as much non-qualification provision within their study programmes as 16 and 17-year-olds.
“Fewer than one in five of 16 to 18-year-olds funded by the agency are aged 18 at the start of the academic year, although clearly this will vary by institution.
“The funding rate for full-time 18-year-old students in 2014/15 will be 17.5 per cent below the rate for full-time 16 and 17-year-olds. This will apply to all elements of the formula except the flat rates for disadvantaged students without GCSE grade C or above in English or maths, recognising the importance of English and maths for disadvantaged 18-year-olds.
“Students with a learning difficulty assessment or a statement of special educational needs will not be affected by this change.”
However, Mr Doel said 16 to 18-year-olds were already funded at a rate 22 per cent lower than that for schoolchildren, aged five to 15.
“As a result of the government’s decision to protect the level of funding for the education of five to 15-year-olds, it is England’s 16 to 18-year-olds who continue to lose out despite their education already being funded at a rate lower than pre-16 education,” he said.
“The latest announcement from the DfE means that 18-year-olds will be funded at an even lower rate.
“Young people who have struggled to reach the expected level by the age of 18, and therefore need to stay in education a year longer, will see their funding cut.
“By definition these are the students who need extra help, not less. I have already raised my concerns personally with Education Minister David Laws and will continue to do so.”
The case of Newham College’s dance and drama head Dr Mark Walcott is a difficult one for the FE sector. He was suspended after an apparently homophobic and racist rant. The situation also led to principal Denise Brown-Sackey taking a leave of absence. Dr Jean Kelly looks at the lessons to be learned.
Many have expressed their shock that a lecturer in one of London’s leading colleges is no longer in post after allegedly expressing views that, in the college’s own words, do not reflect the values of the institution.
Though fortunately rare, situations such as this do though prompt some uncomfortable considerations for the teaching profession and indeed the wider sector.
As the sector’s professional body, the Institute for Learning (IfL) is charged, by members, with upholding and promoting the values of a highly regarded and respected teaching and training profession.
Our members sign up to a code of professional practice as a way of demonstrating their commitment to professional integrity, respect for learners and colleagues, and adherence to a professional standard of behaviour.
Teachers and trainers live out this commitment in their everyday practice with learners, as a condition of employment and through codes of conduct set out by subject and vocational professional associations.
In these kinds of discussion, it is helpful to draw parallels with other professions.
In nursing, for example, serious allegations made against an individual would trigger a process that might involve being summoned to a professional conduct hearing by the professional body.
If found to be in breach, the individual could face a penalty, perhaps even being struck off the professional register, in which case it would be impossible for them to continue practising as a nurse.
This kind of process is commonplace in many professions, to instil trust and provide a contract of sorts to guarantee consistent high standards for the public.
Schoolteachers are held to account in a similar way by the National College for Teaching and Leadership, which has powers to prohibit an individual proven to have committed serious misconduct from teaching in schools.
Early years practitioners are now also accountable against professional standards.
Such a system existed in our sector for five years after the government introduced regulations requiring teachers and trainers to register with the IfL.
Lord Lingfield’s first review indicated that government should take responsibility for such extreme cases, but his second concluded that, “establishing special national arrangements to disbar FE lecturers would be disproportionate”
Subsequent revocation of the regulations means that should the individual in this South London college be dismissed, following a new inquiry, they can readily apply for and take up a teaching role elsewhere.
It will be up to them whether or not they disclose particular aspects of their employment history in their application.
We consider that it is in the public interest as well as in the interest of the teaching profession to have accessible and robust arrangements whereby learners, staff and members of the public can report concerns about unprofessional conduct, in the knowledge that their concerns will be treated with the utmost confidentiality, sensitivity and urgency.
Potential breaches must be investigated independently and if a person is found to be seriously in breach, it must be possible to prevent them from teaching again.
At a time when part-time and sessional employment is becoming more commonplace in teaching and training in our sector, colleges and training providers have a fundamental duty to their learners to ensure that the staff they recruit have undergone a rigorous and proper recruitment process for all provision.
The IfL has every confidence that colleges and training providers take this duty incredibly seriously.
This does not, however, offer any national protection for the sector’s employers or for its young, and adult learners, many of whom are vulnerable. Doctors, social workers, schoolteachers and those in other highly respected professions are bound by professional codes, but not teachers in FE.
We regret the government’s decision to remove regulations and fear that a laissez-faire approach for FE brings unacceptable risks for reputation, for learners and employers, for colleges and providers, and for the public.
Dr Jean Kelly, director of professional development, Institute for Learning
Apprenticeship funding will be redirected from providers to employers — but they will have to make a “significant” cash contribution towards training costs for the first time.
Chancellor George Osborne announced in his Autumn Statement a new funding model would use Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) systems to route funding directly to employers.
The Treasury subsequently announced it would launch a consultation on the technical details of the system early next year.
A compulsory employer cash contribution for a significant proportion of apprentices’ external training costs, excluding English and maths, will also be introduced.
Mr Osborne told the House of Commons: “The government will put business at the centre of the apprenticeship system by enabling employers to receive funding for the training costs of apprentices directly through an HMRC-led system and ensuring that employers contribute.”
A Department for Business, Innovation and Skills spokesperson confirmed taxation was one of the HMRC systems being considered to route apprenticeship funding directly to employers.
The government will also be looking at the option of an “alternative funding route for the smallest businesses”.
The Autumn Statement also talked of an “additional contribution” to the costs of training for 16 to 17-year-olds and consider the approach for 18-year-olds, but did not commit to fully-funding them as now.
The Treasury further announced it would make £40m of new funding available to help deliver an additional 20,000 higher apprenticeships starts in the 2013/14 and 2014/15 academic years.
Phil Orford, chief executive of The Forum of Private Business, welcomed the changes which he said would make providers “deliver the skills employers require”.
However, the announcements drew a strong warning from the chief executive of City & Guilds, Chris Jones, told FE Week: “Although it isn’t the intention, the Autumn Statement puts the apprenticeship system at risk.
“All employers, regardless of size, will feel the effects. The reforms will require additional resource. There will be even more hoops to jump through to establish an apprenticeship. Where is the incentive there?”
Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “Mandatory contributions will be a barrier to the growth of the programme for those aged over 19, especially young people who are unemployed.”
Andrew Jones MP is a little uncertain about being profiled when we meet in the glass-roofed atrium of Portcullis House, across the road from the Houses of Parliament.
“I don’t normally do this sort of thing. I normally talk about policies, not personalities,” he says.
Inset: Andrew Jones learning about wildlife in his
constituency from Yorkshire Wildlife Trust photographer Carl Watts
But he is happy to talk about his passion for cricket, which he says he has loved “from the very beginning”.
“Never any good at playing it, mind you, but I do occasionally play and occasionally umpire, but I’m a very enthusiastic spectator,” he says.
“I’ve travelled to lots of places, I should think 60 countries … a bit of a theme has been to go and watch England play cricket.”
But his traveling hasn’t always been connected to cricket.
At 19, Jones drove from coast to coast across America, “zig-zagging” his way from north east to south west on his own.
“It was great fun. I just set off, by myself, thinking: ‘Let’s see what happens’,” he says with a grin.
The standout moment of the trip he says, was his first glimpse of the Pacific Ocean in San Diego-California — a long way from his birthplace in Ilkley, near Bradford in Yorkshire.
I wanted to be in business, I wanted to be in the cut and thrust of that
“I travelled all the way from Ilkley to Leeds for university, which is a whole 15 miles and suddenly I’d embarked on a 4,000-mile journey,” the committed “Yorkie” says, still wide-eyed at the memory.
Jones worked in a seafood restaurant in Boston, Massachusetts, during his university summer holidays.
“It was fun, there was a buzz about it — I’d never been anywhere near America before and I thought: ‘Right, I’m enjoying this…I’ll go and see more of this place’. So I did. I saw lots and it was stunning.”
The 50-year-old is less clear about the moment he decided he wanted to be an MP.
“There was no ‘road to Damascus’ conversion,” he says.
“Certainly, after 1997, and the defeat of the Conservative Party, I thought: ‘Right, this is not acceptable – I’m going try to get more involved in stuff,’ but at no point up until that time had I thought about representative politics at all.
“So at some stage between 1997 and 1999 was the tipping point where interest became picking up the phone and trying to do something about it.”
Politics certainly wasn’t his first ambition.
“Some people do wake up at the age of 15 and think they want to be MPs, fair enough,” he says.
“I wanted to be in business, I wanted to be in the cut and thrust of that.
He says he was attracted to the “fast-moving” nature of business.
“Also, if you were brought up in my time, it was at a time of relentless commercial bad headlines, of Britain on the slide, Britain not recoverable, strikes, three-day weeks, petrol rationing…,” he says.
“I can remember power cuts and job losses… So there was a little bit of a feeling that: ‘Business needs to perform better, I like business, that’s what I’m going to do’.”
Jones’ father, Richard, worked in marketing for the textile company Lister, whose mill towered over Bradford.
“It was quite fun, going in to see the business,” says Jones.
“You would see things like looms, weaving … it’s quite exciting to see if you’re going in as a small boy.”
Jones says the upbringing he looks back on was “a happy childhood where opportunities are open to you”.
His mother, Jean, worked in a bookshop, in between caring for Jones and his brother, , who also went into business.
“It’s inevitable that your upbringing has an impact on you,” he says.
“My father worked in marketing, but I didn’t set off into marketing thinking: ‘I’ll do what my father did’, but I did.
“So if there was an impact, then it wasn’t a conscious one.”
Jones enjoyed school, and went on to study A-levels and English literature at Leeds University (where he got a “very sociable” third class degree) before going on to work for in marketing for B&Q.
“I really enjoyed it and it was a fantastic learning experience for me because it was a time of huge expansion of the business, it was very entrepreneurial, very successful,” he says.
Jones worked in a range of marketing roles for different companies, until, while working for Leeds-based retail consultancy The Marketing Store, he found himself redundant.
“It’s not a particularly pleasant experience, but it was an interesting time because I went to work with some friends starting a business called Savvy Marketing, which is still going strong,” he says, cheerfully.
“It’s a bit of a shock when these things happen, but it’s something which happens a lot and can happen more than once in a career. So the question is how you respond to it really.”
After 1997, he was drawn into grassroots and community politics and eventually to the idea of standing for election.
He was elected as a councillor for High Harrogate in 2003, and became Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources.
But Parliament still beckoned, and in 2010 he was elected MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough.
“It’s quite a shock actually, if we’re being honest about it,” he says of his election victory, where he overturned a 10,500 Liberal Democrat majority.
“I actually did go home and write a losing speech before writing a winning speech after polling day, because I thought it was going to be close but I wasn’t quite sure.
“I had been very focused on the finish line of election day itself, rather than what happened next.
“When you are standing on the platform and the results are announced, it feels slightly surreal, but as you get off the platform the returning officer gives you an envelope, which is an envelope they will give to each winning MP, and it’s basically, ‘Dear member of Parliament’ — it’s the first time I had ever been called that — ‘here are your joining instructions, please report to Portcullis House on Monday, for the start of your induction course’.
Although he can see connections between his career in business, and his new one in politics, Jones admits he’s slightly surprised by the way life turned out.
“If you’d gone to Andrew Jones in 1985 as a marketing employee at B&Q and said: ‘You’ll be a Member of Parliament in 25 years’ time’ I’d have thought you’d got the wrong Andrew Jones,” he says.
But it was his love of the business world, he says, which has brought him into the role of apprenticeship ambassador.
“Skills are a huge part of turning our economy around … and apprenticeships are very much a part of that,” explains Jones.
“I think this is something which has got broad support across the political divide… colleagues love hearing about apprenticeships and meeting apprentices in their area, and quite frankly who, as a Member of Parliament, wouldn’t want to go out and visit successful businesses and meet people learning for the future, investing in skills — who wouldn’t get behind that?”
Wisden Cricketers’ Almanac — if I was stranded on a desert island I would want it sent in every year
What do you do to switch off from work?
You’re never quite off-duty as an MP, but one of the real benefits of being a Yorkie, particularly where I’m from, is that we have fantastic scenery. I go for walks on the Dales or on the moors
What’s your pet hate?
Cynicism about community work or about public service
What did you want to be when you grew up?
Not an MP — I wanted to be in business
If you could invite anyone to a dinner party, living or dead, who would it be?
Winston Churchill, Benjamin Franklin, 19th Century cricket player WG Grace and Elizabeth I
Traineeships are to be exempted from a benefits rule that was “compromising” the programme.
The Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) 16-hour rule, which limits the amount of time Job Seeker’s Allowance (JSA) claimants can train every week, will no longer apply to traineeships — the government’s flagship youth unemployment policy.
The move came as part of the Autumn Statement, which read: “The government will ensure that the benefit rules do not impede the take-up and effectiveness of traineeships by exempting those undertaking a traineeship from the rule which prevents JSA claimants from doing more than 16 hours of study per week.”
However, it remained unclear when the exemption would come into force with, FE Week understands, the DWP and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) still locked in talks about the move.
It follows concerns (as reported in the last edition of FE Week) from Skills Funding Agency boss Keith Smith and Ofsted FE and skills director Matthew Coffey about the popularity of traineeships.
It also follows criticism in August from the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) that the 16-hour rule could adversely affect traineeships.
An AELP spokesperson said: “Now the announcement has been made, we would expect to see early implementation and will be urging that to happen.
“We will want to explore with the government whether the rule changes affect work experience as well, but there is no doubt this announcement is a major step forward.”
Association of Colleges chief executive Martin Doel said: “This change will enable colleges to more effectively meet the needs of young people at a time of stubbornly high youth unemployment.”
——————————————————————————————-
Editorial – A step in the right direction
Traineeships are part of the ‘apprenticeship family’, overseen by the National Apprenticeship Service, and considered by many to be a pre-apprenticeship programme in all but name.
Their exemption from the DWP’s 16-hour rule will come as a welcome surprise. Albeit a long overdue one.
However, it is worth noting that questions remain about when it will actually come into effect and whether other types of work experience programs will also be exempt.
Once in place, it should make the scheme significantly more attractive and affordable to many young people, so hopefully more will benefit.
This will increase participation, but is that enough for traineeships to be successful?
Without successful progression into meaningful paid employment we will have failed, like many of the youth employment programmes long since consigned to the history books.
So, as I’ve highlighted in this column before, the next logical step should be a financial incentive for a positive outcome.
If providers continue to be simply paid based on the duration of the traineeship then won’t some keep them out of paid work and on JSA for as long as possible?
With youth unemployment so high, now is not the time to be introducing perverse incentives.
Further education data staff have spoken out about the stress and extra work caused by continued problems with Skills Funding Agency (SFA) software.
Management information system (MIS) officers responding to an FE Week survey hit out at the SFA over the strain and financial burden of preparing the fourth month funding data return (known as R04).
The survey was posted on the information authority Feconnect forum and the CMIS-Network, a Jiscmail email discussion group, on Wednesday, December 4 — the day before the R04 deadline.
Less than 10 per cent of the 153 respondents (9.2 per cent) believed they had a reliable funding report from the new funding information system (Fis) and almost a quarter (23.5 per cent) said they had been unable to successfully install the latest version.
The SFA came under fire last month after delays in releasing Fis, and the learning aims reference system (Lars) — an online tool enabling providers to look up qualification funding values — has still not been released in full, although a “Lars lite” version is available.
In response to the question “Is there anything you would like to say to the SFA about the impact on your organisation?”, a third of the 106 who answered mentioned the additional stress and workload.
The deputy college information systems manager of a large FE college said the process had caused “stress and worry in unnecessary amounts as a result of the software fiasco” and branded it “an appalling waste of time and money”.
The MIS manager of a local authority said: “The amount of staff hours spent on the Fis and invalid records is causing us financial problems.”
Another respondent, the deputy director for finance and funding at a large FE college, said: “We have exhausted staff, unreliable data and have had little or no support from the SFA, IA [Information Authority] or DS [Data Service].”
Concern over lack of support was also expressed by the MI manager of a small FE college, who said: “I have had emails into the Data Service for over two weeks and they have just replied this morning with answers that are completely irrelevant to the question.”
Many data staff also called on the SFA to take responsibility for the situation, which was dubbed a “shambles”.
The director of MIS at a large FE college said: “Every apology is limited (‘we apologise to anyone who might have been affected’) with spin saying actually it is not that bad after all — it is that bad.”
The director of a small independent training provider said: “If a provider had delivered performance at this level they would have lost their contract … Parity with sanctions please — if providers are penalised for poor performance, I suggest the same must be true for the SFA.”
The R04 will be used to calculate the statistical first release, due out in January, but the SFA was unavailable for comment as to whether large amounts of inaccurate or incomplete data would prevent publication.
When asked by FE Week about the stress caused by R04, Association of Colleges (AoC) assistant chief executive Julian Gravatt said: “We’re confident that colleges will manage stress issues among their staff and there’s AoC advice available to help them.
“Hopefully this week’s R04 return will be a success and we’ll both build on this next year while ensuring that everyone learns the right lessons from the project.”
