Previous Job: Vice Principal – Student and Staff Experience, Inspire Education Group
Interesting fact: Having spent 14 years in the travel industry, Sarah has travelled the globe, getting engaged in Australia and married in Mexico
Josh Hill
Operations Director, PET-Xi Training
Start date: March 2026
Previous Job: Business Development Director for Adult Education, SCL Education Group
Interesting fact: Josh is a gigging musician and performs in a number of bands, playing rock and blues on bass, keys, guitar and vocals gives him a real avenue of expression outside of the working world
Training providers have warned the apprenticeship units funding model is “not a winning formula” and could choke off delivery before it begins.
Draft funding rules for the new short courses set to be paid for through the reformed growth and skills levy from next month show funding will be heavily end-loaded and paid on two milestones to providers.
The first 30 per cent of the funding band will be paid once the learner has completed 30 per cent of the planned delivery hours. The second milestone payment will come once the learner has completed all hours and passed their skills test.
It means a provider that delivers 90 per cent of planned hours when a learner drops out risks receiving just 30 per cent of the funding.
On top of this, the Department for Work and Pensions said it would keep the “affordability” of apprenticeship units “under review” and could withdraw a unit with just four weeks’ notice.
Providers fear the model leaves them exposed and could dampen their appetite for involvement.
Simon Ashworth, deputy CEO and director of policy of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “As it stands, the methodology places significantly more risk on providers, with funding heavily end-loaded so providers absorb the upfront costs of delivery. This will create real cashflow pressures.”
He added that despite skills minister Jacqui Smith telling FE Week there was no cap on the amount of levy funding employers could spend on new apprenticeship units, the “reference in the small print to DWP being able to withdraw funding with just four weeks’ notice effectively acts as a backstop”.
“Taken together, this is not a winning formula,” he warned.
High risk, low reward
The government confirmed this week that from next month, apprenticeship units would be available for delivery in seven areas: AI leadership, electric vehicle charging point installation and maintenance, electrical fitting and assembly, mechanical fitting and assembly, permanent modular building assembly, solar PV installation, and maintenance and welding.
The content for apprenticeship units comes from the knowledge and skills from existing apprenticeship occupational standards “needed to address specific critical skills gaps”.
Units will be restricted to employed learners aged 19 or older and involve 30 to 140 hours of training, delivered over one to 16 weeks. Learners will need to pass a “skills test” at the end of their course, delivered by their training provider and validated by their employer, with independent assessment being an option.
Initial delivery will be restricted to a “targeted group” of existing apprenticeship providers that already show “strong performance” in the occupational standards linked to the units.
Funding bands and delivery hours for individual units are still being tested with “critical stakeholders”, but should be confirmed from April 1.
Robert Halfon, former skills minister and now executive director of external affairs at manufacturing giant Make UK, welcomed the “strong focus on critical engineering and manufacturing skills” such as welding, fitting and assembly in the newly announced apprenticeship units.
However, he added that the approach to funding their delivery “must be sustainable for training providers, otherwise employers will find themselves once again unable to access training they want to invest in”.
“Too often, the problem that employers encounter with the skills system is a lack of local provider capacity to deliver the training they need,” Halfon told FE Week.
“A funding model that makes it too risky for providers to deliver apprenticeship units only deepens this problem if it means there is little appetite to offer the courses. Providers need to be backed with the right funding from this new flexibility in the growth and skills levy to ensure that they can offer the right training in the right places.”
Ashworth warned that without a meaningful level of funding to incentivise delivery, it is “hard to see strong take-up”.
“It is now for government to demonstrate whether these new products have real substance or risk being superficial,” he added.
A DWP spokesperson said: “These apprenticeship units will offer employers more flexibility to upskill their staff while addressing the nation’s skills shortage.
“As part of their introduction, consultations will be held with employers and providers.”
In Greater Manchester, a quiet revolution has been taking place in Further Education to address these challenges. It hasn’t come from new qualifications, or from policy announcements, but from a bold, new, practical idea, that innovation can be taught, learned and embedded through people.
The Innovation Literacy Launchpad drew on evidence from the GM Further Education Innovation Programme (GMFEIP), funded by Innovate UK, which demonstrated how FE-led approaches can widen participation, build capability and support diffusion in innovation.
The Innovation Literacy Launchpad was developed in response to a well-evidenced gap between technical skills and the real-world capabilities needed for innovation, the programme has, in just a short pilot phase, demonstrated something powerful, that when apprentices are given the tools, confidence and space to think differently, they don’t just learn, they transform how work gets done.
A Practical Response to a System Wide Challenge
Across the UK, organisations like Innovate UK and global bodies such as the World Economic Forum have consistently highlighted the same issue. While industries invest heavily in technical training, the skills that truly drive innovation such as creative thinking, problem-solving, collaboration and experimentation remain largely underdeveloped.
This gap is particularly visible in workplaces where processes go unquestioned, ideas remain unspoken and employees lack the confidence to challenge the way things have always been done.
The Innovation Literacy Programme was designed to tackle this head-on. Rather than treating innovation as abstract or reserved for specialists, it reframes it as something practical that everyone can do, every day. Delivered over eight immersive sessions, the programme takes apprentices on a journey from identifying problems to generating ideas, testing solutions and communicating change.
A Bold Pilot with National Reach
Between October 2025 and March 2026, the Innovation Literacy Launchpad pilot shared this innovate course with 13 colleges across England, Wales and Scotland. In that time, 30 staff were trained as facilitators through a “Train the Trainer” model, enabling them to deliver the programme directly to apprentices in their own setting, with 290 forecast for delivery in the upcoming months.
Facilitator satisfaction reached a Net Promoter Score (NPS) of +64, an exceptional level of endorsement, while through GMFEIP, over 300 apprentices completed the course and reported a positive experience with an NPS average of +25. But beyond the numbers lies something more meaningful, a shift in mindset and behaviour.
Trainers described learners arriving hesitant, unsure, even disengaged, “rabbit in headlights” and leaving as confident contributors, presenting ideas, challenging assumptions and actively seeking improvements in their workplaces. One apprentice summed it up simply: “Now, if I see something that doesn’t make sense, I ask why… and if nobody knows, I get rid of it.”
The shift from passive participation to active problem-solving is at the heart of the programme’s impact.
Apprentices as Agents of Change
A recurring theme throughout the pilot has been the idea of apprentices as “Trojan horses for innovation.” In organisations that may lack formal innovation capacity, apprentices are uniquely positioned as learners and employees, empowered to bring fresh perspectives into established environments.
During the Launchpad, apprentices reported increased confidence in speaking up, greater willingness to share ideas and a more constructive approach to teamwork and problem solving.
Apprentices began identifying inefficiencies, questioning processes and proposing improvements, often for the first time in their real world setting. The programme’s strength lies in its direct connection to real work contexts, where apprentices apply what they learn immediately, bridging the gap between education and impact.
The Power of Pedagogy
What sets the Innovation Literacy Launchpad apart is not just what it teaches, but how it teaches it.
This is not a traditional classroom based course. It is built around facilitation, discussion, reflection and hands-on activity. Apprentices are not passive recipients of knowledge, they are active learners engaging with innovation, which is critical for embedding in the workplace.
Where facilitators fully embraced the approach, sessions were more engaging, participation was higher and outcomes were stronger. Trainers themselves described returning from training “buzzing with enthusiasm,” with that energy spreading across their teams and colleges.
One senior leader captured the emotional impact, “I honestly had a tear in my eye at the end of the session. The excitement of the trainers to go ahead and deliver it is just palpable.”
The sense of possibility, confidence and shared purpose is difficult to quantify, but central to the programme’s success.
Scaling What Works
The pilot has shown that innovation capability can be developed effectively across Further Education institutions and that across the sector there is strong demand nationally. The Train the Trainer model offered a scalable route, enabling colleges to build internal capacity and extend reach.
A recent evaluation report noted that maintaining the integrity of the programme as it scales requires ongoing support, coaching, observation, feedback and communities of practice. During the pilot, a central team played a key role in quality assurance, working alongside facilitators to embed the intended approach which has been deemed essential for future success of the programme.
The evidence is clear that when delivered well, the programme works across a range of sectors, levels and learner groups, from Level 2 to Level 6, and across a wide range of disciplines.
Beyond Apprenticeships
While the pilot focused on apprentices, the potential reach of the Innovation Literacy Launchpad extends far beyond. Colleges and stakeholders have already expressed interest in applying the model to T Levels, Higher Education, staff development and direct employer engagement.
There is also growing appetite for commercial delivery, reflecting the programme’s relevance to workforce development more broadly. At its core, the Launchpad offers a solution to something that many organisations are searching for, a practical, proven way to build innovation capability from the ground up.
Further Education a Catalyst for Change
Perhaps the most significant legacy of the programme is what it reveals about the role of Further Education. Too often the sector is positioned as a provider of technical skills alone, but FE has the potential to be a driver of innovation within local and national economies.
The Launchpad demonstrates this potential in action, by equipping learners with the mindset and skills to innovate and by embedding those capabilities within workplaces, the FE sector becomes a catalyst for change.
As one university leader involved in the programme noted, the approach “demystifies innovation and makes it accessible.” It shows that innovation is not about costly expertise or high tech solutions, it is about people doing things better, every day.
Looking Forward
While the Innovation Literacy Launchpad is still in its early stages, its impact is already clear. The programme has engaged colleges, energised staff, empowered learners and begun to shift how innovation is understood and practiced within Further Education.
Looking ahead to further scale the programme, it will require investment, coordination and a commitment to maintain quality. It will also require a stronger long-term evidence base, tracking how learning translates into workplace impact over time.
In a system searching for ways to boost productivity, close skills gaps and drive inclusive growth, the Launchpad offers a model that is both practical and transformative.
The idea is simple, to teach people how to think differently and make small changes everyday.
To learn more about the Innovation Literacy Programme or to download the evaluation summary, visit https://innovationliteracy.co.uk/
Ministers have been accused of hypocrisy after government departments rushed to enrol civil servants onto level 7 apprenticeships just before public funding was switched off.
Analysis by FE Week shows dozens of level 7 apprenticeship contracts were secured for close to 200 civil servants in the months before January’s funding deadline for learners aged 22 and over. Most were for the controversial senior leader standard.
The cuts were introduced to ease pressure on England’s strained apprenticeships budget and to redirect funding towards younger learners. But the data reveals that departments across government – including those responsible for the policy – made significant use of the subsidy.
The Department for Work and Pensions, which oversees apprenticeships policy, enrolled around 20 staff onto the level 7 senior leadership apprenticeship in November.
And in an apparent case of departmental confusion, it awarded a five-year £2.1 million contract for level 3 team leader and level 5 operations manager apprenticeships – two of 16 standards earmarked for defunding this week – with teaching starting in December. Internal decisions to scale back management apprenticeships were being signalled at the time.
The DWP declined to explain the rationale for the contract awards, or provide the ages of the level 7 apprentices it enrolled shortly before funding was withdrawn.
A government spokesperson said: “Level 7 standards were available to all employers until the point they were defunded for learners aged 22 and over. Government departments are subject to the same rules.”
Sector leaders questioned the “contradictory” move from the government as it proved ministers and officials deemed the defunded apprenticeships as valuable and appropriate.
Rush hour
The rush to secure level 7 apprenticeships followed the Department for Education’s announcement in May that public funding would be withdrawn for learners aged 22 and over from January.
Starts on level 7 apprenticeships spiked nationally last year as employers raced to beat the deadline. It heaped further pressure on England’s apprenticeship budget. Maximum funding available for the two most popular level 7 standards, senior leader and accountancy professional, was £14,000 and £21,000, respectively.
To avoid another cost spike, officials have capped starts for providers offering the 16 standards earmarked for defunding this week.
FE Week analysis indicates at least nine government departments were part of the level 7 spike. Between the initial announcement and the funding cut-off, around two-thirds of level 7 contracts were commissioned in the final quarter of 2025.
The most significant late activity came from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which secured nearly two-thirds of its 16 contracts – covering at least 87 learners – during the last quarter of 2025.
The Department for Education had consistently commissioned level 7 apprenticeships since 2021. Last year, it issued eight procurement notices spanning areas such as AI, systems thinking and senior leadership, with five programmes launching in the final two months before the funding deadline.
Meanwhile, the Department for Work and Pensions, which assumed responsibility for apprenticeships in September, enrolled around 20 employees onto the level 7 senior leadership standard in November.
Caught in a contradiction trap
Apprenticeship leaders said this behaviour from government departments was “entirely predictable”.
“Whenever a funding cliff edge is introduced, you’re likely to see both public and private-sector employers act in a fairly rational way to secure access to that type of provision through government funding,” said Mandy Crawford-Lee, chief executive of University Vocational Awards Council.
“I’m a bit cross if I’m honest. This is just a stupid policy and history will not be kind.”
Ben Rowland, CEO of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said the defunding policy was being driven by artificial financial pressure, not a lack of demand or value.
“Employers, including Whitehall itself, are clearly signalling that these apprenticeships deliver real impact,” he said.
“This leaves the system caught in its own contradictions, with government restricting funding while continuing to rely on these programmes for its own workforce.”
Crawford-Lee added: “If they are deemed valuable enough for central government to utilise, there is a legitimate question now to be asked why they should no longer attract public investment more broadly.”
The Chartered Management Institute has found nearly half (49 per cent) of management apprentices work in the public sector, including health, defence and education.
Petra Wilton, policy director at the CMI, told FE Week that the large take-up of management and leadership level 7 standards by public sector employers gave civil servants a career path into professional management.
She added: “The loss of levy funding for these courses will have an impact on not only the quality of leadership in our public services, but ultimately on the services they provide to taxpayers.”
England’s apprenticeship budget will grow to £3.3 billion in 2026-27, FE Week has learned.
The figure represents a 5.8 per cent rise on the current £3.118 billion allocation, a sum already boosted mid-year by £43 million to meet higher-than-expected demand.
The latest settlement adds a further £180 million, but comes amid ongoing financial strain and controversial funding reforms.
It follows the first-ever overspend of the apprenticeship budget in 2024-25, which forced the government to inject £345 million and pushed total spending beyond £3 billion in 2025-26.
Despite the uplift, ministers are under pressure to rein in costs. Apprenticeship starts have remained largely flat over the past four years, while spending has surged due to the growth of higher-level apprenticeships – predominantly taken by older learners – which are more expensive to deliver.
Meanwhile, participation among young people has fallen sharply. Starts for under-25s dropped by 40 per cent over the past decade, while almost one million young people are now not in education, employment or training – an increase of 248,000 between 2021 and 2024.
In response, ministers are attempting to redirect funding towards younger learners while implementing savings measures.
Popular management apprenticeships are among 16 standards that will be defunded later this year, with caps introduced to prevent a repeat of the recruitment surge seen before level 7 funding was withdrawn for over-21s in January.
It is estimated the move, announced on Monday, could save up to £300 million annually, while savings from level 7 apprenticeships should reach around £200 million.
The changes form part of a wider reform of the apprenticeship levy into a broader “growth and skills levy”. This will expand the scope of funded provision, including the rollout of short courses – dubbed “apprenticeship units” – and new foundation apprenticeships in sectors such as hospitality and retail from April.
New incentives of £2,000 for small and medium-sized businesses hiring 16 to 24-year-old apprentices will also come into force from October, which can be stacked on top of existing incentives of £2,000 for hiring a foundation apprentice.
Treasury top-slice continues
While the apprenticeship budget is increasing, the issue of a Treasury top-slice persists.
Employer levy contributions are forecast to generate £4.5 billion in 2026-27. Of this, around £500 million will be allocated to the devolved nations. Combined with the £3.3 billion apprenticeship budget, this leaves an estimated £700 million not returned to the system.
“Right now, you’re probably standing where the perfumes and aftershaves were,” says Blackburn College’s executive director of student support and experience, Matt Robinson.
He leads me to a classroom for young people who, until recently, were not in education, employment or training. “There is some good in this world, and it’s worth fighting for”, one learner has scribbled on a display board. It feels like a fitting motto for this new ‘Launchpad’ hub, housed in a former Debenhams in Blackburn town centre.
The provision is part of a college and community partnership that Blackburn College credits with bucking the trend by slashing local NEET numbers at a time when national NEET rates have continued to climb.
Blackburn with Darwen Council credits the programme’s “positive impact” for the area’s 16-17 NEET rate dropping from 4.6 per cent last year to 3.3 per cent this quarter.
A standout feature of this centre is its flexible roll-on-roll-off provision, which enables more fragile 16 to 19-year-old NEETs to ease into college life gradually. The college has also teamed up with community partners to support adult NEETs at the site too.
Robinson is “incredibly passionate” about working with partners in “the heart of the community,” on provision that is “small and nurturing compared to the hustle and bustle of college”.
Launched in September, Blackburn College’s chief executive, Fazal Dad, sees the centre as a “new way of thinking about place-based leadership in FE”.
Launchpad’s Katie Torbay, Farooq Imran. Dr Fazal Dad and Matt Robinson
From talking to doing
Dad sits on several local and national boards, including Skills England, and says the issue of tackling growing numbers of NEETs has cropped up regularly. Although “there’s a lot of talking” and “hypotheses”, “nothing actually gets done” about it.
But Dad is no dawdler. Two years ago, he took proactive action in his community.
He had noticed more young people were arriving at college “not ready to learn”.
“The schools didn’t give us the real picture,” he says. Often these students had very poor school attendance and felt daunted by the busy college environment; within the first six weeks of term, many were dropping out.
To cater for this rising cohort, the college sunk £1 million into renovating the former Debenhams and JobCentre building which is a five-minute walk from Blackburn’s main campus. The local authority stumped up a further £50,000.
The original plan was to take on 120 young NEETs. The centre opened in September with 260, reflecting the scale of demand.
Farooq Imran and Akeeb Ahmed
Focus on flexibility
The ‘Future Focus’ programme at Launchpad can take on 16 to 19-year-olds “at any point in the year when they’re ready to re-engage with education”, rather than only when the academic calendar allows, says Dad. He believes this flexibility is “fundamental to genuine inclusion”.
In many areas of the country, colleges partner with the King’s Trust to support NEETs through its personal development programmes. But Robinson points out that these typically 12-week programmes have three fixed entry and exit points a year.
Future Focus’s provision generally starts “as small as possible”, explains head of inclusion Farooq Imran, with the first term spent on non-accredited qualifications to build up resilience, confidence and teamwork.
The curriculum is based partly on the needs of local employers, with a “clear progression road map” put in place for learners to focus on their next steps.
When they complete these initial courses and feel ready to move on, students continue being taught by their Future Focus teachers but on a skills pathway that prepares them for a full course starting at the main campus the following September.
Imran says the provision has not worked for a “handful of people” who have been referred back to the local authority.
But by December, 55 of the initial 260 had graduated onto a mainstream college course and around another 10 were in employment, while Robinson says the others had “purposeful individual interviews” to set them onto alternative pathways.
A party was held in the social hub with games and a DJ to celebrate the learners’ achievements.
One learner benefiting from this flexible transition approach is 18-year-old Akeeb Ahmed.
At 13, he took on the bulk of the housework and caring responsibilities for his three younger brothers, as his mother struggled with epilepsy.
He rarely attended school, fearing one of her seizures might cause her to “fall down the stairs and bang her head”. “I’d rather be at home and know mum was safe than be at school,” he says.
After his mother died in 2024, he moved in with his Nana, who passed away during his first year at Blackburn College, where he was studying a level 2 bricklaying course. His attendance dropped to 36 per cent.
Since joining Launchpad in September, staff have supported Ahmed to secure an ADHD diagnosis. He now values being able to access “a lot more one-to-one support if I need it”.
“It’s a lot quieter here, I feel I can focus better,” he says. “I feel like this place has given me a second chance.”
Ahmed, who is on a construction pathway, took a level two employability course as well as GCSE maths and English, and by January felt ready to return to the main campus. He is now attending taster sessions there in joinery, before potentially starting a joinery course in September.
He is also feeling more confident he will pass his GCSE maths and English this year, as he will be able to take them in a small room to reduce his anxiety.
Similarly, Kasey, 17, was initially so nervous about starting a hairdressing course at the main campus after completing her Future Focus employability course that staff had to walk her down to the salon. She now spends Thursdays in maths and English GCSE classes at Launchpad, and Wednesdays in hairdressing sessions on campus.
“The Future Focus staff help me get to where I want to be – they’re willing to put extra work in for me to prepare for my resits in June,” she says.
Future Focus programme learner Kasey
Small but powerful
In the past, the college would not normally find out which learners had been persistently absent from school until they had already arrived at college.
But now there are better data sharing systems with schools and the local authority to gauge those at greatest risk of becoming NEET, and to transition them into Launchpad from the outset since “prevention is better than a cure”, says Dad.
Future Focus’s curriculum manager Katie Tormay says they also work with schools to find out what a young person’s areas of interest are, so they know “what lessons we can give them to get them interested in a college course for next year”.
Robinson believes there is a “misconception” in the FE sector that NEETs are predominantly “low level” learners, when “that isn’t actually the case at all”. “We have some students that have just had lots of things going on at home, poverty, social, emotional, mental health issues,” he says.
Around 30 young people on Future Focus are currently on level 3 provision. Some have applied to universities.
Tormay says many of Future Focus’s learners have not attended school since year 7, having been classed by the system as ‘electivelyhome educated’ “but not really homeschooled”.
These young people often display low confidence and anxiety.
“Traditional college environments, however strong, can feel overwhelming, overly formal or inaccessible for this cohort,” says Dad. “Launchpad responds directly to that gap.”
Typical FE college classes accommodate between 15 and 25 learners. Launchpad has between eight and 10.
When Launchpad opens at 8.30am, breakfast is provided for all learners, and at lunchtime those entitled to free meals get vouchers to spend at nearby Blackburn market.
“The independent act of going down there makes them feel more part of the community,” says Tormay.
As well as a specialist support team, the centre hosts pastoral and attendance staff who all share a “connect before you correct” approach to working with learners, she adds.
Imran says teachers often have to come into the students’ social hub before classes start to escort anxious learners into the classroom.
For some, Tormay says, “the hardest part is getting them through the door”. She recounts how her team spent the first eight weeks meeting one learner at the entrance, coaxing him in.
A message board in a classroom at Launchpad
Supporting adult too
Launchpad was built on the principle that anyone from the wider community as well as 16-19 year olds can come through its doors and be offered “quality information, advice and guidance on next steps and what they need to get there”.
Tormay says the open doors approach is paying off, with some unemployed parents of Future Focus participants coming forward to seek retraining support themselves.
Launchpad also acts as an educational base for Newground Together, the charitable arm of housing association group Together Housing, which provides education engagement programmes for around 300 adults a week in a designated training room there.
Their provision, funded under the Department for Work and Pensions’ Restart programme, reflects for Dad just how much housing associations have become “community anchor institutions like colleges serving their community”.
The centre is also used by local organisations such as We are Noise, a creative arts and music charity, and Blackburn Foodbank.
And some rooms are occupied by the college’s Skills for Work team and the local authority for short-term re-engagement projects for adults, and on Sector-based Work Academy Programmes (SWAPs) funded via the DWP.
One such programme, Gateway to Blackburn College, offers guaranteed interviews to join Blackburn College as a member of staff.
DWP officials who visited were “very impressed” with the centre, says Robinson.
Another recent college programme was aimed at addressing the shortfall in school classroom assistants by training up 16 people on a week-long level one programme, followed by four-week work placements in schools.
Dad says that though four of those trainees were subsequently offered jobs, at least four others are still volunteering at the schools where they were placed, which underlines the financial challenges schools face.
Duty to serve
Dad describes Future Focus’s wraparound support and flexible approach as being of “high quality”. But quality comes at a price.
He tells me I’ve “hit the nail on the head” when I suggest colleges, funded per learner, are financially incentivised to recruit higher-level students rather than those needing more support, who cost more to teach.
Dad acknowledges that Launchpad “has to pay for the bills” but brings in little financial return, though he declines to discuss the figures. As a result, he admits there are “certain other things” he would like to do at the college that are not affordable.
The fact most learners are only entitled to a free college education until they are 19 is also an issue the college is “trying to navigate”. But he argues the centre is reaping rewards through “system change at a local level” that “redefines what inclusion looks like”. “Colleges as anchor institutions must take this responsibility seriously,” he adds.
Dr Fazal Dad at Blackburn College
Other areas innovating
Dad claims Blackburn is the only centre in Lancashire with such provision, and he is “inundated with requests to see it”.
Elsewhere, FE colleges’ off-site town centre provision has tended to cater for adult cohorts rather than young people. Bedford College Group operates adult entry-level to level 2 provision in town centres in Bedford, Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough.
But in Nottingham, a youth guarantee trailblazer project that launched in October is, like in Blackburn, supporting younger NEETs through partnership work involving the local college.
The Thrive Partnership helps 18-21 year old NEETs from workless families through a collaboration between Nottingham College and East Midlands Combined County Authority, Nottingham City Council, the DWP and community organisations.
Rachel Wadsworth, Nottingham College’s vice principal and the project’s senior lead, says it has involved the college venturing out into community centres in deprived areas of the city to engage young people and their families, in an effort to persuade them to join its employability programmes.
The project started with tea, coffee and cake mornings to meet families, as a “safe introduction to Nottingham College to build trust”. Careers events were also held to “broaden their horizons”.
The project ends later this month and so far of the 60 young people who initially signed up to the programmes, seven have progressed onto a college course and one is going on to university. Wadsworth considers this “very successful” given how challenging it can be to break intergenerational cycles of unemployment.
Back in Blackburn, the Launchpad provision is growing in size as local partners are “starting to understand the provision better and giving more referrals”, says Tormay.
The college is now seeking to launch a supported internship programme at the centre for those whose next step is employment, where young people are provided with work placements, “with a view to that being somewhere they move onto”.
They are also opening a scaled-down version of the Launchpad model for young people in nearby Darwen town centre next month, also in partnership with the local authority.
“Historically, people from Darwen struggle to engage with activity in Blackburn”, says Robinson. “So we’re doing what’s right for the community there as well.”
FE plays a major role in delivering skills, widening participation and ensuring that it supports local economies. However, when it comes to leadership demographics, the sector is comparatively static. Available workforce and governance data show that FE leadership is disproportionately older. This raises questions about succession planning and long-term sustainability.
The Department for Education’s data shows the median age of the FE workforce is in the mid-40s and has remained very stable in the recent years. While there is no specific data in relation to principals or senior executive teams, governance data does provide a useful benchmark. In the 2023–24 academic year, 67 per cent of FE college governors were aged 45 or older. This indicates that strategic decision-making within the FE sector is largely concentrated among older cohorts.
Experience is clearly vital in the FE sector. The issue however is not age itself, but the way it can become an informal stand-in for leadership readiness, which can slow progression into leadership roles.
The experience problem in FE leadership
FE regularly highlights that leadership shortages and succession risk, however progressing into senior roles can often depend on long service instead of clearly defined indicators of being ready. Young upcoming leaders are often encouraged to “gain more experience”, without much clarity about what experience is actually missing or how that can be gained without senior responsibility.
This creates an experience problem. Leadership roles need experience, but meaningful leadership experience is only acquired by being trusted to lead by academic institutions. When pathways are informal or not clear, young capable professionals may stall or end up leaving the sector.
Research which took place in succession planning in English FE colleges support this view. A Liverpool John Moores University study found that leadership development has historically been reactive, with limited strategic focus on trying to identify and nurture future leaders. Reliance on informal networks and established norms restricts leadership renewal and results in existing profiles being selected.
Why generational renewal matters now
The case for younger leaders is not about replacing experience with enthusiasm. It is about having balance. FE operates in a context which is rapidly changing and shaped by digital delivery, evolving labour markets, increasing learner complexity and sustained financial pressure. Leaders shaped by more recent reforms often bring perspectives directly relevant to these challenges.
Younger leaders are more inclined to question current practices and see institutional systems as design choices rather than fixed realities. In a sector which require continuous adaption, this is an asset. When leadership culture equates readiness with age or tenure, these perspectives struggle to get into decision making positions.
Workforce pressure and leadership capacity
Leadership renewal cannot be separated from wider workforce pressures. DfE workforce data shows ongoing vacancies across the FE sector, including 3.9 teaching vacancies per 100 teaching positions and 2.3 management and leadership vacancies per 100 such positions by the end of the 2023–24 academic year. This points to persistent capacity pressures as institutional demand is increasing.
Workforce data further highlights representation gaps. Leaders are proportionally less likely to come from ethnic minority backgrounds or to declare a disability than the wider FE workforce. These patterns suggest that leadership pathways can filter out multiple groups, which includes younger professionals, rather than operating as pipelines which are nurturing and developing younger leaders.
Rethinking leadership readiness
Addressing this challenge does not mean sidelining experienced leaders or lowering expectations. It just requires rethinking leadership readiness. Capability, impact, adaptability and the ability to be able to lead through transformation should carry as much weight as length of service.
Structured leadership pathways, clear progression criteria and opportunities such as supported secondments or cross-college leadership roles would allow young emerging leaders to gain senior experience earlier. This would show that FE values potential alongside experience.
If the sector is serious about succession planning, it must move beyond informal, time-served models of leadership development. FE does not lack young capable leaders. It lacks a system that allows them to lead consistently.
What do the Cook Islands, Latvia, Bolivia and Malaysia all have in common? They’ve all published a lifelong learning strategy.
These are just some of the more recent ones. In the last 30 years, dozens of countries (including Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) have published a national plan or strategy collected by the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.
England is conspicuous by its absence; it has never attempted a full lifelong learning strategy. And the government and opposition parties aren’t likely to provide one any time soon.
In the meantime, adult education is left on “life support”, as the principal of Redbridge Institute of Adult Education recently described it; he said he “feared for the long-term future of our sector”.
So we decided to develop our own in collaboration with learners, partners, stakeholders and allies. A true People’s Strategy for Lifelong Learning.
Each of those countries with a strategy has attempted to place lifelong learning in the context of the wider challenges facing them, connecting it to work, health and the need to build stronger, more cohesive communities.
Most importantly, they have stated that lifelong learning matters, and can be part of every citizen’s life.
So maybe the question is not how we compare to the Cook Islands but rather what we can do to ensure a future for lifelong learning. This is where developing a long-term national strategy comes into its own.
We do it in other contexts. The NHS has a 10-year plan. The government has published its first long-term strategy to tackle homelessness. It even has an over‑arching document, Plan for Change, mapping its most important milestones over the course of parliament without mentioning lifelong learning. If things are to get better, we need a roadmap.
None of the recent policy initiatives; the skills white paper, or recent SEND reforms, add up to a national lifelong learning strategy for learners of all ages, backgrounds and postcodes.
Meanwhile, adult learning participation rates are far lower than 20 years ago, driven by a huge drop in funding levels – with the promise of further cuts to come.
So how can we build a strategy to fix this?
First, by connecting lifelong learning to wider agendas. Learning leads to better health and wellbeing; improved productivity and employability; a better understanding of our neighbours and the wider world; the ability to cope with everyday life in an increasingly complex world, lived in digital spheres as well as in real life.
For our strategy, we’ll be connecting with experts in other fields beyond education including health, community building and place making, employment rights and those tackling hate and misinformation.
A roundtable in Scotland after the May elections will consider whether lifelong learning is thriving and what the key messages for the new government might be.
We’ll be collaborating with the wider adult learning sector, unions, other charities, local authorities and of course our own tutors and colleagues. Anyone trying to do the best for adult learners who is held back by restrictive policies and inadequate funding.
Most importantly, we’ll be amplifying the lived experience of lifelong learners by holding events, publishing stories, undertaking research and providing a platform for them to tell their stories of the difference that access-to-learning has made.
The emerging strategy will have grown organically from a bed of shared experiences, knowledge and connections.
It will feel like an experiment, which is why we’ve called it Lifelong Learning Labs.
Like any experiment we’ll start with an idea – that our communities would thrive if lifelong learning were more central to all our lives. But we want to test the best ways of achieving that by sharing our collective findings and ideas.
By the end of the year we’ll have a core set of recommendations to take forward to the next general election, where we want to see parties adopting the idea of a lifelong learning strategy in their manifestos. We’ll have done some of the hard work for them already.
Further education has become quicker at adopting new technology than teaching the judgment needed to responsibly use it, and our inspection and funding systems reward that imbalance.
Digital platforms, simulations and artificial intelligence are treated as signs of progress and workforce readiness because they are visible and easily quantifiable. The slower work of helping students develop judgment, empathy and professional responsibility is harder to demonstrate, and harder to defend when time is tight.
As a teacher of health and social care, including the health T Level, I see this tension reappearing in everyday lessons. It brings me back to one question: what has to remain human, no matter how advanced our tools become?
I’m not arguing against technology. The issue is what slips down the priority list when systems start valuing what can be logged and audited over what has to be noticed gradually.
This shift shows up clearly in classroom practice. Students are expected to juggle professional judgment alongside platforms, templates and assessment criteria just to progress.
Technology itself isn’t the problem; the problem emerges when FE culture rewards procedural confidence and digital fluency more clearly than critical thinking or ethical reasoning.
That matters for health and social care students. Safe practice means bringing together knowledge, professional judgment and values. Evidence-based practice relies on interpretation, not uncritical adherence to guidance.
Yet in systems shaped by inspection and audit, it is far easier to meet checklist requirements than to show how students are learning to sit with uncertainty.
During a graded observation or deep-dive, folders often speak louder than longitudinal evidence, because inspections are time-limited and depend on what can be made quickly legible.
When judgment is constrained, it shows up in how students relate to uncertainty. FE staff will recognise moments when phones come out or group work slips into multitasking. These behaviours reflect a wider environment where discomfort can be avoided and attention divided.
I see the longer-term consequences of this gap from both sides. Alongside teaching in further education, I work part time as a critical care nurse.
Looking back at my degree, much of the clinical learning was organised around competencies and tick-box skills. Like many nurses, I didn’t really learn how to be a nurse until I qualified.
There has always been a gap between what students are assessed on and what newly qualified practitioners actually need when they are responsible for real people.
I wonder whether this gap helps explain why a significant proportion of newly qualified health and care practitioners leave the profession within the first few years.
The health T Level does a better job of preparing students for the sector than many qualifications that came before it. Reflective practice is embedded, students must demonstrate practical skills to pass, and placements give them experience in real NHS settings.
Even so, students still spend significant time learning systems and assessment demands alongside developing judgment.
Artificial intelligence doesn’t introduce this imbalance; it accelerates it. Students are already using AI tools, and responsibility for managing the ethical and educational implications has largely been pushed down to individual institutions and lecturers.
AI can assist with decisions, but responsibility must still sit with people because it cannot explain uncertainty to a patient or family. If FE doesn’t explicitly teach students how to question and contextualise AI outputs, some may leave college confident with systems but less prepared when guidance doesn’t quite fit or emotions run high.
The problem is not a lack of evidence about what develops judgment, but that our accountability systems are least able to recognise the forms of learning that take the longest to see.
FE sits between policy ambition and what public services are expected to deliver. If education continues to be judged mainly on speed and visible innovation, the slow work of teaching judgment will keep losing ground.
Are our funding models, inspection frameworks and national guidance brave enough to protect the human capacities that public services ultimately depend on?
