Probe finds ‘funding irregularities’ in huge salary of Weston’s ex-principal

Fraud investigators have exposed “funding irregularities” involving payments to England’s former highest paid principal Sir Paul Phillips, FE Week can reveal.

The government has intervened and longstanding chair Andrew Leighton-Price has stepped aside at Weston College, where Phillips worked for over 20 years and employed his son as chief financial officer.

Tim Jackson, an adviser to the FE Commissioner and former principal of Sparsholt College, has been parachuted in to lead the college’s governing board while investigations continue.

Weston College is yet to publish accounts for 2022/23 but previous financial statements show Phillips was paid £357,000 and £362,000 in 2021 and 2022 respectively.

Paid 9.6 times median wage

The government’s probe follows revelations in FE Week that Phillips earned a basic salary of 9.6 times more than the median pay of his full-time staff in 2022 – the highest pay multiple across the college sector. He was set to take on a unique remunerated role of “president” after he retired but governors U-turned after the controversial plan thwarted the college’s recruitment process for a successor.

Interim principal Jacqui Ford told staff yesterday the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s counter fraud and investigation team, through auditor BDO, had “uncovered some historical failures of financial management and controls, and failure to disclose certain financial information”.

Weston College has now been handed a financial notice to improve (NTI) which says: “The investigation has found failures of management and controls, including high remuneration packages to the retired ex-principal, and failure to disclose such details of senior pay as required through the ESFA’s college accounts direction.”

The NTI, published today, also found the college failed to declare an “in scope payment” to Phillips on a Managing Public Money return in April 2023.

The college has now been requested to hand over all information relating to the payments for the FE Commissioner Shelagh Legrave’s assessment on the “failing to manage and report accurately on payments made to the retired ex-principal.”

Once the assessment is completed, the FE Commissioner may impose further conditions on the college.

In the meantime, Ford, the chief finance officer and the “appropriate governors” have been summoned to attend regular meetings with DfE and must supply the government with a draft single improvement plan.

The college nor the government commented on the full nature of the financial irregularities at the time of going to press.

Staff are “not massively surprised” about the intervention, according to FE Week sources.

Phillips was appointed as one of the government’s national leaders of further education in 2017 and knighted for services to further education in 2022. Weston College was awarded the Association of Colleges award for excellence in governance last year.

Phillips retired from his principal role in August 2023. His departure was highly commemorated by the college, which organised a donation page for a holiday for Phillips and his wife, and a staff lunch that was set to show a video of staff lip-syncing Tina Turner’s Simply the Best, tailored to Phillips’ tenure at the college.

His son Joe Phillips joined the college in 2010 and has held posts including vice-principal for finance and business planning, deputy principal and most recently chief operating officer.

Joe Phillips resigned in late 2023.

Paul Phillips’ 2021 total pay packet included a basic salary of £222,000, “benefits in kind” of £28,000, a “deferred payment” from a “retention scheme” of £37,000, plus pension contributions of £70,000.

His basic salary shot up by 16 per cent to £258,000 a year later. He also received £29,000 for benefits in kind and £75,000 pension contributions.

Phillips’ pay packet for 2023, his last year in post, is not yet known.

The government requires colleges to publish their accounts by January 31 each year. The counter fraud investigation is understood to be the reason why Weston College has delayed publishing its figures for this year.

University and College Union regional official Nick Varney said: “For years [Weston] management failed to properly negotiate and reward our hard-working members, who remain some of the lowest paid in the further education sector. If this intervention finally creates the opportunity to reset industrial relations and open up the secret world of senior management at the college, we are all for it.”

‘No threat’ to college’s future

In a video sent to staff by interim principal Jacqui Ford, she made clear the intervention notice “focuses on the actions of staff no longer at the college” and does not threaten the college’s financial sustainability.

She added that the NTI will not impact day-to-day operations and was not a reflection of the quality of education at Weston College, which earlier this year was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted including for leadership and management.

“I have full confidence that we will quickly meet the requirements of the notice to improve and will restore the confidence of the ESFA,” Ford told staff.

Incoming chair Tim Jackson is expected to begin his role next month. He has already met with the board, staff and incoming permanent principal Pat Jones who is set to take the reins in July.

Ford told FE Week: “The college is cooperating with the Department for Education and the FE Commissioner’s team on the matters identified, and to implement the conditions set out in that notice within as short a period of time as possible.

“In the meantime, the college is continuing to operate normally in serving our students, communities and businesses and we’d like to thank our staff for their hard work and professionalism at this time.” 

FE Week has attempted to contact Paul Phillips, Joe Phillips, Andrew Leighton-Price and the DfE for comment.

Why we’re planning to allocate UCAS tariff points to apprenticeships

A Levels were once seen as the main route into higher education (HE). Today this couldn’t be further from the truth. In 2023 over 112,000 18-year-olds were accepted into university or college without the traditional 3 A levels typically associated with application to HE.

With different qualifications opening up different pathways, students now face more options than ever before. UCAS’s Where Next: What influences the choice school leavers make? report found that post-16 choices strongly influence students’ futures, highlighting the importance of young people knowing where all pathways lead when making choices in school.

Higher education providers are increasingly recognising the value of the broad range of qualifications and the role this plays in widening access and participation. This positive shift means progression routes are now more interconnected than ever before. This gives individuals access to a variety of pathways that suit their needs and aspirations.

To support this, UCAS allocated tariff points to all regulated Level 3 qualifications in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland and SCQF Level 6 apprenticeships in Scotland in 2022. However, to date, Level 3/SCQF Level 6 apprenticeships have not carried tariff points (although in some cases, the composite qualifications may do).

We’re looking to change that. Under new proposals, UCAS is looking to allocate tariff points to Level 3/SCQF Level 6 apprenticeships across the UK, signalling that HE may offer a progression route for these individuals. And we want to hear your views.

The tariff is a simple model that allocates points based on the size and grading structure of a qualification. Over the next four weeks, we will be holding a public engagement exercise with the sector to gauge feedback on our proposed approach to apprenticeships.

Our aims are to signal to apprentices that HE may be an option for them, and to make it easier for them to engage in the process and recognise potential routes.

We recognise that this is not a silver bullet. Universities and colleges are autonomous in the qualifications they accept, and not all universities and colleges use the tariff when making offers. Many use qualifications and grades instead, and many institutions are likely to still use Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) and Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) when assessing a candidate’s application.

Our aim is to signal to apprentices that HE may be an option for them

Of course, not all Level 3 apprentices are considering HE either. But it is a step towards making pathways more visible. Students are at the heart of everything we do, and we want to help those with an apprenticeship understand all available options for their next steps. We will support them in understanding the route to higher education through personalised information, advice and guidance.

It is worth remembering that tariffs are only one aspect of the overall admissions process. Universities and colleges also consider a range of other factors, such as an applicants’ knowledge, skills, personal statement and references.

By promoting a greater understanding of these pathways to universities and colleges, we can support young people in progressing across the full range of post-secondary destinations. While universities and colleges are used to managing differing qualifications when making offers, the allocation of tariff points will help enhance their understanding of this route.

UCAS has an important role in supporting the growing number of individuals interested in apprenticeship opportunities. The next milestone for our apprenticeship service will be the launch of our new CV builder.

Sixty per cent of employers require a CV as part of an apprenticeship application, but many young people find creating one challenging. We also know disadvantaged applicants are initially more interested in apprenticeship opportunities but are less likely to be placed on one – with lack of support and understanding a determining factor.

This new tool will help people apply for apprenticeship vacancies by creating a high-quality CV on our website.

Our four-week public engagement seeking feedback on our proposed model for allocating tariff points to Level 3/SCQF Level 6 apprenticeships is now live. We welcome all sector stakeholder views on the model, with the engagement exercise open until Thursday 20 June. We will then review all feedback and aim to announce the outcome in the summer.

For more information and to take part, visit the UCAS website

Election 2024: What does it mean for FE and skills?

A general election will be held on Thursday July 4, Rishi Sunak has announced, kickstarting a campaign “for Britain to choose its future”.

“Earlier today, I spoke with His Majesty the King to request the dissolution of parliament. The King has granted this request and we will have a general election on July 4.”

What we know

Parliament will dissolve on May 30 (Thursday next week). Public bodies will then be subject to pre-election rules meaning they cannot do anything that could have a bearing on matters relevant to the election. A date for when the pre-election period officially starts has not been announced.

The UK will go to the polls amid mounting concerns over skills shortages in key sectors of the economy, declining apprenticeship training opportunities for young people and a teacher recruitment and retention crisis.

Today’s drop in inflation to 2.3 per cent is likely to be seized upon by ministers as they prepare to respond to the recommendations of the School Teacher Pay Review Body (STRB). The Association of Colleges this week held off making its recommendation for college staff pay rises until the STRB reports so it can bid to match the schools offer in colleges.

Gillian Keegan told the STRB earlier this year that teacher pay awards should return to a “more sustainable level” than seen in the last two years, indicating a lower pay recommendation than the AoC recommended last year, which was 6.5 per cent to match that of school teachers.

Keegan had promised the government would reveal its teacher pay offer earlier this year, but that is now likely to fall to a new government.

The Conservatives confirmed a comprehensive spending review will not take place until after a general election. This leaves education and apprenticeships budgets unconfirmed beyond 2024-25. The Conservatives set the apprenticeships budget at a record £2.7 billion for this year. Labour has yet to make any statement on education funding.

What has Labour pledged?

Sir Keir Starmer announced major reforms to the apprenticeship levy in his 2022 Labour party conference speech. 

If Labour form the next government, the levy will be replaced with a “growth and skills” levy which will allow employers to spend up to 50 per cent of their funds on non-apprenticeship training. 

The Conservatives have attacked Labour’s plans, claiming the number of apprenticeships would half. 

Calls for levy reform have been rife amid declining numbers of young people taking up apprenticeships. A CIPD report this week said the number of under 19s starting apprenticeships has fallen 41 per cent since the apprenticeship levy was introduced and pointed to a “collapse” in apprenticeships offered in small businesses. Over that time employers have instead offered apprenticeships to workers aged 25-plus in higher-level, professional occupations.

Despite announcing additional spending for small business apprenticeships last year, Labour has consistently dodged questions about whether this will be introduced. 

Labour has also criticised high numbers of apprenticeship drop-outs, but hasn’t said what it would do to improve achievements. 

Labour has also so far refused to say whether their proposed new “taskforce” Skills England would replace any of the existing education and skills quangos. 

Skills England would decide which non-apprenticeship courses would be eligible for funding through the new levy and run a bidding process for colleges to become “technical excellence colleges“.

Qualifications reform

Controversial plans to defund level 3 qualifications that rival T Levels, such as BTECs, would be “paused and reviewed” by a Labour government. However, shadow ministers have offered no further detail on how soon after an election win the pause would take place, nor have they set out what their review would look at. 

T Levels have been lauded by education ministers as “gold standard” technical qualifications but have been criticised for low uptake and high numbers of drop-outs. 

Sixth Form Colleges Association deputy chief executive James Kewin said last week plans to defund level 3 qualifications should be formally paused within one month of the general election. 

What will the Tories’ pitch be?

Expect ministers to focus on the Conservatives’ record on education as they seek to cling to power.

Education secretary Gillian Keegan has begun to relentlessly post on social media about delivering over 5.8 million apprenticeship starts and standards in nearly 70 per cent of occupations.

In relation to new policies and spending, it is less clear.

But Sunak will likely speak a lot about his plans for a new Advanced British Standard qualification to replace A-level and T Levels, plus maths to 18.

Price of exams soar above inflation in 2024

Exam fee rises soared above inflation this year, new Ofqual data shows, but value for money for general and vocational qualifications has remained “broadly unchanged”.

The average cost of a vocational technical qualification was £69.39 in February 2024, 5.5 per cent higher than last year.

Price rises for general qualifications were even larger at 6.4 per cent. The average cost for a GCSE is up 6.6 per cent to £51.15, while A-levels rose 5.8 per cent to £121.39 and AS-level increased 6.8 per cent to £69.47.

Consumer price inflation (CPI) over the same 12-month period was 3.8 per cent.

Ofqual’s analysis, however, pointed out that exam fees rose in line with inflation over last two years, which suggests that qualification “value for money is broadly unchanged from two years ago”.

Last year, college leaders raised the alarm over some awarding organisations’ fees. While most increases were around 4 per cent, England’s biggest exam board AQA upped its fees by up to 16.5 per cent.

College leaders warned at the time that their already strained financial budgets were being stretched “even further” by rises in exam fees.

Data shows that in 2021, general qualification exam fees rose by 2.6 per cent and then jumped up 6.5 per cent between 2022 and 2023. For VTQs, prices increased by 1.2 per cent between 2021 and 2022 and 4.7 per cent between 2022 and 2023.

Inflation between 2022 and 2023 was 9.2 per cent.

Ofqual said today that it was “more helpful” to examine prices over a 24-month period to account for the lag between awarding organisations’ cost pressures, their subsequent exam fee hike and the “uncharacteristically high inflation of the past couple of years”.

“Given economic conditions and development associated with ongoing reform, price rises of the magnitude that are reported are to be expected,” the analysis said. “Ofqual has been, and continues to be, notified of above-inflation price rises and scrutinises these rises in their local market context.”

England has more than 250 awarding organisations which receive more than £700 million in revenue from exam fees, Ofqual estimates.

VTQ inflation ‘uniform’ across levels

The statistics on VTQs include, BTECs, Cambridge Nationals and functional skills but excludes apprenticeship end-point assessments. 

Ofqual found inflation was relatively uniform across the different levels with the highest inflation being in level 4 and above qualifications at 5.7 per cent and the lowest being in level 1 and level 1/2 qualifications at 5.1 per cent.

But the highest exam rise was seen in the construction and planning sector subject, where prices rose 8.5 per cent to an average price of £79.19.

‘Diffuse’ impact on fees from reform

Ofqual also suggested that changes to educational policy and reform would impact qualification fees.

Reform such as the removal of 16-19 funding for level 3 qualifications overlapping T Levels and with low or no enrolments combined with the rollout of T Levels would likely have a “diffuse” impact on pricing.

“Given the multi-year timescales that reforms take place across, increases in short-term costs linked with development of new qualifications may lead awarding organisations to adjust their fees across their wider portfolio,” the body said.

“Awarding organisations also need to invest to ensure resilient delivery across their qualification portfolios, including maintaining their operational capacity to ensure secure delivery of assessments, particularly in the context of an ever-evolving technological landscape. The cost of such necessary additional investment may also contribute to price movements.”

Ministers plan to appoint edtech evidence checkers

Ministers plan to appoint edtech evidence checkers to help schools and colleges work out which products deliver the best impact as part of an artificial intelligence “training package” for teachers worth up to £5 million. 

This will include a proposed “online resource that covers essential training for all teachers” and a tool kit to support leaders rolling out and “embedding of effective” AI practice. 

Government is seeking a provider to run the scheme and “help education professionals take advantage of AI’s potential”, a tender document states.

A consultation on AI last year showed “the number one request from educators is further training and guidance on its safe use”.

The Department for Education said the plans are in the “early stage of development”. It is currently “judging interest from potential suppliers” for the multi-year project, worth between £1 million and £5 million.

But Rose Luckin, a professor of learner-centred design at University College London, said the plans are a “critical and welcome step forward”. 

“As AI becomes more prevalent in education, it’s crucial that teachers have the knowledge and skills to leverage it effectively, confidently and responsibly.”

Edtech evidence claims scrutinised

The DfE tender document outlines plans for a “project team to facilitate the running of an edtech evidence board of experts”, who will “quality assure evidence of edtech product efficacy against set criteria”.

The plan would help schools and colleges know which products are “grounded in evidence”.

Education secretary Gillian Keegan has previously called on edtech firms to be “transparent” with schools and colleges about the evidence behind their products, adding: “We should have the same expectations for robust evidence in edtech as we do elsewhere in education”.

Under the plans, edtech firms would be asked to “submit evidence of product efficacy”, which “area-specific committees would [then] assess”. 

“Their decisions would be scrutinised and ratified by an overarching board, before being published,” the DfE added.

The project team, board and committees would create the criteria against which to assess the evidence.

AI help on the way

Meanwhile, the training offer would likely include a website and “the opportunity for trainees to start ‘having a go’ at prompting a simple AI system”.  

Five to 10 grants would be dished out to teachers or organisations to “develop case studies on effective practice in successfully implementing widely available AI tools in schools and colleges”.

And extra training would also be offered to support teachers in “developing more advanced skills through a series of live webinars covering different techniques for the use of AI”.

Ministers are keen for schools and colleges to take advantage of the AI revolution by using it for purposes such as streamlining administrative tasks to slash workload, while being alive to the risks. 

But the DfE’s policy paper on generative AI in education says content created can be inaccurate, inappropriate, biased, out of date or unreliable.

Edtech investor Richard Taylor, who is managing director of MediaTaylor, said that if a school or college was “really interested” it could do “half the stuff” being proposed already, such as by googling how to do a prompt for AI tool such as ChatGPT.

“You’ve got to work out how you’re going do it in a way that doesn’t add more pressure on teachers or on the very scarce amount of professional development time they’ve got,” he added.

He questioned how the project will “get beyond the enthusiastic…early adopters” of AI and cut through to the “meaty middle” of the teacher workforce. 

AI ‘unreliable’ to assess student work

A YouGov poll of 1,012 teachers in the UK in November found almost two thirds think AI is too unreliable to assess students’ work or help with resource or lesson planning.

Jodie Lopez, an edtech business consultant, said training teachers on AI use in education is “definitely welcomed and needed”.

But she added: “There is also a lack of CPD more widely in technology use in education too and for some educators a sudden leap to AI is premature.”

Some schools and colleges still “struggled to get decent wi-fi”, she added.

Taylor suggested the DfE would be better of running “a consultation process first to work out what schools, colleges and teachers want, what do they know and what are people doing elsewhere”.

The DfE did not want to comment.

Maths to 18: MPs want financial literacy alternative to GCSE resits

The government should create a financial literacy qualification as an alternative to GCSE maths resits as part of their plans for an Advanced British Standard, MPs have said.

The House of Commons education committee has today urged ministers to provide post-16 students with “comprehensive financial education” as a “priority” in proposals to continue maths education to the age of 18.

Financial education has formally been part of the national school curriculum since 2014, but it is not currently compulsory in post-16 education in England.

During a recent inquiry, MPs heard from broadcaster and Money Saving Expert founder Martin Lewis that there are people entering the workplace who “do not understand their paycheques or that their tax code number is their responsibility”.

The committee released a report today that said financial education is “crucial” for 16-to-18-year-olds, many of whom are transitioning into the workplace, paying taxes, considering applying for a student loan, and living away from home for the first time. 

Despite this, MPs found that around half of pupils in state-funded schools do not go on to participate in maths at post-16, while almost an additional third are forced to study maths after the age of 16 to meet the controversial condition of funding rule.

The report suggested that the process of resitting maths, through either the GCSE or functional skills alternative, often leads to “reduced confidence, with low expectations of success”. Experts told the committee that forced resits can present a “lasting sense of failure” and leave students feeling “disillusioned and disengaged” from maths.

November 2023 results showed 22.2 per cent of almost 61,000 students aged 17 to 19 who resat maths last year achieved a grade 4 or above in England, seen by the government as a standard pass.

This was a fall of 8 per cent on the last year, when 24.2 per cent achieved at least a standard pass, and down 16 per cent on pre-pandemic 2019, when the pass rate was 26.4 per cent.

The education committee urged the government to address this as part of its plans for the Advanced British Standard (ABS) – a proposed baccalaureate that would replace A-levels and T Levels over the next 10 years, which will see students study English and maths to 18 alongside “majors” and “minors” in other subjects.

Ministers should “consider offering a specific qualification in financial literacy which could fit into the ABS as a minor subject,” today’s report said.

This would “provide opportunities for progression for students who may not be able to take A-level maths but show an interest or aptitude in improving their financial knowledge”.

And critically, this could be a “useful alternative to the GCSE retake for those who do not achieve a grade 4 or above in mathematics”, according to the MPs.

Their report added: “We welcome the government’s proposals to make mathematics compulsory learning for all students up to the age of 18. Whichever form this takes, whether through the ABS or otherwise, the government must ensure that the mathematics programme includes financial literacy as a fundamental part of the curriculum.”

MPs also urged the government to “redouble its focus” on recruitment and retention of maths teachers, where demand would increase “substantially” under a maths to 18 policy.

The report said evidence shows that existing targets are not being met and quoted data that shows only 63 per cent of the required secondary school maths teachers were recruited in the academic year 2023/24.

It added that it was “clear” through the inquiry that the challenge of recruiting more maths teachers is a “particular challenge in the post-16 space”.

Last year’s inaugural release of the Department for Education’s annual statistics on the FE workforce revealed an average of 5.5 per cent of all teaching positions to be vacant across further education providers. Shortages are particularly felt in subjects like maths, physics, construction and engineering.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Being financially literate relies on a solid understanding of maths and we have reformed the curriculum and invested substantially over £100 million in the Maths Hubs programme. The Advanced British Standard will build on this and see all young people study maths and English to 18, giving them the essential skills they need to succeed.”

AoC delays FE teacher pay recommendation for second year in a row 

The Association of Colleges will hold off on making a pay recommendation for FE staff again this year until the school teacher pay review is published.

Unions, who were told about the decision in a meeting with the membership body yesterday, warned that this is likely to delay vital negotiations with individual colleges for months.

The AoC deployed the same tactic last year when the body refused to make a pay recommendation unless government coughed up extra money so colleges could make “a meaningful offer” to staff.

The move was followed by an announcement in June of additional 16 to 19 funding of £470 million in total to be dished out over the next two academic years: £185 million in 2023/24 and £285 million in 2024/25.

Unions have said their pay demands for 2024/25 can be funded by this additional funding.

It took until September for the AoC to make a 6.5 per cent pay rise to colleges last year, mirroring the schoolteacher pay rise recommendation by the arms-length School Teachers Review Body (STRB) in July.

AoC chief executive David Hughes said: “Last year, the government was able to find additional funding to ensure that the pay gap between school and college teachers did not get even wider, and we want to give them the chance to do so again this year. Therefore, we will not be making a recommendation until the STRB report has been published.” 

FE pay ‘stagnant too long’

Talks between the AoC and a group of five trade unions began this week following the unions’ pay claim for 2024/25 submitted in March.

The National Joint Forum of unions representing Unite, UCU, Unison, GMB and the National Education Union demanded a 10 per cent pay rise for FE staff next year, or a £3,000 salary increase, to keep up with the pace of inflation.

The pay demand is above the 3.2 per cent consumer price index and 4.3 per cent retail price index inflation rate in the year to March 2024.

The AoC said at the time that unions should “focus their energies” on demanding the government raise the funding rates which haven’t kept up with inflation.

The pay claim also called for a £30,000 minimum starting salary for FE lecturers, matching schools, and urged college bosses to address the 40 per cent real terms pay decline for FE staff since 2009/10 and the “steep” rises in the cost of living.

Unions maintained some demands from last year such as colleges having class size recommendations, a “national policy on the delivery of guided learning hours” and to have a binding national pay agreement.

New claims include a demand for staff to have two mental health days per year and a commitment to close gender, ethnic and disability pay gaps.

Hughes said: “AoC met with the college staff unions on Monday 20 May to begin pay negotiations for 2024/25. There is strong agreement between employer and staff representatives on the need to improve pay in the FE sector, and AoC has been campaigning consistently for the pay gap between school and FE teachers to be eradicated.”

A UCU spokesperson said: “Pay across the FE sector has been stagnant for far too long which is why we urgently need a new deal for FE. Whilst it is important for AoC to attempt to source further additional funding to resolve the pay gap between school and college teachers, waiting to see what the teachers’ pay review board recommends could mean we are waiting for months, and our members need a pay rise now.

“Our claim is about more than pay. We need binding national outcomes in FE just as there are for schools and sixth forms across England.”

Knock on effect in FE of school teacher pay delay

The AoC claimed the decision to delay its pay recommendation was due to its campaign to eradicate the pay gap between school and FE teachers.

This year’s STRB report has not yet been released by the government, sparking concern from teachers’ unions. 

Teacher union NASUWT said last week that it fears ministers will delay the report for as long as possible as a general election draws closer this year.

“The pay review body is not the property of the education secretary,” said Dr Patrick Roach, NASUWT general secretary. “Teachers and employers have a right to know immediately the opinions and recommendations of the School Teachers Review Body, without interference from ministers.”

In previous years, the pay report has not been published until late July.

Skills bootcamps can help fill immigration shortages, says DWP

Skills bootcamps will be “targeted” at sectors facing staff shortages due to tighter immigration rules, a senior minister has claimed.

In a speech today, work and pensions secretary Mel Stride said a new government taskforce is looking at “interventions” to help recruitment into sectors such as construction, care and hospitality.

Stride said new visa rules which are expected to cut migration are a “huge opportunity” for jobseekers already living in the UK who should take on roles previously filled by “overseas workers”.

His taskforce has only met once and is yet to release any detailed plans.

It will reportedly try to emulate initiatives used to fill HGV driver shortages in 2021, which included skills bootcamps and jobcentre training schemes.

However, it remains unclear how the government will encourage more people to sign up to bootcamps as they are already free for any adult aged 19 or over who is not in work.

A spokesperson for the Department for Work and Pensions told FE Week measures such as incentives for employers and targeted funding could be used to boost bootcamp numbers, but stopped short of providing any further detail.

Unspent bootcamp budget

The government has significant amounts of unspent funding from the £584 million set aside for bootcamps between 2022 and 2025.

According to a freedom of information request response last year, of the £150 million set aside in 2022-23, only £85 million was spent.

The government has not yet published details of how much of the remaining £498 million was spent in 2023-24.

Stride said the government will also deliver a “major new advertising campaign” encouraging businesses to recruit from local Jobcentres.

Courses for the unemployed

Skills bootcamps are flagship government post-pandemic work programme that aims to help people progress in their career or move into a new sector such as digital, construction or engineering.

They are open to the unemployed for free, as well as employed people, but their employer has to pay up to a 30 per cent cash contribution.  

They involve a combination of training, work experience and a guaranteed job interview over a period of up to 16 weeks.

Despite the half a billion pound-budget, there is limited evidence to show whether skills bootcamps are successful at getting people into employment or achieving other positive outcomes.

A government-commissioned study of the courses found about half of participants in 2021-22 started a new job, a new role with their employer or were given increased responsibilities with the same employer.

Since then, the government has only published the number of people starting the programme, despite also collecting data on how many complete them and move into new jobs.

Lack of joined up support

Responding to Stride’s announcement, Stephen Evans, chief executive of Learning and Work Institute, said the main reason people who can work are unemployed is a “lack of effective joined-up support” rather than migration.

He added: “Many employers are already working with jobcentres and of course more should do so.

“But to make a real difference we need to employers to look at how they structure jobs to fit with people’s health needs and caring responsibilities and think more broadly about where they recruit, given many people are out of work but not on benefits.

“That needs to be coupled with a step change in joined-up work, health and skills support for people, since only one in ten out-of-work disabled people get help to find work each year.”

Employers renew calls for youth ‘apprenticeship guarantee’ 

Employers have renewed calls for an “apprenticeship guarantee” to reverse a collapse in apprenticeship starts for young people.

Then prime minister Boris Johnson hit national media headlines in 2020 after he backed such a proposal put forward by former skills minister Robert Halfon.

But, as experts predicted at the time and as Labour accused Johnson of being “deceptive”, the idea was never fleshed out by the government and was soon forgotten.

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has brought the idea back into play in a new report published today that highlights a stark drop in apprenticeships for young people, as employers rebadge training for existing staff as apprenticeships to make use of their levy contributions.

But questions remain over how apprenticeships can be “guaranteed”, given that apprenticeships are jobs and government cannot force employers to offer them.

Here’re the key takeaways from today’s report.

The case for an ‘apprenticeship guarantee’

Dramatic fall among young people…

CIPD’s report included a survey of 2,000 employers, which found more than half (60 per cent) think that the primary purpose of apprenticeships should be supporting young people to enter the workplace. Just 15 per cent of employers said apprenticeships should primarily be used to develop existing staff.

Despite this, government data shows a 41 per cent fall in apprenticeship starts for the under 19s and a 36 per cent decline for those aged 19 to 24 years old between 2015/16 and 2022/23.

There has been a well-documented shift in the share of apprenticeship starts for those aged 25 and older over this period. And while all age groups have seen large declines in level 2, the dramatic shift to level 4 and above apprenticeships has “clearly favoured those aged 25 and above”, CIPD’s report said.

It claimed: “Apprenticeships in England now predominantly attract individuals already active in the labour market rather than those transitioning from school to work, in contrast to many other countries.”

…SME starts also ‘collapse’

Figures also show that between 2016/17 and 2020/21 apprenticeship starts for small employers decreased by nearly half (−45 per cent), and in medium-sized enterprises, starts dropped by more than half (−56 per cent).

Larger employers also saw a decline, but this was notably less pronounced (−14 per cent).

CIPD said the “collapse” in apprenticeship starts among SMEs has “undermined” opportunities for young people as it is this group of employers who are more likely to take on young apprentices and train people with lower qualification levels. 

Data also shows the introduction of the levy coincides with the number of people undertaking apprenticeships from the most deprived areas of England, falling from 250,000 to 150,000 between 2015/16 and 2022/23.

Employers ‘incentivised’ to rebadge training

CIPD also repeats warnings, raised in the past by Ofsted and multiple think tanks, that employers have been “incentivised” to rebadge existing training courses as apprenticeships to utilise their apprenticeship levy money.

Today’s survey showed 54 per cent of organisations paying the levy “admitted they had converted existing training activity into apprenticeships programmes to claim back their allowance”.

Backing for ‘apprenticeship guarantee’ – but is it possible?

To combat these trends, nine in ten (89 per cent) of employers in CIPD’s survey supported the HR body’s recommendation of an “apprenticeship guarantee” for young people up to the age of 24. The policy would “ensure that a level 2 or level 3 apprenticeship place is available for every young person who wants one and meets the minimum entry requirements”.

However, the practicality of implementing the proposal is still in question. Apprenticeships are jobs and government cannot force employers to offer them.

In 2009, the Labour government attempted to establish an “apprentice guarantee” through the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act, but the plans ultimately fell through. 

A recent paper titled ‘The Economy 2030 Inquiry’ explained that the 2009 act placed a duty on the CEO of the Skills Funding Agency to ensure an offer of an apprenticeship place to all qualified 16–18-year-old applicants.

The paper said the young person could choose an apprenticeship at either level 2 or level 3 from apprenticeship frameworks in two sectors (which were to be defined as those covered by a Sector Skills Council), plus they must be “suitably qualified” with GCSE English and maths and be placed within a “reasonable travel areas”.

The guarantee was not to come fully into force until 2013. But, after the change of government in 2010, that part of the act was repealed. 

Authors of the 2030 inquiry said this proposal “remains the best vision of the system we need to create for people up to age 24”, but noted issues around funding, supply and low English and maths pass rates.

In May 2020 the idea of an apprenticeship guarantee resurfaced after then-education select committee chair Robert Halfon asked Boris Johnson during the government’s Liaison Committee if he would “consider introducing a guarantee offering every young person from 16 to 25 a guaranteed apprenticeship providing they can get their qualifications from level 2 right up to degree level”.

Johnson responded positively and then reaffirmed his liking of the idea during a televised Covid briefing days later, telling the nation that “it is going to be vital that we guarantee apprenticeships for young people”.

Then shadow skills minister Toby Perkins labelled the commitment as a “deception” at the time, saying he was “concerned” that young people were being given “false reassurance” by Boris Johnson at a time when they are facing “a very difficult job market”.

The government has never since said it would adopt an “apprenticeship guarantee” as policy and the idea appeared to be quickly dropped. 

Newly elected mayor of the West Midlands, Richard Parker, included an “apprenticeship guarantee” for young people in his manifesto, but didn’t detail how it would be implemented.

After publishing today’s report, Peter Cheese, chief executive of the CIPD, said: “The evidence in this report shows clearly that young people most need and benefit from apprenticeships, and that the erosion of this pathway has had a negative impact on social mobility for the most disadvantaged. The introduction of an apprenticeship guarantee would help reclaim apprenticeships primarily for young people and reverse the decline in opportunities for them.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “A guarantee for young people to be able to access a good apprenticeship and more targeted use of the levy to train older staff would result in more people benefitting from the skills they need.”