Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Prison Education unlocked: The system that’s failing its learners

The prison population is estimated to pass 100,000 by 2030. With re-offending rates starting to increase and new prison education contracts out to tender, Jessica Hill and Sophie Carlin explore this hidden world – and find out what needs to change

After prisoners at HMP Warren Hill in Suffolk have been unlocked from their cells, got showered and had breakfast, they wander over to a building with a sign above the door that reads ‘college’.

Mike Hallatt, a teacher there for PeoplePlus (one of four core education providers operating in prisons) smirks at this.

“Don’t be fooled. It’s all smoke and mirrors,” he says.

The ‘college’ boasts a “huge chapel”, “massive kitchen”, supermarket and medical rooms. But its core education provision is “a tiny office where we’re literally sitting on each other’s laps” and four classrooms – one which Hallatt claims has not been used since courses were “cut back” during Covid, although PeoplePlus says it rotates classrooms.

HM Inspectorate’s last report on Warren Hill found it “excellent”, with “impressive” educational activities on offer. There are far worse prisons for education. But there’s little choice for prisoners over what to learn, with all core courses being only levels 1 and 2. PeoplePlus says its delivery model is “both inclusive and well established from entry level up to level 2”.

Since one inmate, ‘Tom’ (name changed) was incarcerated seven years ago, he’s completed 42 courses – including three level 2 courses in food safety and preparation. But none will help him achieve his ambition of becoming a mechanic.

Similarly, Josh Betford found all the courses he took while imprisoned at HMP Guys Marsh “too easy, teaching me things I already knew”.

“It felt like a box-ticking exercise, they even give you the answers half the time. The focus was on people getting maths and English qualifications and maybe forklifting or bricklaying. But being a tradesman isn’t for everyone.”

He wishes he’d been taught “investing or law, something useful”.

Government funding changes have resulted in a 90 per cent drop in prisoners studying level 3 or above courses since 2010, a 2022 House of Commons report found. Hallatt says his learners are “crying out for decent qualifications. They keep asking me, what does an employer want?”

A poem written by a prisoner who is a student of Mike Hallatt’s

‘Toilet roll’ contracts

After the 2016 Coates Review called for education to be put “at the heart” of the prison system, 11 prison ministers have overseen a decline in both quantity and quality of provision. The number of prisoners doing courses dropped from over 100,000 in 2014/15 to 63,744 in 2022/23.

In 2014/15, four per cent of Ofsted judgements for education, skills and work provision were ‘outstanding’, 20 per cent were ‘good’, 60 per cent ‘required improvement’ and 16 per cent were ‘inadequate’. But by 2022-23, none were ‘outstanding’, nine per cent were ‘good’, 47 per cent ‘required improvement’ and 44 per cent were ‘inadequate’.

Prisons’ chief inspector Charlie Taylor sees this as “catastrophically bad”.

“Prison education was nothing to open the champagne about before the pandemic, but it’s got worse.”

Much of the slide in standards is blamed on the Ministry of Justice prioritising value for money in the contracts it signed in 2019 with providers such as Novus (LTE Group), Milton Keynes College, PeoplePlus and Weston College, to provide English, maths, IT and ESOL classes. (Prisons buy in other education activities under a separate system.)

The University and College Union (UCU) prisons official, Paul Bridge, claims these contracts introduced “a greater layer of administration” and that the “purpose of education has been lost”.

“Educators are tasked with managing the regime, instead of delivering a broader-based educational experience. There is gaming and perverse incentivisation… it’s pretty fundamentally flawed.”

UCU prison education chairperson Brian Hamilton says the “very binary” contracts treat education “like they’re buying toilet roll”. But education can make a “measurable” difference because ex-prisoners are “contributing to society if they don’t re-offend”.

Prisoners are nine per cent less likely to re-offend if they’ve engaged in prison education, research shows. The re-offending rate fell from 31 per cent in 2010 to 24 per cent in 2021, but rose to 25.5 per cent in the first quarter of 2022.

Narrowing the curriculum

The MoJ’s ambition through the 2019 contracts was that “every prisoner can finish their sentence with a basic level of English and maths”. But its focus cut off the opportunity for many prisoners to learn what interests them.

Pierre Reid, 33, found during his seven years in prison that “still having to go through basic maths and English offends a lot of prisoners and makes them shy away from education”.

He took a range of courses, all at levels one and two, apart from a peer mentoring course which he credits with helping him change his ways. Reid, who just got a job at Domino’s, wishes he could have learnt “physics, or astronomy [as I have] interests in that”.

While the level one and two classes are unchallenging for some, more than half of prisoners are believed to be functionally illiterate and there are few courses available for them either.

Hallatt says some of his learners “can’t read or write, and are thrown on courses they clearly shouldn’t be on. They do the courses anyway, just to keep employed… for the money, not anything else.”

Prisoners are paid to attend classes – £13.50 a week at HMP Warren Hill – which Hallatt says is usually spent on vapes and phone credit. Some jails pay inmates less for attending education than work activities, although Taylor believes more governors are now “evening out” the pay differential.

Hallatt estimates that only an hour of his six hours a day of classes is spent teaching, with prisoners socialising for much of the time.

“They talk about nothing more than going home and their parole hearings … it’s fascinating. We don’t stop them.” Similarly, Taylor finds when visiting classrooms that prisoners “often seem to spend more time sitting around chatting” than learning.

But not all prison education is poor.

Taylor says category D (open prisons) inspections have been “slightly better” in the last year. A recent report on HMP Ford found an “impressive” construction school set up with Chichester College Group.

But most prisons are category C, designated ‘training and resettlement’ prisons, locations where provision is “most concerning”.

Officer shortages

Prison education never fully recovered from Covid, with “far too many prisons continuing to operate greatly reduced regimes”, Taylor says.

Of the 51 prison education provider contracts assessed for quality by the MoJ, two-thirds (34) went unrated between October and December 2022 because classroom-based delivery was “significantly restricted” due to “safe systems of work”.

A recent Inspectorate report blamed reduced activity on “insufficient” prison officer numbers, “poor delivery by prison education providers”, “industrial relations” and “overcrowding”.

While the number of prison officers rose by three per cent between 2022-2023, the prisoner population increased by seven per cent. Long-term sickness among officers is on the rise, with average days lost rising from 10 to 14 between 2018 and 2023.

HMP Bedford’s recent inspection report said high levels of long-term sickness was “affecting the delivery of many core services”. Leaders “frequently shut down” education services and the library.

Covid also led to education being provided on the wings, instead of classrooms.

Bridge says this “transition from the talk and chalk approach to developing bespoke packages for learners in their cells” was a “light bulb moment” for some governors, as it could “save money and control prisoners by keeping them locked up”.

Bridge sees it as “inherently unsafe” for educators, with UCU in “proactive discussions” over the issue.

Providers lose out financially when classes don’t take place.

Across five prisons in the first quarter of 2023/24, 18 per cent of planned learner places were lost for operational reasons including prison officer shortages. Only five per cent were lost due to lack of teachers. Across the four publicly run prisons, this represented 1,892.5 education hours lost and £35,197 recoverable from providers.

The MoJ says new performance measures on attendance and learner progress will increase the “priority” of education for prison governors.

A Prison Service spokesperson said: “We know how important education is in helping offenders gain the skills they need to turn their backs on crime. That’s why we launched our Prisoner Education Service and are holding governors to greater account for performance, while rolling out more specialist staff, technology and hardware.

“Our approach is working – with the percentage of prisons rated ‘good’ by Ofsted increasing significantly over the last year.”

But FE Week found that of the last ten inspection reports (since November 2023) Ofsted rated eight ‘inadequate’ (for education, skills and work) and two ‘required improvement’.

The Shannon Trust, working with mentors and mentees in prison to help people read inside HMP Featherstone. Wolverhampton, UK.

Retention woes

Bridge believes that prisoners being “banged up for longer” is leading to “more frustration and increasing violence”.

His reps in the Midlands report rising sexual harassment, and UCU’s “more experienced members” are “concerned about how we’re trained and supported”.

“Younger, less experienced educators don’t have jail craft. They’re not quite aware that some prisoners are well versed in forms of subconscious behavioural control.”

Hallatt sometimes feels “unsafe” in classes, “particularly in the kitchen” among carving knives.

The report into Five Wells, where Weston College is currently advertising seven vacancies, said its head of education “raised serious concerns” about his staff’s “safety”. Taylor has found there are “not enough” teachers to run workshops in “many prisons”.

However, David McBride, education manager for Novus at HMP Isis says his jail is “nearly fully staffed” and “doing really well with retention and recruitment, as are Novus”. The provider is currently advertising 47 vacancies across 50 prisons.

What’s changing?

Many blame problems on education funding in prisons staying the same (around £129 million a year) since 2015, representing a real terms drop of eight per cent between 2019 and 2022.

Another £30 million a year is believed to be spent on contract management. The funding rate for the male prison population is less than a fifth of the rate for students in community-based adult education, analysis by Novus suggested.

The government is not expected to increase funding substantially when new contracts kick in next year. It’s Future Skills programme, launched last year, was intended to provide training in 30 prisons but is only running in 23.

And 12 contracts were published last week for HMP Academies employer-led work programmes, which was intended for 17 prisons. The programmes’ emphasis is on work rather than training, with contracts stating that “the scope, content and pace of learning” is at the employer’s discretion.

A joint DfE/MoJ prisoner apprenticeship scheme launched in 2022 was expected to include up to 300 apprentices by 2025, but so far fewer than ten prisoners have enlisted.

To improve quality, the prison service will be able to claw back up to 10 per cent of funding if providers have not met their targets under the new contracts. Currently, the clawback mechanism’s focus is on service levels rather than quality. Providers will continue to be financially penalised when classes cannot take place due to prison officer shortages.

Last year, heads of education, skills and work and neurodiversity support managers were introduced to over 100 prisons to improve support for prisoners with additional learning needs.

But Hamilton says “you could employ a lot of teachers with that money. These people don’t deliver education, but make others jump through hoops to fulfil contracts”.

Jon Collins, chief executive of the Prisoners’ Education Trust (PET) believes there “needed to be a reset” through new contracts as “there’s a general view that the current set haven’t quite delivered what people hoped”.

But the new model is not substantially different to the current one.

FE Week understands that Weston College, which currently provides education in 19 prisons, is not bidding for lots in these contracts. It did not respond to a request for comment.

Population growth impact

Overcrowding could make it even harder for educators to operate in jails. Longer sentencing saw prison populations rise over five per cent to 87,936 in the year to February, with numbers expected to pass 100,000 by 2030.

“The rate at which new prison places are being created is not keeping pace,” says Taylor. “It’s far tighter than it should be, which makes things very risky. There’s a danger we’ll hit an absolute crisis point in the future.”

Reid recalls how at one prison, “education fell to the wayside” because “they were overwhelmed with prisoners. It just becomes about keeping everyone alive.”

As a solution to overcrowding, the government is seeking to rent prison space from other countries. Collins warns this would make prison education “very difficult and expensive” to deliver.

There are also concerns about the poor state of some education facilities. Milton Keynes College tutors report “rotting walls and doors, mould, leaking roofs requiring buckets, and lack of adequate heating”, while prison observer Danny Barrs describes “classrooms where windows were broken” and “disgusting toilets”.

Digital divide

HM chief inspector of prisons, Charlie Taylor

Charlie Atkinson, training manager at the Dusty Knuckle, a London bakery employing former prisoners, recalls one trainee who never made it to work due to his lack of digital awareness.

“He saw somebody tapping on their Apple Watch and thought he was hallucinating. He’d never seen an Oyster card before.”

Atkinson has been asked to “help ex-offenders learn to use Argos self-checkout machines”, because upon their release the probation service gave them vouchers “to buy a tent and sleeping bag”. Her insights highlight how fast the digital world is moving, and how painfully slow the MoJ is to catch up.

In-cell technology is only so far available in 15 prisons, with four more planned by March 2025. As a separate pilot, 1,500 education-specific offline laptops have been deployed across 35 prisons.

Prisoners can access some online learning materials on education departments’ computers using the intranet programme Virtual Campus. But digital skills courses are “pretty limited”, says Collins.

Hallatt teaches an essential digital skills course that “states quite clearly learners must have internet usage”.

Without it, teachers must design offline resources on how to send emails, so learners “pretend” to send them. Inmates are then “very strictly monitored” to go online in a ten-minute window during exams.

Igniting the learning spark

Sharon Berry, chief executive of Storybook Dads

PET provides 130 distance learning courses to prisoners, including in bookkeeping, running a business, and even beekeeping (for prisons with beehives). Last year, it received around 2,500 applications and funded 1,300 courses.

Collins says their courses help with wellbeing, and they “try to offer things people will find interesting rather than just what’s good for job prospects”.

Some partnerships have begun bringing universities into prisons for teaching, but Collins says most are on hold awaiting new MoJ safety guidance.

Storybook Dads helps prisoners make audio comics for their children. Its chief executive Sharon Betty says prisoners tend to have “poor memories of school” – almost half were excluded – but they feel “more encouraged” to improve their reading or digital skills after making a comic.

Betty recalls an illiterate Irish traveller who went on to learn to read, after the experience of creating an Ugly Duckling comic for his daughter’s eighth birthday moved him to tears.

But reduced prison regimes mean the charity produces 3,500 stories a year now, compared to 5,000 pre-Covid.

“They may not want to go into a formal education setting to learn digital skills. But after they’ve made a comic they’re really proud of it and think, ‘actually, maybe I can learn to use a computer.’ So we’re making those little inroads.”

A comic made by a prisoner for their child, thanks to the charity Storybook Dads

Council tells students to study from home as it cuts transport

Students in Birmingham have been advised to study from home more as their cash-strapped local authority axes local transport subsidies to balance its books.

Birmingham City Council’s cabinet will meet next week to agree its budget which includes savings worth £300 million.

Cuts to services targeted at sixth-form-age students risk excluding the most vulnerable students from education, a local principal has said.

Among over 200 proposed savings is a review of its non-statutory transport support for post-16 students.

Hikes in fees and cuts to services are forecast to save the council just over £7 million.

“We must be candid and recognise that this proposal involves a reduction on what is offered. That is not something the council wishes to do, but rather considers itself driven to by the current financial situation,” the council said.

If approved, the plans will see the fees paid by parents of post-16 students towards travel support, such as minibuses and taxis, increase from £780 to £1,028 per academic year.

The council issued a section 114 notice in September, effectively declaring bankruptcy.

Bankrupt council won’t lose adult education service

City councillors were told to immediately stop all non-essential spending, reduce running costs, and not commit to new expenditure.

Local authorities are only obliged to provide transport support for children of mandatory school age. Sixth-form age students, including those with SEND, are not entitled to transport support from their local council.

The council is seeking savings in these “discretionary” services.

Kim Everton, executive principal of The Hive College, a specialist college in Birmingham, said over 50 per cent of her students currently used subsidised transport to get to college.

“All our learners have SEND and many of them come from low-income families with working parents. If this is removed, many learners will not be able to attend college and many will become NEET (not in education, employment, or training),” she said.

The council is recommending local colleges deliver more of its courses online to reduce the need for young people to travel. It also admits its cuts could lead to students choosing courses based on proximity, rather than career aspirations.

Birmingham is not alone in hiking charges on parents of SEND young people to help fill budget blackholes in local authority finances.

An FE Week investigation earlier this year found multiple examples of cash-strapped councils charging families as much as £933 per year towards travel to and from colleges.

Birmingham City Council has launched a consultation on its plans, but it closes ten days after the full council is due to approve the budget cuts.

A spokesperson told FE Week: “The council is in a challenging period due to its finances, and we understand it is an unsettling time for many of our residents.

“The children and young people’s travel service are already undertaking work to make savings in this area, primarily through a substantial re-tender exercise that was carried out during Summer 2023, these savings have been incorporated into the council’s savings.”

Awarding body writes off £2.5m as T Level recruitment stalls

A major T Level awarding body has written off over £2.5 million because of low student recruitment on the flagship qualifications.

NCFE’s latest accounts, published this week, reveal the charity added the loss to its planned deficit for 2022/23 as an “impairment charge” due to lower-than-expected enrolments on the T Level courses it has developed.

It follows the news that the government’s Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education is taking steps to make the next wave of T Level licenses “more commercially attractive” for awarding organisations as low student numbers and high development costs are leaving awarding organisations out of pocket.

Kris Todd, NCFE’s chief financial officer, told FE Week the write-off was a “prudent” step to accurately reflect the value of T Levels on the organisation’s books.

He said: “T Levels represent a long-term investment by NCFE and as such we recognise their development costs as assets on our balance sheet. In line with financial reporting standards, and subject to external audit, we are required to consider the value of these assets in our accounts each year.”

NCFE’s accounts state that “to date, student enrolments have fallen below expectations”.

“As a result, we have written down our development investment relating to T Levels which has resulted in an impairment charge of £2.5 million in the year,” the financial statements added.

The accounts go on to explain that the charity’s deficit for the year of £6.8 million, and group deficit of £7.9 million, were budgeted for, except for the T Level impairment charge.

Prudent write-down

Guidance from the Charity Commission says charity trustees should typically expect full costs to be met when a public authority is purchasing a service from them.

However, trustees can decide to use charity funds to subsidise or supplement a service purchased from a public authority, but only if doing so furthers the interests of the charity and its beneficiaries.

Todd said: “If we believe the value of the [T Level development] assets are overstated, we are required to make an adjustment. We do not anticipate generating the same level of surplus over the life of the contracts as we initially did and have prudently taken the decision to write down the value of the assets accordingly.”

NCFE generated £43 million in income in its 2022/23 financial year, up from £39 million the year before. Its expenditure however increased to £50.8 million, up from £41.9 million.

Previous accounts explained that the charity had budgeted for deficits because of its “planned and significant” investment in its business, including developing T Levels.

The latest accounts said the charity plans to get back to a surplus position in the next two years as its investment programmes are delivered.

T Level losses

NCFE currently holds exclusive contracts with the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) to develop and award T Levels in education and early years, health and science, and digital.

Ministers last month scrapped the development of the T Level in hairdressing and barbering, which NCFE was contracted to develop, citing low interest from employers. NCFE is continuing with the development of a T Level in beauty and aesthetics with VTCT, though it won’t be launched for students until at least 2025. These courses were originally scheduled for delivery in 2023.

And in July last year, NCFE passed its licenses to develop and award the T Levels in craft and design and media, broadcast and production to Pearson.

Awarding licenses are currently up for grabs for so-called “gen 2” T Levels in education and early years, construction, and digital to replace the current contracts as they expire. A separate procurement is due to launch next month for health, healthcare science and science T Levels.

NCFE is yet to declare whether it will put itself forward to continue to run the T Levels.

IfATE is taking steps to make T Levels more “commercially attractive” to awarding organisations in its gen 2 contracts through a funding model that would guarantee a certain level of profit.

Low student take-up

The new contracts will feature a “demand-sensitive” adaptive pricing model which will mean awarding organisations can charge providers higher fees if student numbers are lower than expected. Fees could also be reduced if student numbers are higher.

Awarding organisations with generation two T Level licenses will be allowed to make a “one-off adjustment” to the entry fee it charges providers if the projected number of students increases or decreases over the contract term.

The move was slated by college leaders when FE Week broke the news last month for forcing providers to pick up the risk for low T Level recruitment at a time when students and parents are questioning the value of the qualifications in light of the government’s plans to replace them with the Advanced British Standard.

A survey carried out by the Association of Colleges in October 2023 found that 11 of the 18 T Level subjects being taught in colleges had under-recruited in at least 50 per cent of colleges. The T Levels which under-recruited the most in the surveyed colleges were in digital, health and construction.

DfE’s latest T Level action plan reported 1,750 students starting a T Level in digital, 2,150 in education and early years and 1,800 starts in health and science in 2022.

Several colleges cancelled T Level courses this year, blaming falling GCSE maths and English pass rates among school leavers.

Post-16 education needs consensus (and better data)

Politicians right across the UK have placed a high emphasis on the role that post-16 education and training can play in achieving a vast range of policy goals, from improving social mobility and productivity to increasing civic cohesion and individual well-being.

There have also been a dizzying array of policy reforms and changes over time. In a new joint EPI/SKOPE report released this week, we chart the different approaches to post-16 education and training across the four nations of the UK, and differences in educational and labour market outcomes. This article draws out the key lessons for England.

Participation is high

There are some clear positives on education participation in England. Participation in full-time education among 16- and 17-year-olds has risen from 40 per cent in the 1980s to about 84 per cent today. There are also fewer young people not in education, employment or training (so called “NEETs”), down from 7-8% in the 1990s and 2000s to about 5 per cent today. We have also seen rising levels of participation in higher education, with 37 per cent of 18-year olds in England accepted on to higher education courses in 2023 as compared with 25 per cent in 2006.

The growing level of participation in full-time education has come partly at the expense of young people doing part-time education, training or work-based learning, such as apprenticeships. In the 1990s, 12-13 per cent of young people aged 16 and 17 were enrolled in some form of work-based learning. This has fallen over time, and now stands at just 7 per cent. Indeed, only 20 per cent of apprenticeships are taken by under 19s in England today, which compares with 37 per cent in Scotland and 50 per cent in Northern Ireland.

This reflects active decisions by policymakers in Scotland and Northern Ireland to focus apprenticeship on young people. In England, apprenticeships have been more focused on adults, partly to achieve arbitrary and (now defunct) targets for so many millions of apprenticeship starts. Despite a cross-party consensus on the benefits of apprenticeships for young people in England, they have largely become a means of re-training for adults.

But inequalities persist

There are, however, many sources of concern when it comes to inequalities. Parental background still plays a disproportionate role in shaping children’s life chances in England. Around 80 per cent of young people whose parents working in professional occupations possess A level or equivalent qualifications, as compared with less than 60 per cent of young people from working-class backgrounds. This then further maps into differences in higher education participation, employment and earnings.

Of greatest concern is the difficulty in tracking inequalities across all areas of post-16 education and training. With the exception of higher education, it is surprisingly hard to examine socio-economic inequalities in post-16 education and training over time. It is even harder, if not impossible, to compare socio-economic inequalities across the four nations of the UK. This is a great shame as there is potentially much we could learn from the diverging approaches being tried across the UK.

And policy churn doesn’t help

Perhaps the most distinctive feature of post-16 education and training policy is the sheer volume of changes and reforms over time. The post-16 education sector has been in state of permanent revolution for at least the past thirty years, particularly technical and vocational education.

There are major changes almost every three years, and significant reforms are rarely left enough time to bed in or achieve their goals before they are replaced by new ones. The latest example is the creation of T Levels and their planned replacement by an Advanced British Standard even before they have been fully rolled out. Constant policy churn implies that the system is at best flawed and at worst failing. This has the potential to harm the morale of staff and students.

A political consensus is needed on the goals and ambitions that can be realised by the post-16 education and training system, well-funded institutions and structures, and a stable set of qualifications.

This may sound fanciful within the UK’s adversarial political system, but the main political parties are not actually that far apart on this issue. They all describe wanting to see a parity of esteem between academic and technical qualifications, a desire for well-funded institutions and the potential benefits from young people doing apprenticeships. The missing elements have been delivery, funding and a willingness to leave reforms to bed in.

Despite its faults, the Butler Act of 1944 was a clear example of political consensus across parties that enabled policymakers to achieve ambitious goals for schools, and it created a system that remained in place for decades. The same is needed now for further and technical education.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 452

Sandra Warren-Smith

National Delivery Director, JTL

Start date: January 2024

Previous Job: Operations Director for Skills, PeoplePlus

Interesting fact: Sandra says the best holiday souvenir she has brought back home is a dog

Neil Bates

Chair, Gen 2

Start date: January 2024

Concurrent Job: Managing Director, Technical Professional Education Ltd

Interesting fact: Shunning university after his A-levels, Neil’s father insisted he walk to the Jobcentre, some 6 miles from home. He came back later that day with a job… working in the Jobcentre!

Colleges facing long delays for severance pay approvals

Colleges are waiting months longer than expected for government approval on severance payments to outgoing staff, in the latest red tape headache imposed on leaders since reclassification.

Following the Office for National Statistics decision in November 2022 to class colleges as public instead of private sector bodies, the government outlined that colleges must apply for approval for special severance payments to departing employees.

Approvals must be sought for payments of £50,000 or more, where they are equal to three months’ salary or more, an exit package of £100,000 or more, or where the employee earns over £150,000.

The application must go to the Department for Education, who claim the process should take just a few weeks to confirm or deny approval. The process can however take longer if it decides to consult with the Treasury department or requires further information about the payment.

Experts told FE Week that the process of seeking severance approval has been “inconsistent” in cases to date.

“We advise clients that they should expect at least a couple of months on any application, even for a fairly straightforward one. In some cases, they have seen it has taken a lot more than that,” said Ben Wood, a partner at law firm Eversheds Sutherland.

“What we’re hearing from clients is that there is some uncertainty around timescales and information, particularly in regard to decision making processes. Efficiency is key here, and colleges are seeking a consistent, streamlined process.”

In one case, involving Bishop Burton College, leaders appear to have applied for approval retrospectively.

According to its latest 2023 accounts, the land-based college made two special payments of £15,636 during the financial year and £12,430 on 31 August 2023.

Both payments were equivalent to three months’ gross salary and fell under the rules for approval.

The accounts state: “The college has applied for retrospective approval from the ESFA for both cases and await their response.”

It is not clear why the college made the payments before going to the ESFA for approval.

Bishop Burton College declined to comment when approached by FE Week, but it is understood it is still waiting for a response.

Wood said: “I think it’s so easy to fall foul of some of these rules. We’re always saying to be cautious, be prudent about these things. But I can see how some colleges wouldn’t think about it necessarily.”

Wood, an employment law expert who works with colleges on reclassification rules, added that he didn’t understand why FE colleges are subject to the three-month salary contingent when academy trusts are not.

“Colleges are uncertain why they are subject to that extra limit. I don’t believe that applies to government departments or academy trusts,” he said.

Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive of the Association of Colleges, also questioned the rule.

“The three-month threshold is low, and with college pay averaging £30,000. This means DfE sign-offs will be required for payments of less than £10,000 in some cases.

“There will be odd cases where a college made a mistake, and we assume that officials will take a sensible approach to allow everyone to focus on the more important issues.”

In the government’s support and intervention guidance, published a month after reclassification, the DfE said it could place a college into intervention if it makes a “significant or recurring” unauthorised transactions.

Concerns over the severance approvals delays come just weeks after college leaders raised issues about delays in receiving government permission to hire senior staff on salaries of £150,000 or more which is causing waiting times of up to five months.

DfE admitted approvals were taking longer than planned and promised to “streamline” the assessment process an update the guidance.

No tolerance: The true cost of resit reforms

Colleges and training providers face fines of around £45 million annually, if current trends continue, under the government’s bombshell English and maths resit funding reforms, FE Week analysis suggests.

Enraged leaders have warned of the “significant” financial damage this will inflict on their budgets as they slam ministers for blindsiding the sector without consultation.

Demands for the “out-of-the-blue” changes, described as a “sledgehammer to crack a nut”, also appear to have fallen on deaf ears with ministers expected to reject calls for a suspension.

The Department for Education announced plans last week, during half term, for post-16 providers to teach students a minimum of three hours a week of English and four hours of maths if they failed the subjects at GCSE, or risk losing funding. Teaching must be in person.

Under the controversial and refreshed “condition of funding” policy, the Department for Education will clawback funding for any eligible learners who have not enrolled to do resits from 2027.

Currently, penalties only kick in when the number of students breaking the condition of funding rule exceeds 5 per cent of a provider’s total 16 to 19 cohort. Funding is removed for each student above the tolerance level at half the national funding rate.

The tolerance was put in place in the early days of the policy after officials recognised there were some students who could not meet the condition of funding for reasons outside a provider’s control.

For example, learners who are on their core aim for more than 42 days and then withdraw without having 42 days on their English and Maths, or those who cannot cope with a programme where they are studying English and maths as well as their core aim due to health challenges not covered by an EHCP (education, health and care plan).

But DfE officials have decided to halve the tolerance to 2.5 per cent in the academic year 2025/26, before removing it completely from 2026/27.

FE Week analysis of the government’s 16 to 19 allocations data shows that since the condition of funding policy was introduced in 2014/15, funding reductions of £43.6 million have been made across the sector.

But if the total number of students who did not meet the condition of funding is multiplied by half the national funding rate, those fines would have ballooned to £375 million if zero tolerance had been applied.

For 2021/22 there were 22,490 students not meeting the rule across 2,811 providers, but only 209 providers (7 per cent) were above the tolerance and received fines of £3.58 million. If zero tolerance was applied, then 1,313 providers would have been penalised to the tune of £47 million. This is based multiplying the non-compliance numbers with half the then-national funding rate of £4,188.

FE Week’s analysis shows that levels of non-compliance have dropped since the policy was introduced but has remained between 20,000 and 25,000 students in recent years – a level which has concerned officials.

Asked why the DfE has decided the scrap the tolerance, the department only said: “Currently, use of the 5 tolerance of non-compliance with condition of funding prior to funding penalties is leaving students without mathematics and English support that they are eligible for.”

But a source close to the DfE told FE Week the department decided to clamp down on the resits policy after internal research showed the most economically disadvantaged students were not meeting the condition of funding, and the tolerance was being misused.

“In some cases, colleges are just not enrolling the most disadvantaged learners in English and maths because they are the hardest to convert in terms of attainment,” the source said.

They explained that the 5 per cent tolerance was “left there as a flexibility” amid calls for the condition of funding policy to be scrapped altogether. But for many years the threshold has been used routinely instead of exceptionally, in the eyes of the DfE.

“The tolerance was meant to be used as a margin for error at the start of the policy. But some colleges are now using the 5 per cent as their starting point.

“A number of schools and sixth form colleges have completely flown under the radar because their entire resit cohort is under 5 per cent of their total study programme cohort, so the condition of funding penalty hasn’t applied to them.”

James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association, said there “should always be a tolerance to allow institutions to make professional decisions about individual students”.

He added: “If there is a problem with how the tolerance is being used, publish the evidence and focus on those with a very high level of non-compliance.”

General FE colleges are the provider type most impacted by the resit policy changes as they take on most students who finish their GCSEs without a pass in English and maths.

‘This is a sledgehammer to crack a nut’

London South East Colleges consistently goes above the 5 per cent tolerance and receives six-figure fines annually. Without the threshold, its fine in 2021/22 would’ve been £735,000 instead of £250,000.

A college spokesperson said this is predominantly due to high numbers of low-level ESOL learners who cannot access entry-level 1 or higher.

“These are often looked after children or unaccompanied minors, many of whom will, in time, have an ECHP assessment but have not been in the country for long enough. Language is a huge barrier, as well as many having significant mental health issues due to previous experiences,” the spokesperson said.

“In an already challenging financial context, removal of the tolerance will further impact our ability to provide high-quality education and skills for the most vulnerable learners.”

United Colleges Group (UCG) had 359 students not meeting the funding conditions in 2021/22 which resulted in a £270,000 fine. If zero tolerance was in force the penalty would’ve grown to £750,000.

A UCG spokesperson said the removal of any tolerance “presumes that colleges are not already working to ensure that all learners understand the importance of continuing to study English and maths, which is not the case”.

Colleges that have sat between zero and the 5 per cent tolerance in recent years are angered about being brought into scope for penalties after claiming to have followed the process diligently for years.

Activate Learning had 163 eligible students who did not meet the condition of the funding in 2021/22, which is 2 per cent of its 7,943 cohort of 16- to 19-year-olds. Without the tolerance, its fine would have been £340,000.

Cheri Ashby, deputy chief executive of Activate Learning, said: “When the condition of funding policy was first implemented, there was no tolerance and it was soon deemed to be financially punitive on colleges.

“For many colleges, Activate Learning included, there are students who we simply cannot get to meet the threshold for reasons out of our control. This includes people who may have been withdrawn from their main aim after day 42 but whose last English/maths enrolment didn’t pass day 42, or those who are struggling with attendance due to mental health challenges not covered by an EHCP.

“We have diligently followed the process, yet despite this we see on average 2 to 2.5 per cent of our students not meeting the criteria. This means that while the first year of the phased removal won’t impact us, after that there will be significant financial implications.”

Ashby added this move, coupled with the introduction of the face-to-face minimum teaching hours for English and maths, means “we will need to recruit more teaching staff to deliver this, something that presents us with a challenge in an already competitive market where there is a shortfall of qualified staff”.

Over 100 independent training providers also deliver 16 to 19 study programmes each year and are set to be hit by the condition of funding changes.

Nacro has scores of non-compliant students each year. The provider’s principal and director of education and skills Elise Temple said: “Nacro Education works with some of the most disadvantaged young people, some of whom have disengaged from education entirely before coming to us. The 5 per cent threshold ensures we can apply careful professional judgment to individual student needs and make decisions about the most appropriate programme mix at a given point in time.

“Taking away this threshold reduces our ability to do this. A one-size-fits-all approach to educational funding risks compounding the challenges of the most vulnerable young people.”

Learning Curve Group also has a large 16 to 19 cohort annually. Chief executive Brenda McLeish said the reforms “disproportionally impact those learners who are most disadvantaged and struggled to engage with maths and English at school”. She suggested: “Perhaps improvements to this area in school would have been a better starting point.”

Funding consultant Steve Hewitt said removing the tolerance needlessly penalises providers for circumstances that the department has agreed for nearly a decade are out of their control.

“This is a sledgehammer to crack a nut,” he told FE Week. “Where is the evidence that DfE are using to make this decision? It feels to me like someone wanted to look ‘cool and hard’ in front of a minister rather than working with the sector to understand why there might be more learners failing to meet the condition of funding.”

Minimum hours here to stay

Department for Education rules haven’t stipulated a minimum number of teaching hours for those resit students until now.

From September 2024, full-time resit students will be “expected” to study at least three hours per week for English and four hours for maths and pro-rata for part-time learners.

This study should be “stand-alone, whole-class, in-person teaching, with any additional support, such as small group tuition or online support, supplementary to these minimum classroom hours”, according to the new rules.

The minimum hours will only be an “expectation” in 2024/25 to “reflect that despite best efforts not all institutions may be able to meet this from as early as September 2024”.

But they will become a strict rule from 2025/26 from which point funding reductions will be made in cases of non-compliance.

FE Week understands the DfE had become concerned that colleges had moved away from offering these sorts of teaching hours after the Covid-19 pandemic.

The DfE said: “The minimum hours of classroom teaching reflect established practice across providers pre-pandemic, and we know that most settings are already meeting them or on a journey towards this. By mandating teaching hours, this will ensure this progress is consistent across the country, so no learner is left at a disadvantage.”

Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes has called for the new rules, which go alongside the “modest” funding of £375 per learner, to be suspended while alternative solutions are drawn up.

“It will damage the life chances of the students it is meant to help, it is unworkable because of the low pay in colleges making recruitment of new maths and English teachers almost impossible, and it flies in the face of the work DfE is doing to simplify the system. Perhaps most worryingly, it shows how little trust there is from DfE in colleges,” he said.

The DfE appear to have rejected the demand. Asked if it would suspend the rules, the department told FE Week: “We will continue to work closely with the sector through this phased implementation to deliver on the shared ambition to support students to progress in these crucial subjects.”

Tightened up rules you may have missed

FE Week understands the DfE had become concerned that multiple colleges and providers were entering lower attainers on the same level of English and maths courses, instead of progressing them to higher level courses in line with the rules.

Condition of funding guidance has now been changed to explicitly state: “Institutions must be able to demonstrate progression for students enrolled on maths and/or English qualifications. In most cases, we expect that it will be appropriate for students to study for a qualification at a higher level than they have already attained, rather than just improving their grade at the same level as their previous achievement.

“When a student is studying for a qualification at the same level as a previous achievement, institutions must have evidence of why the qualification is the best choice for the student.”

Students with special educational needs and/or disabilities and an EHC plan, who are assessed as not able to study towards either GCSE or stepping stone qualifications, can be made exempt from the condition of funding.

FE Week understands the DfE had become concerned that providers were exempting all SEND students with EHCPs, so officials have changed the wording of the rules to state: “Institutions must consider all exemptions on a case-by-case basis. There is no blanket exemption for whole institutions.”

Destinations unknown: ILR data cut angers MCAs

The government’s “shock” decision to stop collecting destination and progression data through the individualised learner record (ILR) has angered mayoral combined authorities.

Department for Education officials released next year’s ILR specification on January 31, and revealed the destination and progression entity is to be removed.

It means that colleges and training providers can no longer log their destinations and progression data, often used for Ofsted inspections and mayoral combined authority (MCA) performance meetings for adult education budget contracts, through the central ILR system from September 2024.

The DfE told FE Week the data field was “identified by the FE sector” as “something they struggle to complete, with providers claiming it as time-consuming and that it results in poor quality data”.

A spokesperson added that the department had also ceased to use the destination and progression data for monitoring outcomes and instead was now using the longitudinal education outcomes (LEO) dataset which has “better quality data on destinations”.

The decision has prompted mixed reactions from different provider types across FE.

Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said he understands the destination field has been dropped as a “simplification measure, and we welcome this”.

“The ILR is a lengthy process for colleges, with at least 100 data fields for each student, and more if they’re taking multiple qualifications, so there is definitely scope for rationalisation and improvement,” Gravatt added.

However, Holex, the representative body for community education organisations, said the announcement was a “surprising turn of events” that was made without consultation or rationale and no alternative way to record the data offered.

There are now fears that learning organisations will have to scrabble around to find individual new systems to demonstrate the effectiveness of their programmes to MCAs, without any new funding to cover costs and no framework to give advice on what definitions should be used.

Sue Pember, Holex’s director of policy and former skills lead in the DfE, said: “While the process of inputting data into the ILR may not have been flawless, many learning organisations successfully extracted meaningful insights for Ofsted inspections and mayoral combined authorities’ performance meetings.

“The sudden disinterest from the DfE has raised concerns within the sector. Learning organisations are now faced with the challenge of selecting systems that not only meet their needs but also produce comparable data for inspection and performance reports.”

Simon Connell, chief executive of the Baker Dearing Educational Trust, which represents University Technical Colleges, called for the decision to remove destination and progression data from the ILR to be reviewed.

“Knowing where young people progress to once they leave – whether that is university, an apprenticeship, employment or nowhere – is useful for measuring how education is tackling skills gaps and promoting economic growth,” he added.

The types of destination data submitted through the ILR includes whether the student moves into employment, unemployment, an apprenticeship or another further level of study like higher education. Progression data is when a student moves from one year of a course to the next.

Officials have however been concerned that the data mostly shows intended destinations rather than real destinations.

LEO data links together administrative data from education, social care, and the labour market to enable DfE to study people’s journeys through education and into the workplace. While it is more robust than ILR submissions, LEO data works on a five-year lag.

Experts who spoke to FE Week predict that there could be a rise in mayoral combined authorities creating their own destinations data collection tools because they want to know that the money they are spending through the adult education budget in one year is helping people get jobs next year.

MCAs appear to have been blindsided by the DfE’s decision.

A West Midlands Combined Authority spokesperson told FE Week: “We are hugely disappointed in the DfE’s decision to remove the destinations field from the ILR. It is a collection and measure that we have found incredibly important in MCAs over the past few years. It has enabled us to work with our providers to get a full understanding of the impact of what we’re funding.

“We weren’t consulted by DfE which is equally disappointing considering well over 50 per cent of the AEB is now devolved. We will now have to replace the ILR destinations data with our own form of collection.”

Office for Students to investigate uni’s subcontractors

An investigation has been launched into “potential concerns” over a university’s subcontracting arrangements which include a further education college and multiple private providers.

The Office for Students (OfS) is looking into the governance arrangements and quality of courses delivered by partners of Leeds Trinity University.

The OfS said it has identified “potential concerns that require further scrutiny”

This is believed to be the first time the higher education regulator has launched an investigation specifically into a university’s franchising and validating arrangements.

Leeds Trinity lists seven domestic and two international “academic partners” that deliver foundation to master’s level degrees on its behalf.

For example, Waltham International College, a private provider which was graded ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted in 2022, delivers three bachelor’s degrees with foundation years in partnership with Leeds Trinity.

Leeds Trinity badged degrees are also offered at Applied Business Academy, Global Banking School, LD Training Services, Results Consortium and Scholars School System.

Degree courses at Barnsley College are validated by the university.

Just over 7,300 students were on subcontracted out courses in 2021/22 according to OfS data. Most of them, 6,540, were full-time undergraduates.

Student numbers in four UK partner private providers grew to “over 9,000” according to the university’s 2022/23 accounts.

The OfS refused to explain whether its “potential concerns” related to a specific contractor but said its investigation will check the quality of courses on offer, the effectiveness of the university’s management and governance and its compliance.

“The investigation will consider whether Leeds Trinity University has complied with general ongoing conditions of registration, and any matters relevant to the provider’s authorisation for degree awarding powers in relation to its partnerships,” the OfS said.

It stressed that launching an investigation does not mean the university has necessarily broken any rules.

If the investigation reveals a breach, the OfS can impose conditions of registration, monetary penalties or revoke degree awarding powers.

A Leeds Trinity University spokesperson said: “As a responsible higher education provider we understand and take seriously our obligation to comply with all relevant rules and guidelines to meet the sector’s regulatory requirements. Leeds Trinity University will work with the Office for Students to ensure transparency and assurance in relation to the institution’s franchise partnership arrangements.

“Widening participation is at the heart of Leeds Trinity’s ethos and has been for many years. Franchise partnerships are one of a number of ways in which the University enables social mobility and raising aspirations in groups traditionally under-represented in higher education.”

It comes a month after the National Audit Office published a damning report on higher education franchising which called for greater oversight in light of fraud and abuse.

The government’s audit watchdog found that 53 per cent of the £4.1 million of student loan fraud in 2022/23 was at franchised HE providers, even though franchised students only make up 6.5 per cent of Student Loan Company funded students.