Leaked AQA chemistry A-level paper was stolen from Parcelforce van

Students who had “full access” to an A-level chemistry paper stolen from a Parcelforce van and then leaked online have been disqualified, AQA has confirmed.

The exam board said it reported the theft to police after students who sat chemistry paper 2 on June 20 said they recognised questions that had previously been posted online.

Today, the board confirmed the paper was stolen as it was in transit to a school. Police are “still working to find those responsible”, AQA said in an email to leaders, seen by FE Week’s sister paper, Schools Week.

Where the board has identified students who had “full access” to the paper before the exam, they have been disqualified. However, images circulated on social media were of too poor quality to offer a “clear advantage”, AQA said.

But after completing “extensive analysis” on the impact of grades, AQA said it had ruled out “a gain in marks or performance that would impact the grade boundaries”.

“This means that the students who sat this paper have performed just as we expected them to.”

A Parcelforce Worldwide spokesperson said they “cannot comment further on what is an ongoing police investigation”.

‘Not possible’ to replace paper

AQA said while images of the paper were circulating on social media, “they were of such poor quality that they would not have offered a significant clear advantage to students who saw these small extracts of the paper”. 

“Nor would students seeing those images have known that they were of the actual paper, as many other revision aids, including past paper images were being legitimately shared. 

“We understand that some of you were disappointed that we did not replace the paper, but unfortunately it really was not possible to replace this paper with a suitable alternative in the time we had.”   

AQA said its analysis included looking at performance statistics on all three chemistry papers and compared results between 2022 and 2019 paper two exams. 

It also modelled predicted performance and cross checked it against “the intelligence available to our exams Integrity team about individual students”.

The board added: “We’re very disappointed this happened, especially after all the hard work you and your students have put into these last two years to prepare. 

“We hope that this offers you the reassurance you and your students need to feel satisfied that the results issued to our students are accurate, and that we’ve taken appropriate action against individuals known to have had an unfair advantage.”

Not the first theft of exam papers

An AQA spokesperson said: “We reported the theft of this exam paper to the police and are continuing to work with them to find those responsible. Our exams integrity team identified students who had full access to the paper before the exam and they’ve been disqualified from the qualification.

“Our research team carried out extensive analysis of students’ performance on the paper, and also compared it with performance on the same paper in 2019, and this investigation has found that students who sat this paper have performed just as we expected them to. This means there’s been no impact on grade boundaries.”

It is not the first time exam boards have had to take action following thefts of papers or the vans transporting them.

In 2003, AQA had to rewrite papers for half a million students after a Parcelforce van was stolen. 

In 2005, a rewrite on a similar scale was required because papers were stolen from one van and lost from another.

Another theft of a Parcelforce van in 2008 prompted the rewriting of 46 papers, and AQA had to rewrite a batch of papers again in 2015 after the same thing happened.

More recently, in 2019, AQA had to replace four exam papers already sent to schools after a batch was stolen from a van.

Large accountancy apprenticeship provider excels with grade 1 in first Ofsted inspection

An independent learning provider training more than 600 accountancy apprentices has been given an ‘outstanding’ rating after its first full inspection by Ofsted.

The education watchdog visited First Intuition Cambridge Ltd in June, and in its report published today gave the firm grade ones in all areas.

At the time of the visit just over 600 apprentices were in training across levels 3, 4 and 7 qualifications, with more than half on level 7 accountancy taxation courses.

Amy Forrest, managing director of First Intuition Cambridge, said: “We are incredibly proud, it’s such an achievement to receive that grade, and to have our apprenticeship programmes recognised as outstanding is fantastic.

“Receiving the outstanding rating demonstrates the brilliant impact that these programmes have for our employers and our apprentices.”

The inspectors reported that “apprentices feel proud to be part of the accountancy profession,” with Forrest citing the firm’s relationship with employers that help design the programmes as a key part of that.

Amy Forrest, managing director of First Intuition Cambridge Ltd, said she was delighted with the Ofsted grade

The report said the mutual respect from staff allowed learners to take responsibility for their studies, noting that they “develop important skills such as preparing to deal with difficult clients and prioritising work”.

It said that “extensive support” is provided to prepare apprentices for end of course assessments, while workplace mentors are “highly valued” by learners to “rapidly improve their skills”.

Inspectors said that most tutors continue to work as accountants so that up-to-date industry standards are maintained.

Tutors are aware of individual training needs for apprentices, inspectors said, adding that they used “highly effective teaching strategies”.

The firm started 13 years ago, with Forrest saying the firm was about “continuous improvement,” having managed to grow its numbers while maintaining the quality of teaching. It began delivering apprenticeships for the first time in 2017.

An urgent call to demystify apprenticeships

As we approach exam results, the option for a young person to undertake an apprenticeship needs to be a mainstream consideration, equal to that of choosing to study at university. To reach the point that both pathways are seen in equal terms, we need to make sure apprenticeships are better understood by students, the teachers who support them and their parents or carers who wish to help them pursue their ambitions. 

The challenge, as shown in a recent report from PLMR’s Education Practice, is that teachers in schools are not confidently well-equipped to signpost students to information about apprenticeships or how to apply for one. Whilst staff in further education and sixth form colleges are better prepared to do so, there is a paucity of clear, easily-accessible information available and known to teachers, students and their parents or carers. UCAS has been making strides in this space but we need to do much more.

So-called ‘careers advice’ needs to be about what is right for students, not institutions.

Advice tends towards university options by default as schools and colleges certainly use entries into university as a measure of success promoted to prospective and current students and their families. University degrees are what the majority of teachers and many parents easily understand as they themselves are university graduates. And even for those parents who don’t have a degree, going to university may well be something they aspire to for their children without realising this may not be the best route into work. 

It is not easy to advise young people about different options if you have limited understanding or experience yourself of what those entail. Yet, while universities can provide brilliant opportunities, it is not going to be the best route for every student into a meaningful, rewarding lifetime of work – so we need to make it as easy as possible for people to understand all the options.

To achieve this, we need to change the way we think about careers advice – especially as many people hear ‘career’ and automatically think of white collar jobs. We need to think more about how we advise young people to get on the right path to gain the skills they will need to work in the sectors that ignite their passion and excitement for what lies ahead – an apprenticeship is a brilliant way to kick off that road to success.

Parents and carers have a significant impact on the choices young people make. Interestingly, it may be grandparents who understand apprenticeships better than parents or carers, as people their age and older may well have started off as an apprentice in accountancy, nursing or another industry. Apprenticeship routes for those lines of work fell out of favour in a clamour for university degrees, and apprenticeships became more associated with learning a trade. 

Yet, there is now a huge range of apprenticeships available for school leavers, including with organisations ranging from Airbus to the NHS to management consultancies like KPMG. These apprenticeships are available at a variety of levels from L2 (GCSE equivalent) up to L6 (degree equivalent) and beyond. Apprenticeships are versatile enough to be suitable both for young people who are high academic achievers or for those who may have struggled in the classroom environment or prefer to learn on-the-job. 

We are continuing to deal with the ramifications of the pandemic and the ongoing cost-of-living crisis. If we are going help young people take their next steps in this environment, and indeed tackle these sorts of challenges as the adults in the society of the future, we need to ensure they are well-advised about their options. Government needs to work closely with the education sector, including UCAS, to urgently demystify apprenticeships so students, teachers, parents and carers can better understand all available options and the life-changing opportunities an apprenticeship can offer.

Education inequalities study reports ‘dearth’ of second chances for learners

There is a “dearth of second chances and lifelong learning opportunities” in the UK’s education system, a new report assessing education inequalities has warned – prompting fresh calls for significant investment in FE.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has published a report on inequalities in the education system ahead of an online event this morning, in which it says that disadvantaged pupils are frequently behind their peers in a system that is not succeeding in addressing the education gap.

While the report covers the whole of the school and education system, in the further education sector the report found that for those looking to pursue vocational qualifications outside of the academic GCSE-A Level-university route the system was difficult to navigate, and information less readily available.

It cited a “proliferation” of vocational qualifications that meant there was not an obvious pathway between levels in vocational studies.

It continued that for higher level learners in universities, government-backed loans covered both tuition fees and maintenance, but further education courses typically used advanced learner loans which do not cover the maintenance element. In addition, the equivalent or lower education rule meant loans were not available for those studying an equivalent or lower level qualification than they had already, making it difficult to reskill.

It said: “Over the past decade, there has also been a significant decline in public spending on basic adult education and training, while for learners wishing to study more advanced vocational qualifications it is often a struggle to access funding.

“This combination of factors leads to a dearth of ‘second chances’ and lifelong learning opportunities in the UK’s education system, which limits the scope for existing educational gaps to be closed.”

The report found that real-terms spending on adult education in 2019/20 was nearly 50 per cent lower than 2009/10, and two thirds lower than 2003/04, while the number of adult learners has also halved in the last decade.

It added: “For adults with low levels of education, these trends have made it more difficult to access opportunities to upskill through formal education or through training – meaning that existing educational gaps among adults may not be closed and may even be widening.”

The study found that nearly half of pupils without five good GCSEs at 16 still didn’t have any by 19, and less than 15 per cent of those with fewer than five good GCSEs achieved a level 3 qualification by the age of 19.

In addition, the document reports that 16-year-olds eligible for free school meals are around 27 percent less likely to earn good GCSEs than their better-off peers, while the Covid-19 pandemic has worsened inequalities because disadvantaged children had fewer resources to learn at home.

The report recognised that the government is in the process of overhauling some parts of the system, such as the new lifelong learning entitlement, but said it was “too early to know whether these reforms will address all of the issues that exist with the financing of advanced vocational and university education”.

The report’s authors have called for policymakers to ensure the system offers “chances and viable alternatives” for those who fall behind while at school, clearer communication on learning options available and “significant investment” – particularly in the FE sector.

Professor Sandra McNally, professor at the University of Surrey, director of the Centre for Vocational Education Research and one of the report’s authors, said the options for young people who don’t secure good GCSE grades at 16 are “limited, confusing, and often not very lucrative,” and pathways to higher learning were “opaque”.

She added: “The post-compulsory system in general can lead towards narrow choices with little opportunity for second chances later on.”

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said there was a “depressingly close alignment between family income and educational attainment,” with government policy a “rut of meaningless targets, empty rhetoric and pitiful levels of funding”.

He added: “We need to see investment in early years education, better support for schools which face the greatest challenges, funding for schools and post-16 education which matches the level of need, and a rethink of qualifications and curriculum so that they work well for all learners.”

A spokesperson from the Department for Education said: “Since 2011, we have narrowed the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers at every stage of education up to the pandemic, and recent figures show that a record proportion of the most disadvantaged students are progressing to higher education.”

The spokesperson said nearly £5 billion in pandemic recovery funding had been invested, which included tutoring courses for two million pupils in need of them most.

They added: “We are also making £2.7 billion available by 2025 to support businesses of all sizes to create more apprenticeships, in addition to investing over £260 million in the last year to expand popular adult training schemes, such as skills bootcamps and free courses for jobs, which thousands of individuals have taken advantage of.”

AQA staff to strike on A-level and GCSE results days, Unison confirms

Staff at exam board AQA are planning to strike over pay on A-level and GCSE results days, as schools minister Will Quince hits out at “scaremongering” from their union over disruption claims.

The 180 workers, including results managers, heads of curriculum and customers service staff, will stage a five-day walkout from August 17 to 21.

The union has suggested that “thousands” of teenagers trying to contact AQA on A-level results day, Thursday August 18, could face difficulties getting through as a result.

But the exam board has again rebutted disruption claims, emphasising that results would not be delayed and that “robust contingency plans” were in place.

It marks the third walkout in the pay dispute, with 79 staff taking part in industrial action last month and another strike planned for August 12 to 15.

Today, Unison confirmed a fourth round of strike action from August 24 to 28. GCSE results day is on August 25.

While Unison said striking is the “last thing” staff want to do, it added that employees had been left with “no alternative” after the exam board refused to budge beyond a pay offer below current inflation.

Staff on strike

Unison and Unite have rejected a 3 per cent pay increase plus a £500 payment for staff, claiming the charity is “failing its staff and pupils by holding down pay”. AQA says the average pay increase works out at 5.6 per cent.

The current UK rate of inflation is 9.4 per cent. Last week, the Bank of England said inflation could hit 13 per cent by the autumn.

Unison’s North West regional manager Vicky Knight said the “results ‘machine’” could not “work effectively” without its members.

“We understand that there may be an impact on results day, particularly around student queries, administrative errors, customer service enquiries etc,” she added.

“Employees at AQA are disappointed the company will neither talk to them nor come back with a realistic pay offer. This leaves staff with no choice but to escalate their action.

“Disrupting A-level results day is not a decision anyone has taken lightly. However, AQA staff have been treated appallingly and only bold action will get their employer to the table.

“AQA must come with a serious offer to prevent any further disruption.”

But AQA has repeatedly set out to reassure students that results day would not be impacted by strikes, including by pointing out that those taking part make up a small proportion of its workforce. The exam board has around 1,200 staff in total.

A spokesperson added: “We’re dismayed that Unison has chosen to deliberately target students like this, but it won’t stop us from delivering the exam results our learners so richly deserve or supporting everyone afterwards.

“We have robust contingency plans in place to ensure that industrial action has no effect on results, and we successfully tested these plans during the previous industrial action in July.

“Our records show that only 4% of our total workforce took part in that industrial action – and the remaining 96% are absolutely committed to never letting our learners down.”

Schools minister Will Quince has also criticised the union for “scaremongering”.

“I think young people have enough to worry about and be concerned about, ahead of examination results anyway,” he told the PA news agency.

“To add this into the mix as a potential worry about whether their papers will be marked and their results will come through on time is totally unnecessary.

“I’ve had assurance that they won’t have any impact but unfortunately scaremongering of this sort of nature by unions is deeply regrettable.”

This is how training providers can prepare for more devolution in the Adult Education Budget

Don’t duplicate your bid applications and do look elsewhere for inspiration, writes Steve Morris

In February 2022, the government published its white paper which confirms a commitment to developing a new devolution framework.

This means every part of England that wants a devolution deal will have one by 2030. So, county devolution is born (these are local authorities in non-metropolitan areas of the country).

With over 40 per cent of the population already living in regions with devolved funding for adult skills training, this percentage is only set to increase.

Recently, York and North Yorkshire announced they will be devolved. The next regions to join them are Cornwall, Derby and Derbyshire, Devon, Plymouth and Torbay, Durham, Hull and East Yorkshire, Leicestershire, Norfolk, Nottinghamshire, Nottingham, and Suffolk.

It certainly feels like we have come a long way since the first devolution deal in England was concluded in 2014 by the coalition government. That deal was done with local authorities from the Greater Manchester area.

But the next decade looks like the change will be even more granular and pronounced.

What does this mean for independent training providers?

The word devolution comes from the Latin verb ‘devolvere’, meaning to roll something down, in this case funding.

The benefit of devolution is that local leaders are given the authority to make decisions regarding the funding of education and training, most notably the Adult Education Budget and National Skills Fund. Local leaders are best placed to make decisions on their residents.

This poses new challenges and opportunities for independent training providers.

National or regional independent training providers no longer have one bite of the ESFA cherry but instead need to engage with multiple regional providers of funding.

This brings a logistical challenge which goes way beyond the resource requirement needed to submit multiple bids, where previously just one bid would suffice.

At LCG, we needed to evolve our thinking on how to approach this opportunity.

LCG deliver over £30 million of skills funding per year with the ESFA and across most of the devolved regions.

This is coupled with our portfolio of services that support FE providers across all current and proposed devolved areas to reach their targets, allowing us to support over 200,000 learners a year to achieve nationally recognised qualifications.

While we are always reluctant to tell other providers what they should do, we are always willing to share the learning journey we have been on throughout these changes.

Top tips for a successful devolution bid:

1. Be flexible – each region has their own priorities and not all want the same process or outcome.

2. Think locally and regionally, not nationally – It’s important to focus on the regional challenges that local authorities are looking to solve.

3. Never copy and paste – Duplicating previously submitted bids could be a barrier, as devolution could mean the content is no longer relevant.

4. Listen to your local experts – Boots on the ground are worth their weight in gold so make sure you canvass local opinion in your team.

5. Do your research – Ensure that you are proposing solutions based on local LMI data and not looking at the national picture.

6. Use the right examples – If you have local examples, use them! Even if it means writing new case studies rather than relying on old favourites.

7. Share what has worked elsewhere – Never be frightened to share what has worked in other regions if you do not have direct experience in the region you are bidding for.

8. Support your bid team – to preserve the health and wellbeing of your bid team ensure you have additional resource.

Over 4,250 university offers delayed after another Access to HE grades blunder

England’s “largest” Access to HE Diploma awarding body is under investigation after more than 4,250 learners had their university offers delayed due to a “serious incident” with their grade submission.

Ascentis submitted the incorrect subject codes for the results that were made available to higher education institutions on July 29. It meant that any student certificated by the awarding body had their result marked as ‘X’ instead of their grade.

Universities have since been unable to confirm whether the affected students have gained their places for this coming academic year.

The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for Higher Education, which regulates the qualification, told FE Week that 4,257 students were included in Ascentis’ results data file.

The agency said it deems this a “serious incident, noting the potential adverse effect to students as these students may experience a delay in finding out whether they have gained a place”.

“We have therefore initiated an immediate inquiry,” the spokesperson added. “We have worked with all parties concerned to ensure that students’ results on the correct diploma from Ascentis are provided to higher education receiving institutions as quickly as possible.”

QAA’s inquiry may result in regulatory action being taken, which could be as severe as removal of Ascentis’ licence to deliver Access to HE Diplomas.

This is the second time this year where Access to HE Diploma students have been hit with a delay to their university offers due to an error by an awarding body. The first involved 1,600 students certificated by the Skills and Education Group, which missed the deadline for submitting grades at the end of July.

There are just 11 awarding bodies licensed by QAA to deliver the Access to HE Diploma – a level 3 qualification which prepares people without traditional qualifications for study at university. Results for the qualification are released ahead of A-levels each year.

Ascentis claims on its website to be the nation’s “largest” and “number one” Access Validating Agency.

UCAS has now been able to process the awarding body’s correct subject codes and the new files were made available to universities on Tuesday (August 9) who have been instructed to use the updated information to update the Access to HE results, a QAA spokesperson said.

The spokesperson added that incorrect subject codes did not lead to incorrect grades being uploaded to UCAS, and the agency understands that it is “unlikely” any offers that were confirmed “would be withdrawn but we are working with UCAS to assess actual impact on students”.  

Ascentis did not respond to requests for comment.

QAA said students or providers affected may contact their officers by email on ahe@qaa.ac.uk if they have concerns about their individual situation.

Another giant apprenticeship provider hit with Ofsted grade 3

A major financial services apprenticeship provider has been hit with its second consecutive ‘requires improvement’ from Ofsted.

Kaplan Financial Limited, which delivers training to 11,500 apprentices employed by big-name employers such as Microsoft, Cisco and HSBC, was dealt its latest grade three in a report published yesterday.

Inspectors criticised ineffective coordination of on- and off-the-job training for most apprentices, a failure to take into account prior learning, a focus on the achievement of professional qualifications over training, and poor-quality assurance arrangements.

There was also specific criticism for Kaplan’s delivery of the popular and controversial level 7 accountancy and taxation professional apprenticeship, which was in scope for Ofsted scrutiny for the first time in this inspection even though it has been delivered by the financial services provider since 2017.

Kaplan is one of the largest apprenticeship providers in England, earning more than £90 million from levy-paying employers from 2018/19 to 2020/21.

This is the second time one of England’s biggest apprenticeship training providers has been given a grade three from Ofsted in the past two months following Lifetime Training.

A spokesperson for Kaplan said the provider was “obviously disappointed” with the result and promised it has “project teams working to address each and every area that needs to improve as a matter of priority”.

Kaplan’s apprentices study apprenticeship standards in the professional and business services or the financial services sector from levels 2 to 7. Three quarters of all apprentices study the level 7 accountancy and taxation professional apprenticeship.

‘Requires improvement’ grades were handed to four of the five fields judged by Ofsted. But a ‘good’ judgement was given to “behaviours and attitudes”.

Inspectors said that senior leaders do not have an effective oversight of how well apprentices develop their knowledge, skills and behaviours as a result of their apprenticeship.

The quality assurance arrangements also do not “sufficiently focus on evaluating the quality of education that apprentices receive”.

Ofsted said that half of the weaknesses identified at the previous ‘requires improvement’ inspection in 2018 remain and leaders have not been “swift enough to improve the quality of training that most apprentices receive”.

Leaders were however praised for developing apprenticeship programmes that meet the needs of employers in the financial services and business sector. They have “nurtured effective links with a range of high-profile employers to provide apprenticeship training across the country”.

Ofsted also shone a light on the delivery of Kaplan’s level 3 data technician and level 4 business analyst apprenticeships, after finding that apprentices “receive useful support when they fall behind, make good progress, and most pass exams on their first attempt”.

Conversely, level 7 accounting apprentices do not receive “effective support when they fall behind or when they fail examinations”. These higher accounting apprentices also “do not receive useful guidance from staff to know what they need to do to improve” and “do not make the expected progress or complete their apprenticeship”.

Ofsted also criticised Kaplan’s managers and talent coaches as they “do not effectively coordinate on- and off-the-job training for most apprentices”.

Inspectors found that too many employers do not “fully understand the requirements of an apprenticeship and focus too much on the achievement of the professional qualifications”.

The report continued: “They [employers] do not ensure that apprentices have the opportunity in the workplace to practise the skills they learn during their training. As a result, a few apprentices on accountancy apprenticeships do not recall previous learning.”

A Kaplan spokesperson said: “While we put our learners at the centre of everything we do, we accept the findings of our Ofsted inspection team. ‘Behaviour and attitudes’ was judged good but there are a number of areas in which our provision was found to be inconsistent and ineffective.

“We already have project teams working to address each and every area that needs to improve as a matter of priority.”

Director ban for subcontractor boss that paid relatives and renovated house using skills funding

The owner of a training provider with links to a troubled FE college has been served a seven year ban from acting as a director following an investigation by the Insolvency Service.

Judy Roach, from Thamesmead, South London, has been hit with disqualification undertakings after investigators found more than £2.5 million in public funding had not been correctly accounted for while her training company was trading.

Roach made payments totalling £171,865 to family members and used the company to pay for over £41,000 worth of renovations to her own house, according to Insolvency Service documents.

Roach’s firm, JAR Training Consultancy Limited, filed for voluntary liquidation in March 2021.

Liquidators Begbies Traynor LLP reported in March 2022 that the firm had received just under £62,000 in claims from creditors against assets valued at just £9,495. The latter figure however excludes a director’s loan worth £45,969.

Creditors declared to date include Santander, HMRC and Brooklands College, which itself hasn’t filed accounts since 2018 after being caught up in a previous separate subcontracting scandal.

However, the Insolvency Service has said that JAR’s true deficiency to creditors is more likely to be in the region of £3.5 million.

Insolvency Service investigators found that Roach failed to “maintain and/or preserve adequate accounting records” from the time her firm was incorporated, September 2015, to the date of liquidation which was March 2015.  

According to Insolvency Service records, JAR received £2,553,785 from three un-named further education colleges. Almost all of it, £2,499,394 was owed to just one college.

The Department for Education told FE Week “JAR was a partner of a primary ESFA contractor who we are in the process of recovering funds from”.

Brooklands College is the only college to have made a claim against JAR according to JAR’s latest liquidation documents on Companies House.

This is the second subcontracting scandal to hit Brooklands College in the past few years. The first, which involved SCL Security Ltd, resulted in the ESFA demanding repayment of £20 million worth of apprenticeships funding. The college is currently undergoing a resizing project to ensure its financial security.

As a small firm, JAR Training Consultancy was exempt from publishing full accounts.

By not accounting for its funding correctly, over £1.7 million allocated to individuals for tutoring and assessing services also cannot be checked and verified.

Roach’s failure to account for millions of pounds worth of public funds has landed her a seven-year disqualification. This means she will need permission from the courts to take part in promoting, forming or managing a company.

“Every limited company has a legal duty to maintain accounting records, especially those that receive millions of pounds worth of public funding. Judy Roach, however, totally disregarded her duties, which meant she was unable to explain exactly what happened to more than £2.5 million of income provided by the government,” said Mark Bruce, chief investigator at the Insolvency Service.

By the time JAR filed for voluntary liquidation, the firm had been trading without filing or maintaining accurate financial records for five and a half years.

Yet the Education and Skills Funding Agency has praised their “joint working” with the Insolvency Service.

Howard Tobias, the ESFA’s head of enforcements said: “I am pleased to note the success of this new joint working between the Insolvency Service and ESFA. Failing to keep or deliver up books and records will not preclude the directors of such companies from further scrutiny and sanction. This outcome demonstrates that the ESFA is prepared to take robust action and we will work with regulatory partners across government to hold them to account.”

Asked by FE Week if criminal proceedings will be pursued again Roach, the DfE said: “Following each investigation, the ESFA will refer matters as appropriate to other regulators and criminal prosecutors.”