Starts on level 7 apprenticeships rocketed 345 per cent in the final two months before funding was switched off for people aged over 21 – amounting to nearly 10,000 more than the previous year, new figures reveal.
Ministers controversially axed funding for the highest level apprenticeships from this January in a bid to divert resources away from executive training and towards opportunities for dwindling numbers of younger apprentices.
Stats released today covered apprenticeship starts for the first two quarters of this academic year, August 2025 to January 2026.
Starts over both quarters combined increased by over 50 per cent in the lead up to the withdrawal of funding. There were 26,200 level 7 starts between August 2025 and January 2026, a 51.9 per cent increase on the same period the previous year.
It means level 7 starts represented 11.6 per cent of all starts reported for 2025-26. At this point in 2024-25, they made up 8.5 per cent of all starts.
But level 7 starts began rocketing, particularly on the senior leader and accountancy standards, since September 2024, when the government first announced it would remove public funding from level 7. Ministers confirmed in May 2025 that funding for level 7 apprenticeships for those aged 22 and over would be removed from January 2026.
Soaring starts
These figures, which are provisional and can increase as training providers submit further data returns, reveal the extent of the rush on level 7 starts piling pressure on the stretched apprenticeship budget.
Increases were modest in the first quarter of this academic year; 7 per cent in August, 10 per cent in September and 15 per cent in October.
But starts soared in quarter 2, increasing by 123 per cent in November and 845 per cent in December, the final month public funding was available.
In volumes, this means there were 7,576 level 7 starts in December 2025 compared to 802 in December 2024.
In January, once funding was removed for new level 7 apprentices aged 22 and above, starts dropped by 93 per cent from 3,106 in 2024 to 207 in 2025.
Senior leading the way
As expected, the sharpest increases in level 7 apprenticeship starts continued on the controversial senior leader standard. Today’s figures showed over 5,000 more apprentice senior leaders starting programmes in the five months leading up to the funding cut-off, 9,624 up from 4,264, compared to the previous year.
The pre-funding withdrawal rush on this apprenticeship, which attracts up to £14,000 in funding per apprentice, was particularly acute.
November saw 2.4 times more starts than the year before (3,043 up from 1,271), and December’s starts were 12 times higher than the year before (3,395 up from 274).
It means senior leader starts more than doubled in the months leading up to funding withdrawal, shooting up by 126 per cent.
But there was a larger jump, albeit with smaller volumes, in the senior people professional apprenticeship. Starts tripled in the run up to January, from 473 in 2024-25 to 1,321 in 2025-26, a 179 per cent increase.
For the accountancy and tax professional apprenticeship, the second most popular level 7 after senior leader, starts were up 32 per cent year on year between August and December.
Professional rush
Analysis broken down by individual training providers reveals the extent to which some companies rapidly expanded their level 7 intakes by hundreds of learners.
Specialist accountancy training provider Kaplan Financial recruited 2,954 level 7 apprentices between August and December 2025, 726 more than over the same period the year before – a 33 per cent increase.
BPP Professional Education also grew their level 7 offer over the period. Their senior leader starts grew from 71 over the whole of 2024-25 to 144 in the first five months of this year. BPP also recorded 190 senior people professional apprentices in the five months before funding was removed, compared to 164 in the whole of 2024-25.
Other examples of training providers that beat, or nearly beat, their annual total for level 7 apprenticeships in the months preceding defunding include QA, Knowledgebrief, Best Practice Network and University of Reading.
Market entrants
FE Week analysis found 19 training providers began delivering level 7 apprenticeships for the first time in the run up to the funding cut off.
Tend Training entered the market clocking up its first 480 starts across all levels between August 2025 and January 2026. Of those, 188 level 7 senior leaders were started before the funding dried up.
Just IT Training, Manchester Metropolitan University and The Opportunity Provider each recorded over 100 starts on senior leader or senior people professional apprenticeships between August and December despite not delivering them before. Others with smaller first-time entries over that period included Peabody Trust (21 senior leaders), Bournemouth University (15 solicitors) and Mary Hare (13 teachers for the sensory impaired).
The national apprenticeship achievement rate has risen to 65.4 per cent for the 2024-25 academic year, just missing the government’s longstanding target.
Data shows almost two-thirds of apprentices are successfully completing their training and assessment, with the proportion slightly shy of the 67 per cent ambition first set by ministers in 2022.
The target, introduced by then skills minister Alex Burghart, was widely viewed as “ambitious” considering the rate sat at just 51.4 per cent at the time, with sector leaders questioning whether it could be achieved by the end of the 2024-25 academic year.
But the overall achievement rate on apprenticeship standards hit 60.5 per cent last year and has now risen a further 4.9 percentage points.
Meanwhile, the retention rate on apprenticeship standards has been boosted by 4.8 percentage points, rising from 61.9 per cent in 2023-24 to 66.7 per cent last year. It means 33 per cent of apprentices dropped out before completing their training.
In a letter to the sector, work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden praised the improved picture but urged for achievement rates to exceed 70 per cent “in the coming years”.
He said: “This is another good result which speaks to the hard work of providers and employers alike.
“It is our collective focus on excellence that has brought us success, but we understand that quality is wider than achievements – it is also about learner experience, good delivery, and long-term value to the country. While many apprentices move on for positive reasons, the greatest value for the individual, the employer, and the economy comes from full completion.
“To maximise the impact of this investment and building on the strong foundations providers and employers have helped to create, I would like to see achievement rates reach and exceed 70 per cent in the coming years.”
McFadden added that the government “will not hesitate to intervene” where quality is at risk as new “products”, such as foundation apprenticeships and apprenticeship units, are introduced.
Ben Rowland, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “This is a genuinely strong set of results and a clear sign of sustained effort from learners and providers across the country. Seeing achievement rates rise again to 65.4 per cent is no small feat and reflects the focus, resilience and professionalism of the sector over a number of years.
“What makes this particularly striking is how close we now are to the ‘stretch ambition’ set by the then skills minister at AELP national conference in 2022. At the time, that felt out of reach. This progress should give real confidence that, even in a period of significant change, the system can continue to improve outcomes.”
ITPs grow the most
Independent training providers (ITPs) continue to dominate the apprenticeships market, accounting for 193,700, or 65 per cent, of the total 299,510 leavers in 2024-25, and saw the biggest increase in achievements.
Achievement rates for ITPs shot up 5.7 percentage points from 57.7 per cent to 63.4 per cent.
Achievement rates in FE colleges also improved, but at a lower rate, to 65.7 per cent from 62.3 per cent. Just under 55,000, or 18 per cent, of leavers trained at an FE college in 2024-25.
Apprenticeship achievement rates improved in each provider type except schools and sixth form colleges in 2024-25.
Officials categorise universities which deliver degree-level apprenticeships in an “other” category. Achievement rates for this group were higher than any other provider type, improving from 68.6 per cent to 73 per cent.
Multiverse dips as other large providers soar
Lifetime Training had 14,960 leavers last year, more than double the next closest provider, Multiverse, and saw its achievement rate soar 10.7 percentage points from 40.5 per cent to 51.2 per cent.
And while Multiverse scored a slightly higher achievement rate of 52.6 per cent, this was a 6.4 percentage point drop on the previous year.
Multiverse was one of four top-20 apprenticeship providers to record an achievement rate fall in 2024-25.
Marr Corporation recorded the largest increase among the giants, rising 17.6 percentage points from 42.6 per cent to 60.2 per cent.
The Royal Air Force recorded the highest achievement rate among the largest providers, hitting 81.3 per cent.
Only one training provider – Dyson Technical Training Limited – was redacted from the achievement rates stats this year due to unreliable data.
The provider, which is part of the global technology firm, was judged ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted in 2024 but decided to put a stop to its degree apprenticeship programmes that year.
Dyson was approached for comment.
Health and care drives national rise
All but one sector subject area – social sciences – witnessed an achievement rate increase. Health, public services and care had one of the most notable changes after scoring a rate of 66.8 per cent, up 7.4 percentage points on last year.
Health, public services and care accounted for 84,250 leavers last year, the second highest number after business, administration and law with 88,680, which itself saw a 5.1 percentage point increase from 60.4 per cent to 65.5 per cent.
Science and maths recorded the largest achievement rate increase of 8.3 percentage points, moving from 66 per cent to 74.3 per cent.
Level 5 is staying alive
Achievement rates increased at all levels, with level 5 showing the biggest increase since last year – rising 6.6 percentage points from 59.6 per cent to 66.2 per cent.
Level 3 was close behind with a 6.3 percentage point rise from 60.1 per cent to 66.4 per cent.
For the third year in a row it was level 4 apprenticeships with the lowest achievement rate – 60.9 per cent – while level 6 apprentices remain the biggest achievers at 69.3 per cent.
19-23s score highest achievements again
Apprentices aged 19 to 23 remained the group that record the highest achievement rates for the third year running – rising 3.7 percentage points from 63.6 per cent to 67.3 per cent.
The biggest jump, however, was in the 24-and-over category with a 6.1 percentage point jump from 58.8 per cent to 64.9 per cent.
Ministers scrapped the English and maths functional skills exit requirements for adult apprentices aged 19 and older with immediate effect in February 2025, which could have had an impact on the rise in those age groups.
However, the achievement rate for 16 to 18s rose 3.8 percentage points from 60.5 per cent to 64.3 per cent – a similar rate rise to 19 to 23s.
Ethnicity and SEND gap shrinks
The gap between white and ethnic minority apprentices has continued to narrow.
There was a 3.3 percentage point gap in favour of white apprentices in 2024-25, down from 5.3 the year before and 6.8 in 2022-23.
The combined achievement rate for ethnic minorities (excluding white minorities) was 62.7 per cent, compared to 66 per cent for white apprentices.
Meanwhile, the gap between apprentices with learning difficulties and those without has also shrunk.
There was a 3.6 percentage point gap in favour of apprentices without learning difficulties in 2024-25, down from 4.5 the year before.
The achievement rate for apprentices with learning difficulties was 62.3 per cent, compared to 65.9 per cent for those without.
Most deprived improve the most
The overall achievement gap between apprentices from the most and least deprived postcodes has also narrowed.
Officials use the index of multiple deprivation (IMD) to classify the home areas of apprentices into five quintiles of relative deprivation.
In 2024-25, the achievement rate for apprentices from the most deprived areas was 62 per cent – a 6.1 percentage point improvement from 55.9 per cent the year before. For those from the least deprived areas, the achievement rate increased 3.9 percentage points from 64 per cent to 67.9 per cent.
This means there was a 5.9 percentage point gap in achievement rates between the most and least deprived, down from 8.1 in 2023-24.
Colleges and training providers continue to support large volumes of learners through Functional Skills and GCSE resits, often alongside complex vocational programmes and increasing pressure on staff as policy expectations evolve.
Following the education and skills white paper, demonstrating progress and reducing resits in English and maths is now a clear priority for government, with this focus increasingly reflected in Ofsted’s inspection approach. As a result, training providers and colleges are under growing pressure not just to deliver these qualifications, but to evidence impact and improve outcomes more consistently.
Pass has developed a solution that supports this approach through evidence-based maths and English delivery, giving educators and learners confidence in when a learner is ready to pass.
Removing the Barrier
Maths and English remain a barrier for many learners, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. At the same time, tutors are managing increasing workloads, balancing delivery, assessment and administrative responsibilities.
However, with the right tools and support in place, meaningful progress is possible. Pass is proud to support HIT Training (HIT), part of The Opportunity Provider group, whose experience in working with a large and diverse apprenticeship population reflects this. Many of HIT’s learners arrive without prior success in English and maths, often carrying negative experiences from school:
Many of our adult apprentices left school without GCSE English or maths… the prospect of tackling these subjects alongside a demanding apprenticeship can feel overwhelming… getting the right starting point is essential in breaking down these barriers.
Micaela Barlow FIH, Quality and Curriculum Director at The Opportunity Provider
Improving Pass Rates
Many providers are now moving towards more data-driven delivery models, using insight to target interventions more effectively and improve learner outcomes.
At Pass, this approach underpins the design of the platform, which brings together the full learner journey in one place, from initial assessment and diagnostics through to structured learning and AI-powered mock exams.
For providers like HIT, this joined-up approach has addressed a long-standing gap:
Until now, we had not found an integrated initial assessment, diagnostic, and exam-preparation system that worked cohesively. Pass has changed that.
The impact of a more structured led approach is already being seen in delivery. At HIT, working with Pass has driven significant improvements in both engagement and achievement, with first time Pass rates now above 80 per cent:
Our success rates, already strong, are now exceptional… first-time Pass rates have soared beyond our expectations… learners are more confident, more willing to practise, and more motivated to succeed.
Effective Reporting
Alongside improved learner outcomes, educators and curriculum managers using Pass are also seeing operational benefits, including a significant reduction in marking time and improved visibility of reporting.
Pass is designed to support learners, tutors and senior leaders, combining an accessible user experience with detailed insight into performance and progress.
As HIT notes:
“Pass is an accessible, well-designed platform that just makes sense. Its intuitive interface, high quality learning resources and reliable reporting tools create a supportive learning environment for all users.”
Support from Awarding Organisations
Awarding organisations are also rethinking how they support centres beyond the final assessment.
Through their partnership with TQUK, Pass has developed a digital mock assessment platform that brings together diagnostics, past papers and automated marking in one place.
TQUK has long placed innovation at the centre of its approach, from remote invigilation to digital certification. This partnership builds on that foundation by extending support throughout the learner journey.
As TQUK explains:
We aren’t just invested in the outcome; we want to support learners throughout their journey… the ability to sit mock exams digitally gives learners an extra layer of comfort… they can benefit from instant feedback through AI marking.
Chris Brown, Head of Sales & Marketing at TQUK
TQUK past papers, previously only available as downloads, are now embedded directly into the Pass platform, allowing learners to complete them in a digital environment with immediate feedback.
Looking Ahead
As the sector responds to the findings of the skills white paper and increasing scrutiny from Ofsted, it is becoming essential for educators to ensure their maths and English delivery can clearly evidence progress and demonstrate that learners are entered for GCSE and Functional Skills exams only when they are ready to pass. There is now a more effective way to reduce ongoing resits and improve outcomes.
For providers reviewing their approach, the message from HIT is clear:
Book a demo with Pass now. You have everything to gain from exploring what’s possible.
To find out more about how Pass can support your provision, see the links below.
Ministers are being urged to bring funding for a scheme supporting looked-after young people in post-16 education in line with rates paid in schools, after an evaluation found wide inconsistencies across England.
A report into the national rollout of the pupil premium plus post-16 pilot, published this week, highlights significant variation in allocations. Some councils received as little as £110 per student, compared with £2,630 per pupil premium plus funding for looked-after children aged under 16.
Pilot leads said the additional funding – used to boost engagement and attainment among disadvantaged learners – was helping to “push back” the cliff edge of support at age 16. However, they warned that a lack of parity with school funding was placing pressure on provision.
The research tracked three cohorts of local authorities that joined the pilot between 2021 and 2025 and found persistent gaps in funding and delivery.
In 2023-24, councils received an average of £413 per student – around six times less than the £2,630 available for school-age pupils.
Virtual school heads called for the Department for Education to overhaul the post-16 funding formula so it mirrors the statutory pupil premium plus in schools, alongside providing long-term funding certainty.
Although funding was confirmed for 2025-26, it remains unclear whether the programme will continue beyond that point.
Two-tier system
The post-16 pupil premium plus pilot launched in 2021 with £3 million in funding for local authorities to appoint virtual school heads. These leads work with colleges, training providers and social workers to improve outcomes for looked-after young people and care leavers aged 16 to 18.
Thirty local authorities joined the first cohort, followed by an additional 28 in the second year and a further 94 from 2023-24.
DfE has spent around £40 million on the scheme in total so far.
The evaluation explored the programme up to the 2023-24 academic year and found earlier cohorts received higher overall allocations. Cohort 1 areas were awarded an average of £94,706, compared with £57,539 for those joining in cohort 3.
This reflected a funding cap that ensured councils in cohorts 1 and 2 did not see reductions of more than 15 per cent year-on-year. The cap was removed in 2024-25, meaning all authorities are now funded using the same formula.
Researchers said this change, alongside the expansion of eligibility beyond further education colleges to all post-16 settings, including apprenticeship providers, contributed to falling per-student rates.
Estimated funding per learner stood at £900 in 2021-22 and £920 in 2022-23, before dropping to £413 after eligibility widened in October 2023. Across the full 2023-24 academic year, this equated to an average of £355 per learner.
In 2023-24, average rates varied by councils depending on when they joined the pilot: £522 for councils in cohort 1, £440 for cohort 2 and £361 for cohort 3.
The report warned this was creating a “postcode lottery”, with allocations ranging from £110 to £1,257 per learner.
“This is despite DfE’s attempts to make funding allocation equitable across virtual schools and again suggests a postcode lottery effect in real terms,” it said.
Flexibility limits evaluation
Some variation also stemmed from how local authorities chose to use their funding.
Across all surveyed virtual school heads, the majority of funding (53 per cent) in 2023-24 went towards direct work with young people. Activities included tuition, provision of IT equipment, ESOL, mentoring, targeted NEET prevention work and enrichment activities.
The remaining funds were directed toward joint working and the virtual schools (23 per cent) and “support” for post-16 settings (21 per cent).
However, researchers said these activities were not mutually exclusive.
“For instance, where virtual school heads have chosen to allocate all or most of their funding to create a dedicated post-16 role in the virtual schools, other activities and outcomes are expected to flow from that role relating to all three types of activity,” the report said.
“The flexibility of the funding has allowed virtual schools to tailor support to local needs. However, variation between levels of funding, what this equates to per young person in real terms, the level of the virtual school’s pre-existing provision or staffing, and the variation in what the funding is used for creates a potential postcode lottery in terms of the level and type of support available.”
The report added: “While structured procedures existed for approving exceptions, the flexible application of funding criteria could lead to inconsistencies across local authorities, creating a potential postcode lottery in access to support for looked-after children and care leavers.”
Leaders called for a revised funding model that is not purely per-student, suggesting a guaranteed allocation to fund at least one dedicated post-16 role in each authority, topped up with individual allocations per eligible young person.
Around 75 per cent of virtual school heads reported using funding to create new posts or expand existing roles.
They also called for multi-year settlements, warning that short-term funding cycles were hindering strategic planning.
One lead said: “Our school improvement plan is centred around three-year goals in our journey – unfortunately, the time-limited element means many plans we have for post-16 have often been short notice or one-off projects, nor can we enhance our structure further with permanent or longer-term posts.”
The Department for Education has been approached for comment.
Chief executive Bill Jones tells of his route to Luminate’s top job via TEFL training, how the group is juggling Leeds’ teenage population spike, and the potential for colleges taking over cash-strapped universities
Before becoming chief executive of the third-largest education group in the country, Bill Jones faced the most challenging moment of his 11 years as its deputy principal, and the ultimate test of his own core values.
A teenage population spike in Leeds arose at the same time as Luminate had stretched itself thin to increase its market share, causing the perfect storm of surging demand and depleted cash reserves.
Luminate’s leaders would have to decide whether to risk burning through their remaining cash to lease new buildings, or play it safe and turn young people away.
In the end, they chose “to stretch our available cash reserves to their limits rather than have more NEETs in Leeds”, says Jones.
In January 2025, Luminate’s cash balance was £2.4 million, equating to six cash days, against a target of at least 25. The situation required “very careful management”, but it was “ultimately worth the sleepless nights”.
Since Jones took over from Colin Booth as CEO in January, Luminate’s cash forecasts have remained tight, fuelled by £2.4 million of in-year growth funding this year as it continues expansion to meet demand. But they are “much improved” on last year.
Bill Jones
Pudsey pride
New sixth form colleges don’t come around very often, but despite the risks, Jones is proud of Luminate’s new Pudsey Sixth Form College, which opened in September and recruited 150 students towards its target of 200.
Opening academic provision in Leeds allows the group to free up space for more technical and vocational provision.
However, Luminate opposed the previous government’s decision to approve a new sixth form college in Keighley, where the group already runs a college providing A Levels.
Jones believes that the “ideology of markets deciding” where to open educational provision, rather than being led by demand, has “led to sub-optimal outcomes and inefficiencies across the country”. At the time, Booth lobbied fiercely against the plans, which were later quietly shelved.
Spaces for places
Booth was never afraid to stick his head above the parapet to defend the rights of the underdogs of the FE world, and Jones appears to be cut from the same cloth.
Bill Jones of Luminate with Jeffrey the grouchy cockapoo
But being new in post, he occasionally throws anxious glances at his head of communications, fearing he has put his foot in it with his candid nature.
“You’re looking uncomfortable,” he says, looking across at her again. She casts a strained smile back at him.
Lying at our feet is Jeffrey, Leeds City College’s cockapoo therapy dog.
Unlike Jones, who comes across as warm and approachable, Jeffrey is “a bit grouchy” as “he’s fed up with people stroking him and prodding him”. An unfortunate frame of mind for a therapy dog.
We are sitting in Jones’s office at his Park Lane campus in Leeds, which is bustling with science and healthcare students.
To house this cohort in the future, Luminate wants to create a new health science academy in a nearby office building called Livingstone House.
Luminate received £8 million in extra post-16 capacity funding from a £20 million package for Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire (as the two areas with the highest teenage population spikes). Much of that went on a 127-year lease for Livingstone House.
The funding was meant to create up to 1,500 extra places, but it was not enough.
The building’s air distribution system was designed to circulate enough air for around 100 people on each floor. Jones needs it to be able to accommodate at least double that number. This means just “one or two” of the building’s six storeys will be ready by September.
Build, Bill, build
Lately, there is barely a corner of Luminate’s estate that has not been subject to building work, funded through a £32.1 million Department for Education loan, plus various capital transformation and post-16 capacity funding pots.
The last two years have not been plain sailing. The owner of a neighbouring business park threatened to launch a judicial review challenging Luminate’s plans to rebuild Harrogate College.
Although this never happened, Luminate had to seek DfE approval to divert money the department had lent them for that rebuild to spend instead on a construction project at its Park Lane campus in Leeds, after hitting cashflow challenges. The FE Commissioner was consulted.
An issue also emerged around a Park Lane block not fully meeting DfE specifications for an educational building, which was deemed by Luminate’s board to present a “reputational risk” with the DfE.
Luminate’s board at the time expressed “some reservations in light of the financial challenges and risks”, and the “conflicting priorities” of a much-needed IT replacement programme and the group’s inability to progress its staff pay award.
Actual income was £3 million lower than budget, and the group’s loan covenants were “significantly closer to the threshold than they had been in the past”.
Luminate’s Park Lane campus
HE domination
While cashflow and construction issues have caused Jones frustrations, he lights up as the conversation moves to an area he is much more upbeat about; the potential for much closer collaboration between colleges and universities. For him, this is “part of what’s so exciting about working in FE at the moment”.
With universities’ finances hitting the buffers and the sector unlikely to be bailed out by any future government, Jones believes we will soon see the first FE college group taking over its local university.
Would he consider Luminate ever doing so?
“Absolutely, if it was in the interests of students and meeting regional skills needs,” he says.
He believes “the more forward-looking” universities and college groups are already “beginning to have those conversations”.
Jones points to a “really interesting paper”, Radical collaboration: A playbook, which charts possible types of collaboration between education partners. He believes that “it doesn’t have to be forced or one party taking over the other party”, and “federations or strategic alliances” will become “more and more common”.
“What could be so powerful about it is the ability to co-create pathways from people’s starting points through to where the jobs are. It’s definitely one to watch.”
Luminate is already well-versed in HE provision. It operates a higher education institution (Leeds Conservatoire) as a wholly owned subsidiary, as well as its own university centre in Leeds.
But Luminate’s particularly large HE portfolio has left it exposed to the difficulties that market is facing; the latest finance record shows HE numbers at FE colleges are down 30 per cent in the last three years.
“Universities have been trying to replace the international students that they’ve lost with domestic students, so there’s more competition,” says Jones.
Luminate’s HE provision has declined recently, but Jones says “we’re growing our way back out again by making our courses niche, and employer focused – so not the sort of thing that’s duplicated in universities”.
Bill JOnes with his former boss, Colin Booth
Staying in Yorkshire
Luminate generated £143 million in income in 2024-25, which is not far off that of FE’s national college groups. But Luminate is firmly rooted in West and North Yorkshire, and Jones has no intention of expanding its geographic footprint.
Jones claims Luminate is “not predatory” and is “about place”. He believes that “distant” national groups “can’t have that responsiveness to local needs when the people making the decisions don’t understand the communities or even the region, never mind the nuances of the local communities”.
Luminate also sponsors a Leeds-based multi-academy trust, White Rose Academies Trust, made up of three secondaries and a primary school. Luminate experienced challenges in its chains of command over the MAT – “there was a vision to have a collaboration that perhaps was a little bit ahead of its time,” Jones admits.
Attempts were made two years ago to merge the MAT with another trust, which never came to fruition.
Jones says these days the college group has a “really good” relationship with its schools, one of which, Leeds West Academy, Luminate collaborated with to build the new Pudsey Sixth Form College. But there are “grey areas” in terms of the management structures of college-sponsored MATs.
Bill Jones as a baby
Teaching to travel
Jones may have seemed destined for a career in education; growing up, he was head boy at his school in Tamworth, Staffordshire, with a primary school teacher mum and PE teacher stepdad.
But their experiences put him off the idea of teaching, and it was only after graduating with a philosophy degree from the University of Liverpool at a time when “graduate jobs were hard to come by” that he succumbed to the idea of teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) as a way to explore the wider world.
He started off his travels in Madrid, but grew so fond of its late-night party scene that he “got stuck” there for two years rather than continuing his globetrotting. But his fear that he might end up like his middle-aged TEFL teaching colleagues who were still on “exactly the same salaries” as him prompted him to return to England and do a PGCE.
Bill Jones as a youngster
Champion for ESOL
His TEFL experience makes him a passionate advocate for the value of English teaching provision in communities. He sees Greater Lincolnshire’s recent decision to stop funding ESOL as “incredibly short-sighted, entirely politically driven through a very peculiar lens and very, very damaging”.
“Were it to happen in Leeds, it would create a very large problem where people are not able to access the provision that engages them and gets them into employment where there are huge shortages,” he says.
Greater Lincolnshire’s mayor Andrea Jenkyns was MP for Morley, near Leeds, for nine years and “visited our college many times”.
Jones points out that illegal immigrants cannot access ESOL, which is what makes the policy “so pernicious”.
“We’ve got to be careful about that becoming more widespread in the UK post an election,” he adds.
Andrea Jenkyns
His visionary boss
As he climbed the career ladder at successive colleges, Jones says he always tried to see the principals he worked under as potential role models.
“You learn from them what to do and what not to do, as much as anything.”
His first teaching job in England was in a small inner-city college, East Birmingham College, where he taught maths and A Level sociology (a new course at the time) instead of English, the subject he had intended to teach.
His college’s “controversial and outspoken” principal at the time, Tony Henry, did not believe in having staff-only areas of the college or his own office, and was known to make tea for his cleaners.
Henry was “visionary” when it came to qualification reform, and was “constantly travelling to the US” to research their model of foundation degrees, which at the time were unheard of in England.
Jones credits Henry with inspiring him to become a “civic leader” by showing him that “the power of FE is not just about how many students pass qualifications, you can do a lot more than that as a leader”.
Jones says Leeds is now a place that exemplifies Henry’s concept of colleges “at the centre of their communities”. The city has “visionary leaders who have come together” from the local authority, universities and NHS trusts as well as its colleges.
The Leeds Anchors network of large employers pools their resources and shares joint targets; its initiative to keep procurement spend in the local area has, Jones says, brought “millions of extra pounds into the city”. Its members have agreed to make a “concerted effort” to recruit people from “priority neighbourhoods” with higher levels of social deprivation, to help close the inequality gap.
Bill Jones
Accidental leader
After leaving east Birmingham, Jones moved gradually northwards toBurton upon Trent College, then Rotherham College of Arts and Technology and The Sheffield College, where he spent six years as executive director of planning and performance. He started at Luminate in 2015 as deputy principal for teaching and learning.
Luminate is unusual in that it gives its academic managers “a lot of responsibility”, as they are held to account for their own budgets.
Jones says this takes some getting used to for new staff from other colleges, whose response is sometimes “if I’d have wanted to do budgets, I would’ve been an accountant”.
Jones points out to them that “every decision you make in the classroom, about class size, guided learning, hours, resources, and types of teachers, has a direct impact on the finances. So if you’re interested in pedagogy, you should be interested in financial management.”
These days, Jones spends his weekdays in Leeds, where he likes to run along the canals and make the most of the city’s thriving independent music scene; “I’m an indie kid at heart, I just like loud guitar music.” At weekends, he returns to his family home in Derby.
He claims to have ended up as Luminate’s CEO “by accident”, as the idea of getting promoted to the top job is “not what drove” him.
Booth gave him “complete autonomy” as his deputy, and he would have been “quite happy” to stay in that role.
But he felt the leadership team at Luminate had built a “genuinely tertiary, inclusive, successful institution with improving outcomes and staff morale”. He did not want their success to be “jeopardised” by a new leader “coming in with a completely different way of operating”.
Since becoming CEO, not much has changed; except that occasionally, Jones finds himself “looking round and realising there’s nobody else to look to”.
Every September, colleges register their enrolment numbers and someone, somewhere, is quietly disappointed. Not catastrophically – just a few dozen short of forecast. The same the year before. And the year before that.
The assumption is usually that demand was not there. But increasingly, I suspect the problem is different: the students applied, and then disappeared.
I have spent the last two years speaking to further education colleges about their student recruitment systems – listening to teams who are tracking hundreds of live applications across shared spreadsheets, chasing responses by hand, trying to piece together a picture of where things stand from inboxes and printouts. What I have found is an uncomfortable truth: FE recruitment is running on infrastructure that was never designed for the volume or complexity it now faces.
And the timing could not be more critical. The 16 to 18 population surge that caught the college system unprepared is already is expected to continue rising until 2028, when the number of 16- to 18-year-olds is expected to peak. At the same time, DfE needs T Level enrolments to more than double, with just over 27,000 starts this year already falling short of revised targets, and an ambition of 66,100 by 2029.
The skills white paper spelt out plans that young people who leave school at 16 without an education or training place will be auto-enrolled into provision. I believe this will be challenging to achieve under current registration systems.
FE recently found that councils blamed “data recording pressures” for statistics that suggest thousands of teenagers are not being offered a “guaranteed” place in post-16 education each year after leaving school without a plan.
And FE Week also recently highlighted how the lagged funding model means colleges must absorb the cost of surging student numbers upfront, with no guarantee of in-year growth funding to cover it. Every applicant lost to a broken process is one they cannot afford to lose.
Unlike secondary school recruitment – where local authorities coordinate a digital, trackable process – and unlike higher education, which has UCAS as a central nervous system, FE sits awkwardly in between. Colleges are largely on their own, and what that looks like in practice is a patchwork of disconnected systems that were never designed to talk to each other. An email platform here. An events tool that doesn’t talk to the CRM. An application form that feeds into a spreadsheet. Open days promoted through one system, follow ups and offers sent through another. At every handover between systems – and there are many – there is a gap where a student can quietly disappear. And because no single tool holds the full picture, nobody sees it happen.
This is not a criticism of the people doing the work. Recruitment teams in FE colleges are often small, under-resourced and working incredibly hard. The problem is structural. There is no common standard, no shared visibility, and almost no usable data. If you cannot see where students are dropping out of your recruitment funnel, you cannot fix it. You do not know whether your offer acceptance rate is 60 per cent or 90 per cent. You do not know whether certain programmes are consistently losing students at a higher rate than others. You are, in many cases, flying blind.
On Social Prescribing Day today, the national conversations focus on the vital role of the voluntary and community sector in supporting health and wellbeing. But there’s a critical gap that risks limiting its impact, just as the NHS seeks to redefine prevention.
The government’s health mission aims to create a fairer Britain where people live well for longer, recognising that health is shaped by more than clinical care. Tackling inequalities requires collaboration across sectors, including organisations like WM College, London embedded in the communities most affected.
Social prescribing reflects this shift.
It recognises that loneliness, low confidence, poor mental health and economic inactivity cannot be solved through medical intervention alone. They require sustained, community-based responses that rebuild confidence, connection and purpose.
FE colleges already deliver this every day, at scale. At WM College, we see this first-hand: adults referred through wellbeing networks rebuilding confidence through creative learning, often taking their first steps back into structured activity after periods of isolation.
So why do colleges remain largely absent from the systems designed to deliver health and wellbeing?
At a time of unprecedented NHS pressure, this is no longer a minor oversight.
The NHS 10-year plan places prevention and neighbourhood health at its core, with Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) tasked with shifting from reactive care to earlier intervention and joined-up provision.
But intent alone will not deliver this shift.
Social prescribing pathways rely heavily on the voluntary sector which is vital, but often constrained by short-term funding. If social prescribing is to operate at scale, the system must draw on existing infrastructure.
Colleges are exactly that.
They are anchor institutions with the space, workforce and reach to deliver high-quality provision – already engaging many of the individuals social prescribing is designed to support.
For many, entering a college is not seen as a health intervention, but as a positive step forward. That distinction reduces stigma and enables re-engagement – particularly important given rising economic inactivity.
Social prescribing helps stabilise wellbeing. But too often it lacks a clear onward pathway, meaning impact can plateau.
FE provides the missing link connecting wellbeing to skills, confidence and employment. NHS England recognises that people with little or no English are more likely to experience poorer health outcomes. Only 65 per cent of people who could not speak English reported good health in the 2011 census, compared to 88 per cent of those who spoke English well. They’re more likely to face healthcare inequalities, including significant barriers and delays in receiving care.
ESOL classes do more than teach language – they build belonging, reduce isolation and prevent mental ill-health. Yet this impact is rarely funded through social prescribing.
As Integrated Care Boards shift toward strategic commissioning for population health outcomes, excluding FE is a failure to align delivery with policy intent.
Where partnerships do exist, they’re often fragile – reliant on individuals and vulnerable to bureaucracy and staff turnover – rather than embedded in system design.
Integrating FE fully into social prescribing would mean recognising colleges as core partners within neighbourhood health models, embedding them in commissioning frameworks and aligning health, skills and employment funding to support joined-up outcomes.
Funding remains a critical barrier. When patients cannot afford medicines, the NHS subsidises them. The same principle should apply to social prescriptions. If a GP refers someone to a wellbeing activity, colleges are often expected to provide it free, absorbing the cost. A prescription is a prescription – and it should be funded as such.
The need for preventative support is growing, and national conversations – including the ongoing inquiry by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Further Education and Lifelong Learning – increasingly recognise the role of adult education in driving health, wellbeing and economic resilience.
These agendas are converging. But policy has not yet caught up with practice.
If we fail to act, we risk maintaining a fragmented system where health, education and employment operate in parallel – missing a critical opportunity for individuals, communities and the public purse.
Further education is not simply a pathway to skills. It is part of the UK’s health infrastructure.
And it is time our systems were designed to reflect that.
When my students arrived at Shrewsbury Prison for our overnight residential, they were singing and dancing on the coach.
An hour later they were in prison jumpsuits, choosing their cells for the night.
Each cell contained nothing but a metal bunk. The heavy doors clanged shut. The reality of the environment settled in.
The aim of the trip was simple: to bring criminology and psychology to life. Students took part in escape-room challenges across A Wing, explored the history of punishment through a guided tour, and debated the realities of prison life in the same corridors where inmates once walked.
But the most interesting learning moment of the trip did not happen during the formal activities. It happened later that evening when the structure faded away.
Learners from different classes, many of whom had barely spoken to one another before, began playing games. Hide and seek echoed down Victorian corridors. Small groups gathered on landings talking and laughing together in what could only be described as impromptu circle time.
At first glance, it looked like chaos. In reality, it was something much more valuable: play.
Resilience and independence
In education we often associate play with early years. Somewhere around the age of 11 we quietly remove it from the learning environment and replace it with seriousness, structure and assessment. But teenagers still need play.
Psychologist Peter Gray has long argued that play is one of the primary ways young people develop social competence, resilience and independence. Through playful interaction, young people practise negotiation, cooperation and emotional regulation in ways that structured activities rarely replicate.
In other words, play is not a distraction from development, it is part of the mechanism that drives it. What I witnessed in that prison wing was exactly that process happening.
Students who normally sit in separate classrooms were suddenly mixing naturally. Conversations were flowing. New friendships were forming. Students who can sometimes be quiet or withdrawn in lessons were confidently participating in group games. The environment had changed, and with it the dynamics between students.
A prison, a space historically designed for isolation and control, had unexpectedly become a place where connection and community flourished.
Of course, the trip had taken weeks of planning, risk assessments and organisation. Experiential learning always does. But moments like that remind me why it matters.
Further education students are navigating one of the most complex periods of their lives. Many are managing anxiety, uncertainty about the future and the pressures of adulthood arriving fast. In that context, opportunities for genuine social connection are not just enjoyable, they are developmentally important.
Play allows teenagers to experiment socially without the pressure of performance or assessment. It gives them a space to negotiate friendships, develop confidence and regulate emotions in ways that traditional classroom environments often struggle to facilitate. And perhaps most importantly, it reminds them that learning environments can be human.
Bringing people together
When we reflected on the trip afterwards, several learners said they would happily do it again.
What stood out was how aware they were of the way the evening had unfolded socially. Some even complimented classmates for starting the games that brought everyone together.
What began as hide and seek soon evolved into sardines, with students squeezing into the same hiding places and encouraging others to join in.
Perhaps most importantly, some of the younger learners said they now felt they had someone in the year above they could approach if they needed support. In a single evening, students who had barely spoken before had created connections that may last far beyond the trip itself.
As educators we often talk about engagement strategies, retention and wellbeing initiatives. Sometimes the solution is simpler than we think.
Give young people a space where they feel safe enough to laugh, explore and play together and learning will follow.
That night in Shrewsbury Prison certainly proved it.
The pay gap between school and college teachers has reached its widest level in 15 years.
But we rarely hear of similar pay gaps for college CEOs, senior leaders, professional staff or other college employees.
Do we pay teaching staff less simply because we can? And could we do something about it if we wished?
In addition to funding, there are four reasons for the gap:
School teachers are graduates, college teachers often aren’t
Almost every schoolteacher is a graduate, compared to about half of college teachers. The UK graduate earnings premium has fallen sharply but is still about 45 per cent. Colleges sell higher education courses as a way of increasing earnings, so surely we would expect schoolteachers to earn more?
Sixth form college teaching is a graduate profession and a comparison of staff costs with general FE colleges is instructive.
The audited finance record for 2023-24 shows median sixth form college teacher pay (including pensions) at £64,128 is 25 per cent higher than for general FE colleges. There is also less variability in sixth form college figures, suggesting they match schoolteacher salaries.
Type of college
Median teacher pay cost/teacher FTE
Upper quartile teacher pay cost/teacher FTE
Sixth form colleges
£64,128
£66,471
General FE colleges
£51,163
£55,372
Land-based colleges
£49,185
£55,943
College teachers have fewer options to increase pay
While sixth form college teachers could all work in schools, that is not true of college teachers. However, it is argued college teachers can always go back to industry.
But the latest Office for National Statistics data shows FE teaching pays better than equivalent roles in leisure, sport, business, arts, hair and beauty, and even some areas of construction. Only areas like finance, engineering and IT offer a better financial deal.
Colleges do not discriminate in favour of teachers like schools do
Colleges are scrupulously fair when it comes to pay rises. Our negotiating machinery treats all college staff (other than senior leaders) in the same way.
But the government treats schoolteachers as a special case with their own pay review body. Unsurprisingly, they get bigger pay awards and better progression.
Colleges divert resources to non-teaching activity
In recent years there’s been an uplift in employer and business development-related activity in colleges, including things like sponsorship of events. Our most expensive staff spend much of their time doing this.
But the funding model of schools and colleges is identical – funding follows the learner. Trust CEOs, school heads and sixth form college leaders don’t spend as much time on such activities.
And the latest finance record shows this increase in employer activity has been accompanied by drops in related student numbers in the last three years.
HE numbers are down 30 per cent, 16-18 apprentices fell 3 per cent, adult apprentices dropped 20 per cent and adult students declined by 1 per cent.
In contrast, the boom in 16-18 student numbers means colleges increasingly resemble schools in terms of their student population and levels of study. This presents real questions about the effectiveness of employer engagement.
To close the gap, here are some suggestions for an FE teacher pay policy:
Take teachers out of national negotiations and commit to at least matching the rises given to schoolteachers, and to senior teams, even if that leaves less available for other staff.
Use audited finance record data for average FTE teacher cost (which is surely a more important league table than CEO pay) to put pressure on colleges well adrift from the median.
Push governing bodies and senior teams to scrutinise their spending on employer engagement and sponsorship activities to ensure it’s worth the investment.
If we aren’t that serious about this issue, then let’s be honest with our teachers and say we’ll let government funding and the labour market dictate salary levels instead.
