Colleges need better funding to perform their crucial role for refugees

With immigration minister, Robert Jenrick warning of an ‘intolerable pressure’ on our ability to integrate new arrivals, we need to acknowledge the services that drive settled communities and skills for work – and commit a stable and flexible budget to them.

Going to college is more than a transactional encounter where you learn a trade, take an exam and tick a box. Further education provisions support young people and adult learners far beyond the classroom: providing packed enrichment programmes including sport, societies and cultural learning.

They also provide service links to mental health support, financial services and copious amounts of in-house assistance. English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) programmes are the epitome of these wrap-around services that colleges deliver. 

Colleges support ESOL students – many of whom have made difficult journeys to the UK and arrive as refugees – to understand life in Britain, learn the language and prepare to contribute economically. They work proudly with asylum seekers – having done so since the arrival of the first Vietnamese boat people in the 1970s through to Afghan refugees today – teaching British Values, helping them to access services appropriately and supporting social integration country-wide.

Colleges are busy, in the background, creating skilled migrants who are ready to contribute economically. By doing so, they are supporting assimilation and communities where people live in harmony with each other. Without them, we would see a dystopian landscape of more ghettoised and isolated communities, a strain on mental health services and more social unrest.

Without colleges, we would see a dystopian landscape

We work with incredibly motivated ESOL students and refugees who are prepped at college to progress into work. Many go on to graduate into sectors which benefit from an international talent pool –  as well as industries which are, like colleges, struggling to recruit and maintain staff. We have seen qualified accountants retrain as teaching assistants, and other refugees go into all kinds of work including community outreach, law and barbering. 

But the bottom line is that funding does not go far enough for adult education. We have reached a point where historic underfunding of the national FE pot needs to be addressed, just as we are seeing a rise in overall demand for services like ESOL in the post-pandemic environment. At Harrogate College, a College of Sanctuary in Yorkshire, we have seen an increase of nearly 100 ESOL students enrolled from last year, with 60 on the waiting list and significantly more in Leeds.

The refugees we work with are incredibly motivated to contribute economically and in many cases are living in real poverty. Many have experienced trauma and left their home country under duress.

As committed sanctuary partners we want to welcome and support them to achieve the better lives they deserve. Let’s commit stable funding to the services that benefit them and our communities at large.

Let’s stop talking about soft skills – They are power skills

Within the tech sector, job adverts tend to focus on the technical skills a candidate needs to possess to be successful in the role. While proficiency in certain software or the ability to code, for example, are enormously important for tech roles, they are not the only qualities an employee needs to thrive once they are in the job.

Those who have strong communication, organisational and interpersonal skills find they can adapt quickly to new roles and flourish in busy workplaces. For too long these qualities have been known as soft skills, but increasingly voices in the recruitment sphere are referring to them as power skills because of the impact they have on the workplace.

Power skills encompass areas such as leadership, teamwork, critical thinking, communication and productivity, and many will already be excelling in these areas without even knowing it. Being aware of one’s own strengths and weaknesses in the power skills department can help job hunters hone their search to find roles that suit their skillset.

By identifying where they thrive, candidates can also make sure they draw attention to their best power skills during the application and interview processes. Candidates can also proactively build up their skills in the areas they struggle with, and this personal growth could make securing jobs easier in the long run.

A recruitment superpower

When many candidates with the same technical skillset are applying for roles, power skills can act as key differentiators. Power skills are known to impress recruiters, so candidates must showcase these when trying to land a job. This is crucial throughout every stage of the recruitment process, from a candidate’s initial application to the first few weeks of a new role.

Clear communication skills can shine through in a written application, while strong problem-solving abilities and emotional intelligence can impress in an interview situation when presented with scenarios. Power skills like professionalism, honesty and passion for the role will put a candidate in good stead and can increase their chances of progressing to the next round of interviews and, hopefully, receiving a job offer.

When starting in a new role, candidates who understand the value of teamwork will learn the ropes quickly as they will be prepared to lean on other people for support, ask questions and muck in with projects when required. Equally, being confident enough to use their initiative when situations call for it will help the whole team to progress.

A helping hand for graduates

Power skills are especially important for Gen Z and Millennials as they are now embarking on the start of their tech careers and applying for entry-level roles. In a competitive job market where work experience, internships and extra training have never been more important, candidates will need to rely on their power skills to make an imprint on recruiters’ minds and stand out among a sea of other candidates.

If a candidate falls short on technical skills but ranks highly on power skills, an employer might consider them as a potential candidate if they are demonstrating the right attitude. Technical skills can be taught, and recruiters may see potential in a candidate who wants to learn and grow over one with all the right technical skills but little interest in the job they’re applying for.

Longevity in tech careers

Experience becomes hugely important when applying for senior job roles, but power skills are also likely to have been developed over their many years in the working world. Strong leaders, critical thinkers and good listeners all possess power skills in abundance. When combined with strong technical skills, these individuals make invaluable contributions to their workplaces and are likely to soar through the ranks.

Power skills are important in any job, but they have particular weight in the world of technology. The tech sector continuously evolves, and keeping up to date with the latest changes and technological advancements is crucial to staying ahead of the curve. Those who possess power skills like self-motivation, adaptability and a keen desire to learn will find it easier to grow and navigate their careers as they inevitably evolve over time.

Why childcare is the FE sector’s business too

Early Years and FE can often feel like distant relations in the education family – linked but at opposite ends of the learning journey. Yet the connection between the two is much closer than many appreciate.

The most obvious link is the critical role FE plays in providing new entrants to the childcare sector with the skills and knowledge required to deliver high quality provision to both children and their families.

We also have the equally important responsibility – especially given the ongoing retention issues in the early years workforce – of providing professional development opportunities and career progression to ensure more experienced staff not only remain in the sector but thrive.

But what we don’t always consider are the less tangible connections between the two sectors – and how the childcare sector supports FE in return. 

Beyond childcare

Childcare is defined as care for children, especially that provided by either the government, an organisation, or a person, while parents are at work or absent for another reason. Every parent and carer should have access to affordable, great quality childcare and early education for their child.

Campaign for Learning’s recent policy paper – Expanding Childcare: time for children, parents and family learning – points to the need to better appreciate childcare as a social good; one that’s not only important for facilitating work and child development, but also allows parents to train, re-train, and take their first steps back into learning.

At present, childcare entitlements and the Government’s proposed expansion are focused on working parents who are required to work 16 hours a week to be eligible for free childcare.

On a policy level, the paper’s authors and Campaign for Learning make a strong case for treating 16 hours of skills training as 16 hours of paid employment, to ensure parents partaking in training would also get continued access to free childcare.

This could apply to parents taking part in Skills Bootcamps or taking relevant childcare qualifications in FE, which would also support the expansion of the childcare workforce. There is also potential for supporting parents to learn online at home, so they are able to go back into the labour market.

The paper goes on to look at support for family learning and routes into further learning, and how time for family learning could also be included within the 30-hour and 15-hour free childcare entitlements for children aged 9 months to under 5.

Understanding its value

As a sector, FE needs to better understand childcare’s multifaceted value. Accessible and high-quality provision allows parents to pursue their own education, engage in training programs, or re-enter the workforce with confidence.

By providing a safe and nurturing environment for their children, parents can focus on personal and professional development, acquiring new skills, and advancing their careers. It helps parents balance their work and family responsibilities, contributing to their economic stability and reducing barriers to employment.

Childcare facilities can also act as centres for family learning, where parents can actively participate in their children’s education. Family learning programmes promote positive parent-child interactions, enhance early literacy and numeracy skills, and foster a lifelong love of learning.

Recognising childcare as a social good also highlights its potential to provide career opportunities. Family learning initiatives and childcare settings can serve as stepping stones for parents interested in pursuing careers in both education and childcare. By engaging in these activities, parents may discover a passion for working with children, leading to future employment or training.

A further benefit of the early years sector within society is its impact in helping to address gender disparities. Historically, the burden of childcare has disproportionately fallen on women, limiting their educational and career opportunities. By appreciating childcare as a shared responsibility and valuing it as a social good, we can promote gender equality by enabling both parents to actively participate in education, training, and employment.

Changing the mindset

Too often childcare is seen solely through the lens of convenience or child development. By changing this mindset, we can better understand its potential to empower parents, facilitate family learning, create pathways into the workforce, encourage early education, and promote gender equality.

In valuing childcare in this broader context, we can advocate for policies and investments that support its accessibility, affordability, and quality, thereby benefiting individuals, families, and society as a whole.

It’s time to get the whole education family around the table to better understand what connects us and how we can all support each other.

Leaders sound alarm as 2024 exam entry fees soar by up to 16.5%

England’s largest exam board has increased fees for some of its most popular GCSE and A-level subjects by as much as 16.5 per cent, more than double the current rate of inflation.

AQA and its competitors Edexcel and OCR stand to net millions in extra revenue between them from price increases for 2024’s summer exams.

Next year entry to AQA’s maths GCSE will cost £48 per pupil, up 16.5 per cent from £41.20 this summer, according to analysis by Lee Hitchen of the Academic Enrichment Centre and a former staffer at OCR.

Entries to AQA’s GCSE English and statistics qualifications and A-level history will cost around 10 per cent more, while English A-levels will increase by around 9 per cent.

However, fees for most other subjects will only rise by 4 per cent at the exam board, whereas OCR and Edexcel have implemented 7 per cent increases across the board, just shy of the current rate of CPI inflation, which was 7.9 per cent in the year to June.

It comes after Ofqual analysis found the cost of general qualifications rose 6.5 per cent this year and 2.6 per cent between 2021 and 2022, though these rises were below rates of inflation over the same period.

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said schools and colleges were “under huge financial pressure and this is yet another example of the kind of challenges they are facing”.

“Exam fees represent a significant cost to schools and colleges and this latest price hike will only serve to stretch budgets even further. We completely understand that exam boards will also be facing rising costs, but we cannot understand why there is such variation between different exam boards and subjects.”

Ofqual warned this week that rising prices across the country for this summer’s exams suggested exam boards “have likely been under increasing cost pressures from the general economic environment over the reporting period”.

AQA awards the lion’s share of GCSE qualifications every year, including the majority of English language and literature GCSEs. From the price rises in those subjects alone, the exam board would net an extra £4.4 million if qualifications issued matched numbers seen in 2022.

For a school or college, the cost of entering 200 students for AQA’s maths GCSE would rise from £8,240 to £9,600.

A spokesperson said the board had “experienced a rise in the cost of providing our services which means that we, as an education charity, have had to take some difficult decisions”.

“For most of our qualifications, we have increased entry fees for 2024 well below the rate of inflation. Entry fees for some of our qualifications have increased above inflation so that they better reflect the market and the true cost of delivering those qualifications.”

Edexcel issues the highest number of maths GCSEs, and would net £1.6 million from its price increase for that subject if the number of certificates is the same next year as in 2022.

A spokesperson said qualification fees “cover the delivery of each qualification from first teaching to successful completion of the course, assessment and issuing certificates”.

“We recognise that school and college budgets are stretched, and we will always aim to keep fee increases to a minimum, while providing as much value for money as we can for our qualification fees.”

OCR said it knew schools and colleges “are facing severe financial challenges”.

“As a not-for-profit organisation, we aim to keep our fee increases as low as possible while covering our costs. We’ve set our fees for the next year below the current rate of inflation.

“We continue to invest in support, resources, training and technology for teachers and students as well as in the development of new qualifications.”

It comes after Ofqual board minutes from December, only published yesterday, revealed how exam boards were reminded last year “of their obligation to notify Ofqual of any proposed fee increases that exceed inflation and that Ofqual is monitoring price increases”.

“It was agreed that Ofqual would bring a deep dive into qualifications pricing to a future board strategy event.”

It is not clear whether the deep dive went ahead, or whether its findings had been presented.

An Ofqual spokesperson said: “We recognise the financial pressures schools and colleges face and require awarding organisations to make their qualification pricing transparent.

“Ofqual monitors those prices throughout the year, and reports on changes in the annual Qualification Price Statistics report. This enables schools and colleges to compare costs against industry averages and rates of inflation when making purchasing decisions. We continue to brief the Ofqual board on developments in this area.”

Keegan wants ‘extreme caution’ from colleges after trans advice delayed

Schools and colleges should “proceed with extreme caution” over transgender issues, education secretary Gillian Keegan said as she confirmed long-awaited guidance has been delayed again.

In a parliamentary statement, Keegan said pushing back publication of the guidance would “allow more time” to speak to teachers, parents and lawyers to ensure it “meets the high expectations that these groups rightly have for it”.

However national newspapers have reported the delay relates to some of the proposed guidance breaking laws and cabinet split on how to proceed.

Academies minister Baroness Barran has said guidance will set out legal duties and provide “clear information to support their consideration of how to respond to transgender issues”.

DfE’s transgender guidance will include colleges

But Keegan said today: “It is a difficult and sensitive area and more information is needed about the long-term implications of a child to act as though they are the opposite sex.

“We also need to take care to understand how such actions affect other children in the school or college. These decisions must not be taken lightly or in haste.

“It is vital that the guidance we publish gives clarity for schools and colleges and reassurance for parents. 

“So, we have made the decision to allow more time – to speak to teachers, parents, lawyers and other stakeholders – in order to ensure this guidance meets the high expectations that these groups rightly have for it.”

The delay has frustrated unions representing leaders who have long called for the guidance to be published. 

Geoff Barton, general secretary of ASCL, said: “At present, schools and colleges have to navigate this complex and sensitive subject entirely on their own.

“Clear, practical guidance on this matter is important as long as it is genuinely supportive to schools and pupils and does not add to the existing and onerous expectations on schools.”

Rye College school faced a snap Ofsted inspection after a national media and political storm over a leaked recording of a teacher talking to pupils about gender.

Keegan said that, “in the meantime, schools and colleges should proceed with extreme caution” when dealing with such issues.

“They should always involve parents in decisions relating to their child, and should not agree to any changes that they are not absolutely confident are in the best interests of that child and their peers,” she said.

“They should prioritise safeguarding by meeting their existing legal duties to protect single sex spaces and maintain safety and fairness in single sex sport.”

Oliver vows to ‘work with whole sector’ to ‘create best’ Ofsted

Sir Martyn Oliver has vowed to work “closely with the whole sector” to “create the best system” for children after being confirmed as the Department for Education’s preferred candidate for Ofsted chief inspector.

Gillian Keegan confirmed the selection of the Outwood Grange Academies Trust boss this morning.

In a statement, Oliver said he was “deeply honoured and hugely privileged” by the recommendation. 

“Subject to the pre-appointment hearing, I can promise that I will work extremely hard and very closely with the whole sector so that we can together build on what has been done to date to create the best system in all areas of education, children’s services and skills for the benefit of children and young people,” he added. 

Oliver will now be subject to a pre-appointment hearing by the education committee in September.

Keegan said Oliver has “demonstrated exemplary leadership and an unwavering commitment to driving up standards in areas of disadvantage in his time as a school and trust leader.

“I am confident the breadth of Martyn’s experience will enable him to build on this vital work as Ofsted moves into the future.”

She thanked current chief inspector Amanda Spielman “for successfully steering Ofsted over the last seven years, introducing key reforms including hugely important new education and social care inspection frameworks”.

Students ‘misled’ and teachers struggling: Ofsted’s verdict on T Levels

“Many” students have dropped out of T Levels after being “misled” onto the flagship qualifications, while experienced teachers struggle to teach the “complex” courses, a damning Ofsted review has found.

Employers are also being left “disappointed” and “poorly informed” about the mandatory 315-hour industry placements for T Levels, as the inspectorate warns that some placements are “not appropriate” for the subjects learners are studying.

Students and teachers also reported feeling “let down” by the early rollout, as universities refuse to accept the qualifications as valid entry courses, adding that they fear the T Level brand has already been damaged.

Ofsted laid bare the “range of shortcomings” in a government-commissioned review of T Levels published today, which concluded there “remains considerable work to do” to make sure the courses, which are the new technical equivalent to A-levels for 16- to 19-year-olds, can be offered at scale.

The watchdog even urges the Department for Education to rethink its wider level 3 reforms, which involve axing most alternative qualifications, like BTECs, from 2025, in light of the findings.

Sector leaders said Ofsted’s verdict shows that ministers need to “drop the rhetoric, face the reality and rethink their plans for qualification reform”.

The DfE admitted there is “further action is needed” to make T Levels a success.

Students ‘misled’ as teachers ‘struggle’

Ofsted has conducted a thematic review of the implementation of T Levels since the courses launched in September 2020. The qualifications aim to combine high-quality study of theory with development of practical skills.

The watchdog’s research involved interviews with employers as well as almost 700 teaching staff and more than 2,100 students and focused on courses in construction, digital, education, and health and science, along with the T Level transition programme.

The inspectorate will inspect T Levels as part of regular inspections from September 2023.

Today’s report said confidence in teaching the qualifications is on the rise but warned the courses are “not at all what students expected” in some cases, adding that “many” learners reported “being misled and ill-informed about their content and structure”.

Students on the health and science T Level were particularly “surprised” at the complexity of the science content and the academic nature of the course. FE Week revealed last year that around 1,100 students on this course had their results regraded after Ofqual found the exams were not fit for purpose. 

One student told Ofsted: “The exams took all of our joy out of everything and really shook our faith in the course.”

Most providers set the entry criteria for T Levels as five GCSEs at grade four or above, but the watchdog found the initial assessment of students’ abilities at the start of their courses is “often weak”.

Inspectors said the practical aspects of courses are “generally taught well” but experienced vocational teachers “often struggle to teach theoretical content in sufficient depth or to set work that is appropriately challenging”.

“Many” providers have experienced difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff who have the required experience and expertise, the report added.

‘Disappointed’ employers

T Level students are required to complete a 315-hour industry placement to achieve the qualification – a policy feature often lauded by education ministers as the main reason why their new “gold standard” technical qualification stands above other level 3 rivals.

Ofsted said that “most students enjoy their industry placements and gain valuable insights into what it is really like to work in the sectors they are studying”.

But finding suitable placements, even after the Covid-19 pandemic, is a “barrier to increasing the number of T Level places available in many providers”.

Employers are also often “poorly informed” about the content and structure of T Levels, with Ofsted finding instances where industry placements “are not appropriate for the pathway that students are on”.

The report said digital placements were particularly difficult to find suitable placements for, adding that there have been instances where employers are “disappointed with the students’ skill level”.

Some students were left to arrange their own placements, while other placements involved “considerable travel, and students did not have the means to get to them”, namely in construction.

High drop-out rate 

Around 17,000 students have started a T Level since 2020 but the DfE has so far refused to release data that shows how many stay on for the full two years.

Ofsted reported that “many” leave before the end of the course. At a few providers, no students moved on to the second year “because of their poor experience in the first year”.

The watchdog also flagged concern that the struggling T Level transition programme, a one-year post-GCSE course aimed at students who would like to do a T Level but are not ready for its academic and technical demands, is only pushing a “low” number of students on to a full T Level.

Unis reject T Levels despite minister promises

While T Levels were designed so that students can enter work straight after completing their course, ministers have repeatedly made clear that the courses are a viable entry route into university.

But Ofsted found cases where students who wanted to go to university were “surprised and disappointed that T Level qualifications are not always accepted as a valid entry qualification”.

It echoes a previous FE Week investigation that revealed less than half of all UK universities refused to accept T Level learners.

One digital T Level student told Ofsted: “I was initially planning to go to university and was told by my college that it should be no issue after doing the T Level. But of all the universities I applied for, I only got one offer, with the reasons for rejection being that I went with the T Level and not traditional A-levels.”

Skills and universities minister Robert Halfon wrote to vice chancellors in January, ordering them to publicly clarify whether they accept T Levels as valid entry qualifications for their universities.

‘Carefully consider’ bonfire of other level 3s

Ofsted found that providers have often introduced T Levels because they are expecting that other, similar courses will not be eligible for public funding in the future, as proposed in the DfE’s consultations on qualification reform.

A key recommendation the watchdog makes to the DfE is for officials to “carefully consider the implications and impact of the planned withdrawal of funding for other similar courses to ensure that students are not disadvantaged”.

James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association which leads the Protect Student Choice campaign, said: “Today’s report is clear that T Levels are not yet the gold standard, mass market replacement for BTECs the government believes them to be.

“Ministers need to drop the rhetoric, face the reality and rethink their plans for qualification reform. We all want T Levels to succeed, but not at any cost, and leaving tens of thousands of BTEC students without a pathway to higher education or employment is not a price worth paying.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said Ofsted’s report “exposes a programme which is complex and therefore running into understandable implementation issues and glitches”.

He added: “The risk is too great to shut down funding for qualifications which are working well for learners now in the hope that the new T Levels will be better because we want them to be.”

Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman said: “As with many new qualifications, there are some teething issues with T Levels, but in most cases providers and employers seem to be working well together to address them. However, we saw a range of shortcomings which providers and the DfE will want to address.”

A DfE spokesperson said: “We welcome the recognition of these high-quality qualifications as a strong technical pathway for young people when delivered effectively.  

“We have already made good progress to address many of the areas highlighted in the report, but we know further action is needed.”

DfE renames struggling T Level transition programme

The T Level transition programme has been renamed to encourage more young people to progress to T Levels. 

The Department for Education (DfE) will now call the programme the T Level foundation year, though providers are not expected to use the new name until the 2024/25 academic year.

The announcement was made in the department’s response to its consultation on level 2 qualifications that support progression to T Levels.

“We are making this change to strengthen the relationship with T Levels and signal clearly that this is the first step on a three-year path to achieving a T Level, for those students who need to take a foundation year,” the report said.

Other future qualifications that are designed to support T Level progression will be called T Level foundation qualifications. Ofqual is now consulting on its plans to regulate those qualifications before teaching begins in 2026.  

A series of national technical outcomes (NTOs) documents, one for each of the 12 T Level routes, has now been agreed which set out the knowledge and skills the new foundation qualifications should deliver for students.

Qualifications as part of the transition programme/foundation year will still be optional, though most providers are choosing to include them.

Destination unknown

To date, nearly 9,800 students have taken part in the T Level transition programme, but it’s not known how many of those have completed and progressed to a full T Level.

Last year FE Week revealed that just 14 per cent of the 847 transition programme students in 2020/21 progressed to a full T Level, the first year the programme was introduced. 

English and maths requirements, a lack of suitable industry placements and more attractive qualification offers were all cited as factors in the low transition rate.  

FE Week understands there is concern among senior officials that progression from the programme to T Levels has continued to be low.

Participation numbers have grown as more T Level routes have come online and the number of providers delivering T Levels increases. 

The number of transition programme students increased to 3,348 in 2021/22 and 5,600 in 2022/23. Progression data, such as how many of them dropped out, switched to a different level 2 qualification, progressed to a T Level or progressed to a different level 3 qualification, has not been released.

£50k minister pay-offs, and 6 more DfE accounts findings

The Department for Education’s ministerial merry-go-round last year saw £50,000 severance fees paid out to politicians – with some pay-offs four times what they earnt in salary.

The DfE’s annual accounts for 2022-23, published yesterday, also show a staggering £20 million was paid out to civil servants in the voluntary exit staff shake-up. More than 200 pay-offs were between £50,000 and £100,000.

Here’s everything you need to know …

1. £50k severance in ministerial merry-go-round

As FE Week first revealed in November, last year’s ministerial merry-go-round at the department cost a pretty penny in severance fees.

Ministers are entitled to severance pay no matter how long they serve – providing they don’t get another government position within three weeks.

Five secretary of states worked at the DfE across the year, with five minsters of state and six parliamentary under secretaries.

Education secretary Kit Malthouse, who served for just 49 days, got a £16,86 pay off – four times the £4,355 he actually earnt as a salary.

Kelly Tolhurst, schools and children’s minister for 50 days, got £7,920 and schools standards minister for 51 days Jonathan Gullis got £5,593.

Skills minister Andrea Jenkyns, who served 111 days, received a £5,593 pay off.

Michelle Donelan, education secretary for just under two days, waived her severance payment. She was paid £9,048 in salary, but this is likely for her previous role as universities minister.

Meanwhile, DfE directors also got bonuses totalling between £40,000 and £70,000.

Julia Kinniburgh got the largest – between £20,000 to £25,000. She was director general for strategy group but since December has been leading the skills group.

2. £20m in voluntary exit pay-offs

The accounts reveal the full scale of the voluntary exit scheme run by the DfE and its agencies from earlier this year.

This totalled 384 exit packages at a cost of £20.4 million. A staggering 215 of these severance payments were between £50,000 to £100,000 (compared to just three in this category last year).

The department’s turnover remained at 11 per cent this year – which is more than double the five per cent civil servant average. “Most employees leave to transfer to another government department,” accounts stated.

3. £2m college merger write off, £2.8m NFF mistake

The department and its agencies clocked up £39 million in cash losses and abandoned claims in the last financial year. Accounts must show where those individuals losses amount to over £300,000.

An error in “the complex allocation calculation” for the schools national funding formula resulted in an overpayment to a “small number” of local authorities. The largest overpayment was to Surrey County Council which lost the DfE £1.5 million, nearly half the total of the department’s cash losses (£2.8 million). An overpaid grant to Steiner Academies worth £580,000 was also written off.

The largest category for departmental write-offs though was for waived or abandoned claims for funding, totalling £18.6m.

Debts owed to the department by Challenger Multi Academy Trust and Greater Brighton Metropolitan College, worth £2 million each, were waived in re-brokerage deals.

A further £1.2 million linked to the T Level professional development programme, which is run by the Education and Training Foundation, was also written off.

A £400,000 out of court legal settlement is also reported but no further details provided.

4. ‘Financial failure’ likely from high needs deficits

The report sets out six “significant risks” – industrial action, education recovery, school buildings, looked-after children placement market failure, high needs cost pressures and cyber security.

The risk of high needs cost pressures is “critical – very likely”, and the DfE said such pressures were “forecast to continue to increase leading to LAs’ financial failure”.

Despite “substantial cash increases in high needs funding, in the medium term (2-5 years) high needs costs continue to rise significantly”.

This will “threaten the overall financial stability” of councils once rules allowing deficits to sit off balance sheets expire in April 2026 and “undermine efforts to improve educational outcomes for pupils with SEND and improve parental confidence in the SEND and AP system”.

Given the need for “systematic, long-term change to the delivery of support for children with SEND”, the risk is “likely to remain at its current status for the next two years”.

5. ‘Insufficient understanding’ of DfE recovery schemes

The risk to education recovery remains “critical-very likely”, with evidence of “disparities between different groups or pupils with certain characteristics”.

An ongoing risk “therefore remains that recovery is not taking place at the same pace across these groups, potentially maintaining or widening attainment gaps, particularly for disadvantaged pupils”.

The report also warned there “may be insufficient demand for or understanding of education recovery interventions in the sector, causing a lack of engagement on recovery programmes and creating programme underspend”.

6. DfE shielded from energy woes (for now)

The DfE’s energy is bought by the government’s Crown Commercial Service on its behalf.

The report states that CCS “hedging activity” took place before prices started rising last year, “meaning that lower prices were locked in, and the long-term hedging strategy allowed CCS to manage costs during the exceptionally volatile trading conditions seen last summer”.

“By purchasing almost all of 2022-23 energy before the spike, the CCS and the Department was protected from the energy price crisis. It is likely the impact from the energy price crisis will be realised in later financial years.”

7. 1.5k staff data caught up cyber attack

The report noted that two “personal data breaches” were reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) over the financial year.

Last July, a DfE supplier was “subjected to a cyber-attack by a malicious third party”. Department data was “included within information encrypted by ransomware”, prompting concerns 1,451 people could be impacted.

A “personal laptop belonging to a member of staff was lost on a train” in the same month.

But “further updates [provided by DfE] confirmed no personal data was held” on the computer itself – which meant “the likelihood of a risk materialising was considered to be unlikely/low”.

Papers showed another supplier “of a number of contracted services to the department” was targeted by a cyber-attack. It is said to be “an ongoing incident”.

“Departmental data was included within information encrypted by ransomware,” the report added.

“Details were not provided of any departmental impact until late April 2023, at which point an initial referral to the ICO was made.”