Latest news from FE Week

Inclusion 2.0: New funding, new responsibility

Earlier this month, the DfE published the first funding redistribution mechanism under SEND reform: the inclusive mainstream fund (IMF) for 16-19 providers. In all, £83 million will flow directly to post-16 organisations. But with it comes significantly more responsibility.

I’ve spoken with sector leaders, SEND specialists and civil servants to build a clear picture of how reform is likely to play out. From those conversations, I’ve identified five second-order effects that leaders of educational organisations need to understand. This article names them; My deeper analysis piece, tells you what to do about them.

Effect 1: Five tiers not four

The reform defines four tiers of SEND support: Universal, targeted, targeted plus and specialist. The structure creates an ingenious incentive for leaders to absorb more non-complex needs into their universal offer, reducing the number of learners formally categorised as targeted.

Whether this is deliberate or accidental brilliance from civil servants, I’ll leave to your judgement. What’s clear is that educational organisations will create an unofficial fifth tier within universal: one that delivers the personalised adjustments expected at the targeted level, without that tier’s legal exposure or administrative burden. I call this the Ofsted inclusion tier.

Standard universal provision means, for example lesson plans adjusted to the cognitive profiles of each cohort. We’ve built Adaptify, a clinical-grade tool, to automate this without adding burden to educators.

The Ofsted inclusion tier goes further. It requires individual support plans with personalised adjustments, such as targeted learning strategies built around a learner’s own unique profile. We’re likely to see this level of support becoming embedded within universal as standard practice, rewriting the DNA of what ‘mainstream’ provision looks like.

Effect 2: Cat and mouse

Tensions will arise. The government wants fewer learners in more expensive specialist provision. Educational organisations generally want the opposite. General FE college leaders should expect significantly more complex learners sitting within their own responsibility than in specialist. Prepare to work hard for every learner you push up and out of targeted plus. Your specialists’ expertise will be stretched hardest here, across targeted plus and specialist tiers.

The average education, health and care plan (EHCP) requires 68 specialist hours for assessment and planning just to create and issue, yet the average SENCO spends just 11 hours per week learner-facing, with another 11 spent on paperwork.

There are not enough SEND specialists to deliver these reforms at scale. Specialists must be freed from admin, with learner-facing time used as the key measure. Non-specialist educators must be equipped with evidence-led technology delivering on-demand inclusion guidance.

Effect 3: Nonsense-ware

You could say the cavalry has arrived in the form of the inclusive mainstream fund.; the question is whether organisations deploy it against the right problems.

The sector must defend itself against a rising tide of non-validated SEND technologies. Procuring SEND solutions is not like buying antivirus software or a CRM. These tools directly inform decisions covered by the Equality Act, and the educational organisation holds legal liability for the validity of every tool it deploys. This procurement should be treated as a clinical decision. Ask one question: is it independently validated? If they hesitate, walk away.

Effect 4: AI co-creation

Individual support plans (ISPs) will balloon in volume, and there are not enough specialists to create them. Educators will need specialist-level knowledge at their fingertips to produce ISPs that hold up to challenge. Legal challenges from learners and parents are becoming easier to mount, and that trajectory will only steepen.

The answer is not to centralise ISP creation with specialists. Those who know the subject and learner well are best placed to design non-complex ISPs, with AI bringing clinical rigour to non-specialist hands. It’s the capability Cognassist is building for the sector.

Effect 5: Insurance premiums

Once the new SEND legislation takes effect, liability insurers will be watching the first wave of legal cases closely, and pricing accordingly. Expect them to scrutinise your operations: is a validated assessment tool in place? Are AI co-creation technologies deployed? The organisations that cannot answer yes will find their premiums reflect that.

The funding is starting to flow. How you procure and embed evidence-led inclusion at scale should now be on the top of every leadership agenda.

Employers’ contributions to teachers’ pensions ‘very likely’ to reduce – minister

A “considerable reduction” to the amount FE providers contribute to teachers’ pensions is “highly likely” following a revaluation of the scheme, a minister has revealed.

But teachers’ contributions and pension pots are not expected to be affected by the change.

Colleges and other further education providers currently pay a fee equivalent to 28.6 per cent of teachers’ wages every year into the teachers’ pension scheme.

But speaking in the House of Lords yesterday, skills minister Jacqui Smith said the rate is expected to drop significantly amid a review of the amounts paid into public sector schemes.

“[Rates] have gone from 16.48 per cent in 2019 to the current 28.6 per cent,” she said.

“It is highly likely… that there will be a considerable reduction in the average employer contribution rate as a result of that revaluation.”

Any change would come into effect next April and would remain in place for four years.

£12bn lower

Smith noted that the government actuary’s department has written to the Treasury stating the “average employer contribution rate across the unfunded public service pension schemes, of which the TPS is one, is expected to fall significantly”.

Across the schemes “contributions are expected to be over £12 billion lower in 2027-28 than in 2026-27”.

The expected reduction is due to an increase in the SCAPE discount rate, a government assumption used to calculate the value of future pension benefits.

Employee contribution rates of 9.6 per cent on average will not be affected by the change. Pension pots will not be impacted either.

‘Exceptional’ standards should be an achievable goal for providers

This week Ofsted has published an inspection report on Kleek Apprenticeships which finds that the national provider in hairdressing, barbering and beauty therapy has ‘strong’ standards across the board.

Are Kleek ecstatic? Far from it. The previously ‘outstanding’ provider believes that the new findings are a demotion and its leader feels demotivated.

The reason is a deeply held conviction that at least two of the judgements should have been ‘exceptional’ standards.

FIN believes that this latest development in the Ofsted reform process is definitely not a moan that the provider will ‘get over’ in a month or so but of real significance when the Milburn review is calling for a major reset of the skills system to provide more young people with a meaningful start to their lives. Ofsted is part of that system and needs to listen up.

Last year FIN sounded the alarm that exceptional standards would be out of reach to apprenticeship and other work-based learning providers. We feared that only schools and sixth-form colleges could achieve them and six months later, only one adult learning provider in the FE and skills sector has a single exceptional standard despite nine other independent and employer providers each achieving five strong standards.

Hard-working providers are entitled to ask why as we have other examples of FIN members who have found this grade unachievable for aspects of learning that are transformational. They find this very demotivating.

Perhaps Ofsted believes their achievement rates aren’t high enough. Half of Kleek’s apprentices need additional support and yet the inspectorate finds that they achieve as highly as their peers. Many had high levels of truancy at school, in fact they hated school or came from alternative provision. Even with so many requiring additional support, its apprentices have an 80 per cent achievement rate, up from 70.6 per cent last year.

At FIN we support over 200 providers and have supported many through inspection under the revised education inspection framework. Inclusion matters until it doesn’t. A work-based learning provider is not going to achieve a 90 per cent-plus achievement rate if half its intake needs extra support.

Ofsted might be tempted to award ‘exceptional’ if they see something ‘transformational’ for learners. In the absence of specific criteria, inspectors will apparently know it when they see it – an extremely frustrating situation, given our members can point out obvious examples without success.

In Kleek’s case, apprentices are sent to the Paris and London fashion weeks while 96 per cent achieve sustained employment. If going to Paris to work with the world’s top designers and models is not transformational, then I don’t know what is.

As the report acknowledges, other apprentices have been nominated and performed very well in prestigious national competitions, such as the Hair and Beauty Rising Star awards and WorldSkills. But in the ‘next steps’ section, Ofsted wants to see more of a transformational impact. FIN feels that the inspectorate should offer providers something much more tangible in defining exceptional and transformational and we can provide the inspectorate with many examples from our members of what is.

Despite providers facing challenging circumstances, Kleek’s commitment to and investment in quality stands out in the report. Have you ever read in another Ofsted report, “Leaders swiftly cease working with employers who do not provide apprentices with on-the-job training that is of a consistently high quality”? At the same time, the provider wants learners to have positive experiences of education and Ofsted observes in its report, “During Pride month apprentices demonstrated support for the LGBTQIA+ community by creating hidden rainbow hair colouring techniques symbolising hidden protected characteristics”.

As FIN members demonstrate constantly and Alan Milburn says in his interim report, becoming NEET does not have to be inevitable. Two changes are required as part of the system reset that Milburn demands. Firstly and unlike for other provider types, Ofsted doesn’t judge independent training providers on meeting local skills needs, so these providers are prevented from demonstrating to local young people and employers that they do this very well.

Secondly, when a provider achieves strong in all areas, lead inspectors should be mandated to look for examples of exceptional practice.

Milburn writes that his review unashamedly extols the virtues of good work. Ofsted’s reports on Kleek and other providers such as National Grid Electricity Distribution (South West) and Corndel show that helping young people secure this work is not an aspiration but an achievable reality. If the system is to be reset, Ofsted must be part of it.

College free meals rate lifted after backlash

College students will receive the same per-learner funding for their free meals entitlement as school pupils following backlash from further education leaders.

Updated Department for Education (DfE) guidance published today increased the further education free meal funding rate for 2026-27 to £2.66.

The 5p rise comes three months after colleges were told to plan for their free meals funding to be frozen at £2.61 per meal, which would have been lower than the rate paid to schools.

College and student leaders slammed the freeze at the time, describing it as “insulting” and “frustrating”.

Today’s guidance comes a week after Treasury minister Lord Livermore told the House of Lords the government was “actively looking into” the lower rate being offered to colleges.

It also confirmed the previously announced extension of eligibility for free college meals to students from households receiving universal credit.

Electronic credits or vouchers provided by eligible FE institutions must be worth at least £2.66 per meal, the guidance said. Providers can offer more if they “determine it is necessary”.

The uplift comes against a wider funding squeeze on 16 to 19 education and amid further education staff pay rise negotiations currently underway between unions and the Association of Colleges.

In March, ministers were accused of breaking promises when they confirmed the national funding rate for 16 and 17-year-old learners will only rise by 0.5 per cent in academic year 2026-27 from £5,105 to £5,133.

Colleges warned the below-inflation rise would leave providers absorbing the cost of thousands of extra learners under DfE’s lagged funding system.

Farage: I’ll appoint political enforcers to stop colleges promoting diversity

A Reform UK government would ban diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives in schools and colleges, and appoint Whitehall enforcers to ensure compliance.

Following the riots that took place in Belfast and Southampton amid growing racial tensions, Reform UK’s leader Nigel Farage revealed his plans in an essay titled ‘Britain is a two tier state – against white people’ taking aim against what he calls the “toxic ideology of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI)” and claiming that “every section of the state” has been “ideologically compromised”.

He added that in the education sector, “bureaucrats are more interested in diversity than the educational success of the largest group of pupils”.

Under a Reform UK government, Farage said national and local government bodies would be prohibited from engaging in or promoting DEI.

“To ensure democratic accountability, political appointments will be appointed from Westminster into public bodies with a mandate to enforce bans on DEI at a ground level,” he said.

When asked whether ‘public bodies’ included state-funded education organisations such as FE colleges, schools and sixth form colleges, a Reform UK spokesperson responded: “Yes. Under a Reform government, the progressive indoctrination of our children will end.

“Schools will only commemorate accepted civic events, such as St George’s Day/other national days or D-Day.”

Flying the flag

Farage also spoke of the curriculum changes he wants to usher in. He said his government would “end the ideological capture of our classrooms and ensure every pupil in England receives a balanced and patriotic education”.

Every school would be required to fly the union flag, honour St George’s Day in England and mount an official portrait of the King in a visible communal space. Reform UK’s spokesperson did not respond when asked by FE Week whether colleges and sixth forms would need to follow these rules.

A new history curriculum would be launched, which Farage said would be “rooted in honouring our island story with pride”.

There would be no public funding under Reform UK for research or courses attempting to “decolonise” the curriculum.

Farage also said that pupils should not be “forced” to celebrate Black History Month, Pride Month and Refugee Week.

He claimed that in education, white children were being “left behind”, and “the teachers who should be looking out for them are lecturing them about ‘white privilege’, telling them about their ‘responsibility’ to reduce racism, telling them it is impossible for black people to be racist towards those with white skin”.

He pointed to the equality policy of Langley School, a secondary run by the Collaborative Education Trust in Solihull, which he said contains a “fascinating glimpse into how our institutions think”.

Stating that 23 per cent of its pupils are eligible for free school meals and almost half are white British, he said the school promised “embedding EDI within teaching and resources”, “promoting community cohesion” and “instilling in pupils an awareness of prejudice”.

FE Week has approached the school for comment.

Leaders hit back

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said it was “ridiculous” to suggest, as Farage had, that schools and college classrooms had been ideologically captured.

“We completely refute Nigel Farage’s characterisation. Schools and colleges do endeavour to make pupils of all backgrounds feel welcome and supported, and they promote respect and tolerance. These are values which we believe are integral to a peaceful and harmonious society.

“Mr Farage’s plan to appoint political commissars to enforce bans on certain events and celebrations in schools and colleges sounds a little like something that could have come out of the Soviet Union. It is chilling.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, pointed out that colleges serve “highly diverse student populations with people of all ages, races, religions, and with and without disabilities” and that “with everyone, they try to meet their needs to ensure they can succeed”.

He added: “That is not ideological or political, it is simply living by the values which colleges hold dear – everyone matters and the aim is that everyone can belong in the college, for who they are, what they can do and what they want to achieve.

“Colleges are inclusive, caring, fair places where students can succeed and where the diversity in our society is celebrated. I do not recognise the world that is being described in this essay and would be very happy to offer Nigel Farage the chance to visit some colleges to learn more about the fantastic places they are. I am sure he would be impressed and pleased with what he saw.”

Reform UK also intends to repeal the Equality Act and ban any recruitment, training or promotion policies that favour one group over another.

Farage claimed that in the NHS, a “flood of incoming international graduates” have left doctors coming through Britain’s medical schools who have “consistently better performance than their international peers”, unable to find speciality training places and jobs.

PeopleCert pursues former City & Guilds chiefs for £3m ‘unauthorised’ bonuses

PeopleCert is seeking to recover almost £3 million in bonuses paid to former City & Guilds chief executive Kirstie Donnelly and finance chief Abid Ismail after an internal investigation concluded the payments were “unauthorised”.

The Greek-owned awarding organisation announced today that it will pursue the pair over a total of £2.9 million in bonus payments allegedly approved without the knowledge or authorisation of PeopleCert, the City & Guilds board or the charity that previously owned the business.

The move follows the dismissal of Donnelly and Ismail without financial settlement in April for alleged gross misconduct, after they received bonuses of £1.7 million and £1.2 million respectively shortly after PeopleCert’s acquisition of City & Guilds Limited (CGL) in October last year.

But the pair hit back, denying the allegations and claiming they have evidence that both the buyer PeopleCert, seller City & Guilds and their advisers were “fully involved” in the structuring and approval of bonuses.

According to PeopleCert, Donnelly and Ismail “directly authorised and paid bonuses” to themselves and other CGL staff, worth £5 million in total, “without authorisation” from the CGL board, PeopleCert or City & Guilds London Institute.

Pay rises were also allegedly made without formal authorisation.

A PeopleCert spokesperson said: “These payments were not brought to the attention of PeopleCert until December 2025, a month after they had been paid, and there was no provision, board resolution, or other binding instrument that authorised these payments.

“It also found that salary increases for the [executive leadership team] and other colleagues were also made without formal authorisation from the CGL board or PeopleCert.

“These actions were in direct breach of their duties and responsibilities as office holders and caused significant harm to the organisation’s reputation.

“In the case of Kirstie Donnelly and Abid Ismail, we intend to take all action available to ensure the recovery of these amounts (£1.7 million and £1.2 million respectively) and will make appropriate referrals to the relevant authorities.”

PeopleCert said other executives who received bonuses will also be asked to repay them in full. However, payments made to around 60 other staff members will be “ratified” by PeopleCert and “no attempt will be made recover the amounts, given the investigation’s conclusion that recipients were neither fully aware nor instrumental in the scheme”.

The findings came from an investigation carried out by a committee of non-executive directors, led by Michael Milanovic, chair of PeopleCert subsidiary LanguageCert, with support from legal advisers Balfour+Manson.

PeopleCert said a subsequent appeal process, led by CGL non-executive director Richard McCarthy CBE, did not uphold appeals against the dismissal decisions.

The findings have been shared with the Charity Commission, which launched a statutory inquiry into City & Guilds in January following the sale of the historic charity’s commercial business.

PeopleCert’s own investigation has also expanded to look at “allegations of manipulation of information” about the level of investment required to upgrade City & Guilds’ IT systems provided to bidders during the sale process.

In a joint statement through their legal representatives, Donnelly and Ismail, who announced legal action against CGL in April, told FE Week the pair “categorically reject” CGL’s allegations.

They called PeopleCert’s disciplinary process “fundamentally flawed and lacked the necessary independence”, insisting they will be “exonerated”.

They said that in “due course” the pair will present evidence to the courts that “overwhelmingly demonstrates” all bonus payments were “approved, documented and implemented” as part of the transaction process.

The spokesperson added: “It further shows that both the seller and the buyer, along with their advisers, were fully involved in the structuring and approval of the bonuses paid.

“This evidence has also been provided to the other appropriate agencies, including the Charity Commission.

“Our clients acted reasonably and honestly at all times. We therefore remain confident that they will be exonerated and that their dismissals will ultimately be found to have been unfair.”

In an internal email this morning, seen by FE Week, PeopleCert boss Byron Nicolaides told City & Guilds staff the bonus issue has created “a challenging environment” for the business that he was now pleased to “draw a line under”.

He said: “Whilst some will continue to voice their opposition to the private ownership of City & Guilds, we must remember some important context.

“Our acquisition followed a fully intermediated, competitive process involving multiple international bidders, with PeopleCert selected as the preferred party as we offered the highest price and had significant experience of operating regulated products and services.

“We also had the global scale, expertise, technology capability and investment commitment needed to develop the organisation for the long term.”

He claimed that under its charity owner, City & Guilds had been loss-making for the previous eight years, was losing market share, had been issued regulatory fines for “failings of governance and technology control”, and did not have the ability to fund the “scale of transformation required”.

Apprenticeship subcontracting review launched by DWP

A “full review” of apprenticeship subcontracting rules and policy is set to run over the coming months, the government has said.

The Department for Work and Pensions confirmed the move in version one of the apprenticeship funding rules for 2026-27 published today.

It said: “We will undertake a full review of the subcontracting section in July – August 2026.

“This will include a review of the underpinning policy, the rules and evidence requirements and the associated definitions. We will involve sector representative bodies in this review and aim to conclude the review by September 2026.”

Changes will come into effect from 2027 and further details of the scope of the review will be “made available in due course”.

The announcement follows comments made by DWP’s head of funding delivery Tracey Cox at this year’s Apprenticeship and Training Conference, who said officials were looking to update their definitions after finding some providers were failing to declare subcontracting because they were unsure what counts.

In March, Cox said there were around six cases where auditors proposed to clawback all funding handed to providers because rules were misinterpreted.

Under the new rules, DWP said it was “reviewing the definition of a subcontractor to make it clearer who is and who is not a subcontractor and what we mean by directly managed and controlled”.

The intended new definitions have already been included in the funding rules glossary, with any resulting changes likely to take effect from January 1, 2027.

Current and intended subcontracting definitions

De-minimis row back

The DWP had proposed introducing a £25,000 “de-minimis” threshold for organisations to be a subcontractor where they are not on the official apprenticeship provider and assessment register.

This has now been dropped and the existing £100,000 threshold will continue to be used.

However, there is also an amendment to the existing de-minimis to remove the stipulation that this can only be used by providers who have achieved the subcontracting standard. This exemption can now be used by all providers for delivery from 1 August 2026.

Min wage withdrawals and ‘substantial’ job link

Elsewhere in version one of the 2026-27 funding rules is an update that if a provider is made aware that a learner is not being paid in line with the national minimum wage regulations, the learner must be withdrawn from the programme.

A clarification has also been added to state that the outcome of an apprentice’s initial assessment must show a “clear and substantial” link between the job role and the apprenticeship, with the apprenticeship “leading to full occupational competence for that role”.

The draft rules said the provider must agree with the employer “that the individual’s job role has a productive purpose and there is a direct link between the selected apprenticeship standard and the individual’s job role”.

This paragraph has now been strengthened to say the provider must agree with the employer “that the individual’s job role has a productive purpose and there is a clear and substantial link between the selected apprenticeship standard and the individual’s primary day‐to‐day occupational duties and purpose, such that the apprenticeship will lead to full occupational competence relevant to that role”.

New enrichment benchmarks: What colleges need to know

Schools and colleges will be expected to provide broad and varied enrichment activities, celebrate participation and achievement and work with external partners where necessary as part of the new enrichment framework.

The Department for Education has published the eight new benchmarks against which schools and colleges will be able to evaluate their provision and make improvements.

Enrichment activities should cover each of the five categories: arts, sport, nature, civic life and life skills.

Schools and colleges will also be able to use a self-assessment and action planning tool to help them assess their offer against the eight benchmarks.

The guidance is non-statutory, but Ofsted said it would look at a school or college’s enrichment as part of how it assesses personal development from September.

DfE added independent training providers (ITPs) are not covered in the guidance but can follow the benchmarks voluntarily.

But the guidance does apply to young people with SEND in mainstream and specialist colleges.

“Colleges will find the benchmarks and self-assessment tools useful, but they also need practical support to do the planning and build the partnerships which are needed to ensure that every young person can benefit from enrichment wherever they study,” said David Hughes, Chief Executive, Association of Colleges.

He added: “Many of the enrichment funding strands exclude colleges and for the strategy to fulfil its ambitions for young people across the country, there will need to be additional investment in FE.

“We have demonstrated that regional enrichment support can work with additional funding and this could be rolled out across the country.”

Here’s what colleges need to know for each of the benchmarks:

1. Enrichment should align with broader priorities

The first benchmark calls for schools and colleges to establish a “strategically aligned enrichment offer”, which fits in with broader priorities. This includes attainment, attendance, behaviour, careers guidance, curriculum, personal development and wellbeing.

Schools and colleges are expected to have a “structured enrichment offer” which is backed by senior leadership and governors and understood by staff. Schools and colleges should also have a plan for implementation and monitoring, including clear roles and responsibilities.

They should also consider how the offer contributes to achieving development priorities and statutory requirements, and include it in their college development plan where appropriate.

The offer should also be “designed and delivered in alignment with its values, context and curriculum intent”.

Specialist post-16 institution Condover College’s enrichment offer was highlighted as a case study that prepares SEND learners for adulthood. Leaders deliver activities such as safety and digital literacy sessions aim that helps students recognise misinformation, protect personal information online, and understand boundaries and consent in relationships.

2. Provide ‘multiple and varied’ opportunities

Schools and colleges are also expected to provide a “broad and well-rounded enrichment offer” as part of the second benchmark.

These “multiple and varied” activities should be “purposeful, fun and can support a thriving childhood and successful transition to adulthood”.

They should also cover five categories at a minimum. These are…

civic engagement
arts and culture
nature and the outdoors
sport and physical activities
life skills

Schools and colleges should deliver activities regularly across the academic year, including some provision during the day such as during lunchtime or timetabled lesson time.

DfE’s guidance highlighted Waltham Forest College’s coding club and STEM employer-led masterclasses as well as outdoor enrichment such as community clean up and inter-college sports leagues.

In this section, colleges also face an additional expectation to teach relationships and sex education as part of developing wider life and future skills.

3. Communicate with parents and celebrate participation

Parents and students should have “timely, accessible and clear” information about the enrichment activities that schools and colleges offer, including expectations and how to access them.

Schools and colleges are also expected to “hold and communicate high aspirations” for students to participate, and to celebrate participation and achievement.

For example, they could hold awards or give out certificates, link enrichment to personal development or leadership awards, or recognise contributions in reports or college records.

Learners should also be supported in reflecting on their enrichment experiences, and how they have learned or gained new skills from them.

4. Consider student, parent and staff feedback

The fourth benchmark calls for enrichment opportunities to be “shaped by the school or college community”, and schools and colleges should ensure that feedback from students, parents and staff informs what they offer and how it is delivered.

Student leadership of enrichment activities should be encouraged where appropriate, with support from staff or external providers and appropriate safeguards in place.

They should consider the interests and expertise school and college staff, as well as their capacity.

5. Make activities accessible and engaging

Enrichment activities should be accessible and inclusive for all students, particularly those who are at risk of missing out.

This includes those with SEND, vulnerable and disadvantaged learners, young carers, care-experienced children and young people and those who are persistently absent.

Schools and colleges are expected to have systems to monitor participation so they can understand patterns and address barriers, such as by directly engaging with students and parents to encourage participation.

Delivery should also be tailored to the individual circumstances of the school or college as well as the local context and community needs.

6. Work with external partners

Students should have opportunities to take part in activities supported or delivered by “high-quality external partners” as well as those developed by schools and colleges.

Leaders should look at opportunities to work with local, national and virtual partners to broaden their offer. This could range from local sports clubs, FE and HE providers, local, regional and national employers, museums, theatres and libraries and guest speakers.

This could involve upskilling and resources for school or college-led enrichment activities, external delivery of enrichment activities and organising off-site visits. There also needs to be a clear process for feedback and review of work with external partners.

Schools and colleges should also be able to signpost to opportunities that extend beyond their own enrichment offers.

7. Focus on outcomes

Schools and colleges should consider the outcomes its enrichment activities aim to achieve and track them over time.

This could include educational outcomes, social and emotional development, physical and mental wellbeing and wider community engagement.

Schools and colleges should use effective systems for collecting and monitoring outcome-related data, and the DfE said they could explore how their management information systems can be best used for this purpose.

8. Keep improving enrichment offer

Schools and colleges are expected to put in place “consistent and efficient mechanisms” to improve the quality and impact their enrichment activities. For example, they may gather feedback from students, parents and staff.

Areas of improvement could include providing activities across the five categories, participation rates and impact on desired outcomes.

DfE set to publish enrichment goals for colleges

Colleges will be included in new government enrichment benchmarks to be published this week, but ministers have not said they will be eligible for funding from a new £132.5 million activities scheme.

The Department for Education (DfE) and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) have said a new enrichment framework will give schools and colleges “practical tools and guidance” across five areas: civic engagement; arts and culture; nature, outdoor and adventure; life and future skills, including STEM; and sport and physical activities.

It follows last year’s curriculum and assessment review, led by Becky Francis, which said there were inconsistencies in access and quality of non-qualification activity in 16 to 19 study programmes, sparking calls from student services leaders at the time for a dedicated FE enrichment framework.

The government responded to the review saying it was developing guidance for schools to deliver a “high-quality enrichment offer” and would extend the framework to cover colleges.

Then the post-16 pathways implementation plan, published last month, said the forthcoming enrichment framework would be non-statutory guidance for schools and colleges supported by “case studies and additional resources”. It also said DfE would update 16 to 19 study programme guidance ahead of September 2027 to set expectations for the knowledge, skills and behaviours students should develop through employability, enrichment and pastoral support.

In its trail for the enrichment framework, DfE suggested activities in keeping with the framework could include music groups, engineering clubs, debating societies, football clubs, “and much more.”

It also said that complying with the framework will not initially be essential to achieve an ‘expected standard’ Ofsted rating because it is new. Information on a school’s enrichment offer will also be available to parents through new “school profiles”, but this element of the announcement did not mention colleges.

Capacity and funding questions

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said they welcome the intent but “as with many other government announcements, there are several question marks over the capacity” to deliver these aspirations.

“Schools and colleges already strive to provide excellent enrichment opportunities to their students, but they have to operate within extremely challenging financial and staffing constraints.

“Those pressures will not disappear simply because the government announces new policies. It has to focus more on how to turn aspirations into realities, particularly in areas of high disadvantage where these opportunities are most needed.

“We’ll now work with our members to fully understand the implications of the new framework and the resources that will be required to deliver these expectations.”

DfE will soon announce “leading figures” within each enrichment category as ambassadors to “inspire participation, raise awareness and help drive support for enriching opportunities for young people”.

The department also announced a £132.5 million “Every Child Can” scheme. Funding comes from the dormant assets scheme, a government-backed initiative that unlocks cash from financial products like bank accounts and pensions that have been left untouched for years.

It will be delivered “through” schools, community programmes, weekend activities and holiday provision. There was no mention of colleges having access to this funding, but more information was promised “in due course”.