Corporate social responsibility strategies are a win-win for FE

ITPs and colleges without a CSR focus risk losing employees and potential new talent, writes Lee Dale

A socially responsible organisation is an attractive proposition for prospective employees.

Currently there is no current formalised regulation around the reporting of corporate social responsibility activities for independent training providers and colleges.

But a seismic shift in this field has recently been seen, with education providers championing these projects.

This area is a particular passion of my own. I strive, like many in education, to make a positive impact on the future world through my career activities today.

With government regulations such as net zero gaining more traction and feeding into economic strategy, the pace and focus on corporate social responsibility and sustainable approaches is only going to increase.

Not only does an early focus by ITPs and colleges feed into an ethical approach, as well as attracting new employee and learner talent – but by clearly communicating their commitment, and educating the future workforce, FE can help shift cultural thinking in these areas.

Shifts in cultural thinking and approaches only turn into positive action when individuals understand the reasons why change may be beneficial.

Author and inspirational speaker Simon Sinek advises us that we should “start with why”. If we can educate people about why a change needs to be made, this allows individuals to emotionally engage, which often prompts more effective positive action.

Education providers are well poised to offer this approach through story-led learning, and teaching topics supported with case studies. This allows individuals to buy into a more sustainable and responsible future approach more readily, while role-modelling good practice.

At Estio Training, we have considered corporate social responsibility in recent years through the lens of social impact.

While leading to typical change initiatives, such as recycle bins, going paperless and no longer using one-use plastic cups, we have also been innovative in our approach. This includes everything from workplace culture to considering our carbon footprint.

We have also recently installed working groups with a core focus around charity, environment, equality, equity, and diversity, as well as staff experience.

This allows the process to no longer be only a top-down strategy, but a truly collaborative one, with buy-in at all levels of the organisation.

Staff being able to contribute towards these areas helps instil motivation, passion and drive in our overall strategy and ambition.

For those organisations who may not yet be considering CSR, there is the risk that talented individuals may not apply or may leave, as the corporate focus does not align with their personal ethical and moral approach.

It may also be the deciding factor when learners select which providers they wish to study with, if that provider seems to be lacking content and focus around this area.

With government initiatives and duties due to be imposed in coming years, it seems a wise move to place CSR high on the corporate strategy and agenda, while also positively impacting the world.

In order for CSR to reach maximum potential impact, there needs to be an evolution from voluntary championing of these topic.

Instead the approach requires a truly embedded curriculum which places CSR at the heart of delivery, and facilitating learners to critically assess approaches, as a core element of educational strategy.

Education also holds a unique position in being able to influence the decision-making within industry and labour markets, especially where apprenticeship provision is involved, with direct communication lines with employers.

Education plays a pivotal role within this shift, as we all contribute towards the development of tomorrow’s leaders and thinkers.

At this point I ask you to consider your approach towards CSR. Could the small changes you make today have a positive impact on tomorrow’s world?

New DfE employer and apprentice surveys reveal reasons behind huge drop-out rate

Personal or domestic factors such as a better job offer, mental health issues or caring responsibilities are among the key reasons for apprentices dropping out, new Department for Education research has found.

And when it comes to apprenticeship-related factors for withdrawals, the most common reasons were that apprentices felt they did not have enough time for training, poor quality training and badly run programmes.

Former skills minister Gillian Keegan ordered an investigation into the “astonishingly” high drop-out rate for apprenticeships last year after original 2019/20 figures showed 39.8 per cent of learners on the government’s new-style “standards” withdrew before completing. This figure was later revised up to 53.4 per cent after statisticians spotted an “error”.

Figures for 2020/21 show 47 per cent of apprentices on standards dropped out.

By comparison, latest DfE data shows the drop-out rate for A-levels in 2019 was less than one in ten (8.7 per cent).

The DfE published its employer and apprentice evaluation surveys for 2021 on Thursday and included a section on “reasons for not completing” for the first time.

From a survey of 541 “non-completers”, the research found multiple and complex reasons that all contribute to dropouts.

Four in ten cited “personal or domestic” factors. Most commonly a this was job or career change (11 per cent of all withdrawals), mental health issues (9 per cent) and caring responsibilities (8 per cent).

The most common apprenticeship-related reasons that contributed to apprentices not completing were: not enough time for learning/training (44 per cent), training not being as good as they had hoped (43 per cent) and the apprenticeship being badly run or poorly organised (41 per cent).

The single most common main reason for not completing was being fired or made redundant (11 per cent), followed by not getting on with employer (10 per cent), not having enough time for learning (9 per cent), a job or career change (9 per cent), the apprenticeship being stopped or cancelled (7 per cent) and no longer wanting to work in the field of the apprenticeship (7 per cent).

And 2 per cent said they left their apprenticeship because of low pay.

Overall, 48 per cent of non-completers said they were dissatisfied with their apprenticeship experience. The most common reason for dissatisfaction was a lack of support from the training provider, college or tutor.

The DfE also found that 83 per cent of non-completers continued in work immediately on after leaving their apprenticeship (44 per cent with their apprenticeship employer).

Paul Warner, the Association of Employment and Learning Providers’ director of strategy and business development, said: “The reasons for apprenticeship drop-outs are complex and wide ranging, with higher rates of non-completion particularly impacting sectors like hospitality, care and retail. The majority of drop-outs are for reasons beyond a provider’s direct control. The pandemic and subsequent cost-of-living crisis have exacerbated many of these, such as changes in job roles, or the need for higher pay resulting in job moves in what is a tight labour market.”

He added: “There is a consensus amongst AELP members that a leading cause of apprenticeship non-completion is a result of an inability to pass functional skills exams in English and particularly in level 2 maths. The new rules on level 2 functional skills announced by the Education and Skills Funding Agency last week are a step in the right direction.”

A DfE spokesperson said they will consider intervening in providers where they are failing to support apprentices to achieve.

“We know more needs to be done to ensure as many people as possible complete their apprenticeship to gain the full value from their experience.

“Providers have a responsibility to support apprentices through to achievement.  Where this isn’t happening we will consider intervention on a case by case basis.”

Other interesting things we learned from DfE’s surveys (apprentices)

The main learner research comprised 5,122 interviews with current apprentices and those that had completed an apprenticeship.

Apprenticeship duration increases

The average intended duration of apprenticeships was reported as just under two years (22 months), an increase of two to three months compared with 2018/19. DfE said this was a continuation of the trend for longer apprenticeships over recent years, partly a reflection of the shift towards higher level apprenticeships.

Over half of apprentices receiving non-compliant levels of off-the-job training

Over half (54 per cent) of apprentices reported receiving at least 20 per cent of off-the-job training. On average, 19 per cent of an apprentice’s working hours were spent on off-the-job training.

The DfE announced on Friday that it is moving away from the 20 per cent requirement and moving to a baseline of at least six hours per week (click here for full story).

1 in 12 apprentices haven’t heard of EPA

Nearly two-thirds of current apprentices (71 per cent) on standards had at least reasonable knowledge of end-point assessment, tended to be informed within at least the first month of starting and in nearly all cases by their training provider. However, one in twelve had not heard of EPA.

Other interesting things we learned from DfE’s surveys (employers)

Overall, 4,085 interviews were conducted with employers.

Big drops at level 2

The percentage of apprentice employers with level 2 completer apprentices on the fell from 62 per cent to 49 per cent (a reduction in the absolute number of apprentices of 43 per cent).

Meanwhile, the percentage with level 3 completer apprentices increased from 49 per cent to 53 per cent (although this was an absolute terms reduction of 21 per cent). The numbers with level 4 completer apprentices rose substantially from 2 per cent to 5 per cent (an absolute terms increase of 70%).

Financial incentives didn’t encourage growth

There was a fall in recruitment of apprentices in 2019/20 and 2020/21 (of 18 per cent relative to 2018/19), mainly due to the impact of Covid-19. To help address this, a financial incentive of £3,000 per new apprentice was put in place for employers, excluding existing staff.

The DfE researchers said the role of the financial incentive in causing employers to recruit more apprentices “is relatively small” with a best estimate of a net increase of 11 per cent in recruitment of apprentices, or 6 per cent taking into account that some recruitment was brought forward.

For most employers not recruiting (69 per cent), the incentive did not trigger recruitment because they had no work for more apprentices.

The FE Week Podcast: New college, new country – Refugees in FE

After travelling thousands of miles, facing extremely dangerous situations, often stuck in legal limbo – refugee and asylum-seeking students arrive in the classroom.

What are the stories they bring with them?

What systems are they facing here?

And how can FE unleash their skills and experience?

Join education journalist Jess Staufenberg as she speaks to students and the staff working with them, from all over the world.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 391

Sheraz Amin

Executive director -Digital Transformation, The Bedford College Group

Start date: May 2022

Previous Job: Head of Digitial Transformation, Santander UK

Interesting fact: Sheraz has worked ten different countries and across England, but has yet to visit Scotland or Wales

Charlotte Rawes

Vice Principal – Progress and Performance, Lancaster & Morecambe College

Start date: April 2022

Previous Job: Director of Apprenticeships & Employer Engagement, Lancaster & Morecambe College

Interesting fact: Charlotte is a former student of LMC, having studied there between 1993-1995, completing a BTEC Level in 3 Leisure Studies

Dr Helen Gray

Chief Economist, Learning and Work Institute

Start date: July 2022

Previous Job: Principal Research Economist, Institute for Employment Studies

Interesting fact: Helen sings in a chamber choir which once performed to Madonna in Lisbon

Lee Jamieson

Vice Principal – Curriculum & Quality, Solihull College and University Centre

Start date: September 2022

Previous Job: Assistant Principal, Solihul College and University Centre

Interesting fact: Lee once climbed the tallest mountains in Scotland, England and Wales in 24 hours. While he didn’t experience the spiritual awakening he was hoping for, he did raise money for cancer charities that are close to his heart

Skills and Productivity Board and Unit for Future Skills: a one-stop shop of what has been published so far

The government published research from its Skills and Productivity Board on Wednesday along with the first set of data for the new Unit of Future Skills.

The Skills and Productivity Board was set up in October 2020 and included a team of labour market economists who gave advice on how courses and qualifications should align to the skills that employers’ need post-Covid-19.

Before Wednesday no findings had been published by the board. 

The SPB has now wound up and been replaced by the Unit for Future Skills. The research conducted over the last two years has finally been published, ahead of this transition.

Below is a summary of the SPB’s long-awaited research and more information on the Unit of Future Skills’ first data release. 

SPB Research

Review of skills taxonomies

The SPB commissioned a consultancy called Frontier Economics to assess the usefulness of skills taxonomies.

Skills taxonomies can be used as a framework by which to measure the demand for the skills by employers, the current supply of those skills from workers, and the potential supply based on courses offered by education providers and employers. 

The board found the best taxonomy to use is called O*NET, which was developed by the US Department of Labor. 

However, there might be some gaps in information with O*NET as it prioritises analysis of broad skills, with attributes summarised in a smaller number of measures than in other taxonomies.

So, Frontier Economics suggested where needed, taxonomies such as those developed by Nesta and ESCO present skills at a very granular level, could be used to plug these gaps. 

Left Behind Localities/ Levelling Up 

Research from Kenneth Mayhew looked at “lagging areas” and how levelling up initiatives will need to be tailored to the different needs of different localities. 

It presented a list of items which the DfE might want to “keep in mind” as they develop future work programmes. 

The report explored the problems faced by lagging areas – noting “there is rarely, if ever, one single problem, which if addressed, will significantly transform the fortunes of a locality”.

It also explored the role of skills in levelling up strategies – calling for the DfE to ask a series of questions around local skills improvement plans and saying the department should make use of taxonomies to understand local problems and solutions.

Possible initiatives which could benefit lagging areas were outlined – such as more policy-orientated work on how to ensure teacher quantity and quality in some of the UK’s more deprived areas.

The report also noted the “inadequacy of careers advice to secondary school students and adults” and argued there is scope for research on the extent to which it varies by locality and on what can be done to improve it. 

Analysis of longitudinal education outcomes

This report explored how investments in education or skills in poorer performing areas could improve productivity. 

A key part of this research was an analysis that used the longitudinal education outcomes dataset. 

Findings were that there are very high returns to qualifications, in terms of both employment and earnings. 

For example, reaching level 2 – something almost one in six people under 27 do not do – increases the probability of employment for women (men) by around 19 (10) percentage points and earnings by around 22 per cent (13 per cent). 

The returns from qualifications are higher in areas of the country that are economically poorer performing. 

Researchers found that reaching level 2 increases employment prospects for women (men) by around 25 (13) percentage points for individuals living in areas in the bottom quartile based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD, the 25 per cent most deprived areas of the country), but only around 18 (8) percentage points in other areas. 

Another key finding was that investment in skills alone is unlikely to be sufficient to ‘level up’ economically poorer performing areas. 

The analysis found that the returns from education in poorer performing areas are strong, with the benefits of upskilling highly likely to remain within those areas, highlighting the importance of skills investments for the levelling up agenda. 

How can skills promote productivity in poorer performing areas

This paper used existing knowledge and research to explain why there is variation in productivity across the country and the role that skills played in these variations. 

It posed a range of questions about where national skills policy could go next in relation to the agenda around levelling up productivity. 

Recommendations included a call for the DfE to map and seek a greater understanding of existing local skills initiatives and institutions and find ways to disseminate examples of good practice. 

The report said the DfE should think about the future systems architecture and governance of skills policy – and how skills policy can best be conceived of and delivered in a more joined up way across traditional divisions or silos within the department. 

A strong emphasis should be placed on local aspects of the work of the Unit for Future Skills, the report said, arguing that it will need to gather and analyse high quality and granular labour market information that can inform decision making at local levels.

The report also said consideration should be given to evaluation of the skills work of combined authorities, and considered alongside the planned evaluation of LSIP trailblazers. 

Opportunities and challenges for improving labour market information on skills

This report sought to support the development of the new Unit for Skills which aims to improve the quality, quantity and accessibility of labour market information. 

Researchers highlighted the key labour market information gaps and opportunities, and illustrated where improvements could be made. 

They outlined a number of priorities for improvements to LMI on skills that the DfE should tackle. 

For example, the report said that local level data on demand is currently poor but should be a priority for improvement. 

It suggests that web-scraping could be used to provide a direct indication of skills in demand, rather than relying on indicators of demand at the occupation level. 

In terms of supply, data on the stock of skills within the workforce is also limited, according to the report. This is a barrier to identifying where to invest to raise productivity.

In terms of suggestions, the paper highlighted the need for a skills taxonomy. 

“UFS should help to develop a common language and taxonomy of skills that can be used consistently throughout the skills system to strengthen the link between qualifications and skills produced for the labour market,” the report said. 

Understanding current and future skills needs

This report is an overview of the Skills and Productivity Board’s work to document the skills needs of the economy now and in future, with a view to identifying skills mismatches and growing areas of skills needs. 

It identifies a set of ‘core transferable skills’ that are currently in high demand across many occupations and that are likely to continue being in high demand in the future. 

These include communication skills, digital and data skills, application of knowledge skills, people skills, and mental processes. 

The SPB said that because these skills are valuable across a wide range of jobs, firms have weaker incentives to invest in them than in firm-specific skills. 

“Investing in the development of these core transferable skills is therefore likely to be worthwhile for the government,” the report added. 

The report identified skills that are growing in importance and used across many occupations in the economy. 

These included people skills, mental processes and application of knowledge skills, and skills associated with being able to teach others and be a good learner. 

Skills that are growing in importance, even though they are used in relatively fewer occupations, include STEM knowledge (particularly relevant for Health and Science and Technology occupations, and already likely to be in shortage now), care skills, important for Health occupations, and a range of management skills.

Unit for Future Skills dashboards

The Unit for Future Skills is an analytical and research unit within the DfE. 

It has been set up to improve the quality of jobs and skills data, and builds on the analysis and research of the Skills and Productivity Board.

This week, the unit published data on the type of employment people undertake after training. 

This data can be accessed through four dashboards – including the Career pathways dashboard, Graduate outcomes dashboard, Further education outcomes dashboard and the 16 to 18 qualifications dashboard. 

The FE dashboard shows qualification level, employment and earnings outcomes data for apprenticeships and adult further education.

And the 16 to 18 qualifications dashboard shows detailed qualification level, employment and learning outcomes for 16 to 18 year olds finishing study at further education institutions.

MBE for AoC’s Mary Vine-Morris

The Association of Colleges’ area director for London has been made an honorary MBE by the Queen for services to further education.

Mary Vine-Morris was among esteemed foreign nationals awarded honorary gongs this week ahead of the Queen’s birthday honours list next week.

Vine-Morris, who has an Irish passport, has served AoC’s London membership for over seven years and prior to that led on 14-to-19 for local government body London Councils, following a nine-year stint at the Learning and Skills Council.

As well as leading AoC’s membership services in London, Vine-Morris has also been the organisation’s national lead for employment in recent years, working in tricky issues related to industrial relations, pay and conditions.

Khan

The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has congratulated Vine-Morris, telling FE Week: “This fantastic achievement is testimony to Mary’s leadership at the Association of Colleges and long-standing support for further education and training in London, including her continued contribution to City Hall’s work on jobs and skills.”

Awards for foreign nationals are known as ‘honorary’ but recipients are still entitled to use the letters after their name if they choose.

Vine-Morris describes the honour as “deeply personal”.

“I know I should say how pleased I am that this accolade is contributing to the sector getting some well-deserved publicity – and I am – but the truth is this is deeply personal to me. My mom would be very proud of this achievement, and I only wish she was still alive to see it,” she said.

“I was born in in County Cork in Ireland, before moving to Willenhall, in the West Midlands, so I want to share this with all the other non-UK passport holders working so hard in our colleges and across the sector.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the AoC, said: “Everyone at AoC is delighted for Mary. She has worked tirelessly for the sector, for learners, for better education and skills throughout her career and her focus on better outcomes shines through her work.

“The fact the mayor of London is singing her praises tells you all you need to know about her influence.”

ESFA ditches 20% off-the-job requirement as part of 2022/23 apprenticeship funding rule changes

The government has ditched its controversial 20 per cent requirement for off-the-job training in apprenticeships and replaced it with a new baseline.

Significant changes to English and maths policy, calculation of prior learning and new eligible costs have also been revealed in draft apprenticeship funding rules for 2022/23.

Published today by the Education and Skills Funding Agency, the rules state that from August 1, the minimum volume of off-the-job hours will no longer be linked to total working hours; instead a consistent baseline figure of six hours per week will be introduced, irrespective of the hours worked by the apprentice.

This means that apprentices who work more than 30 hours per week can now spend less than 20 per cent of their week doing off-the-job training.

The 20 per cent off-the-job training rule was introduced following the apprenticeship levy reforms in 2017. Many in the sector have complained that the rule is the single biggest barrier to apprenticeship recruitment, but others view it as a vital part of the apprentices’ development.

The ESFA said the 20 per cent rule means that an apprentice who works longer hours is potentially unfairly impacted, because higher working hours means a higher threshold for eligibility.

Announcing the change to a six-hour per week baseline, the ESFA said: “From 1 August, the minimum volume of hours will no longer be linked to working hours; instead we will have a consistent figure, irrespective of the hours worked by the apprentice. This will be six  hours per week (this figure was chosen as it represents 20 per cent of 30 hours, which all part-time apprentices are currently doing). The six  hours per week is for calculation purposes only; once calculated the programme can still be delivered flexibly.”

However, the agency said this change “must not dilute the existing requirement – to provide the right level of training to every apprentice”.

The volume of training that is delivered must be guided by the initial assessment of the apprentice and this “may mean that an apprentice trains for more than six hours per week”.

Association of Employment and Learning Providers director of policy Simon Ashworth welcomed the move.

“The approach using actual and individual contracted hours created inequality. This meant that some individuals had to undertake additional training to their peers, purely because of their contracted hours – which don’t always correlate to what training they actually need,” he said.

“Along with being fairer, the proposed baseline approach is simpler to understand. We are glad that the ESFA have listened and acted on these concerns.”

English and maths requirements changed

The ESFA also announced today that people who start a level 2 apprenticeship without level 1 English and maths will no longer need to automatically attempt level 2 English and Maths tests to complete their apprenticeship.

“It will mean that thousands of level 2 apprentices can focus on securing a level 1 English and maths qualification with only those who are really ready to take the level 2 tests attempting them,” the agency said.

Initial assessment added to eligible costs

The ESFA has been reviewing eligible costs associated with apprenticeships for over a year.

The sector is still waiting on the final outcome of the review, but the agency revealed today that initial assessment has been added as an eligible cost.

But there will be changes resit costs when it comes to eligible and ineligible rules. The ESFA will provide full details when it publishes the outcome of the eligible costs review “shortly”.

More formulaic approach to prior learning

Prior learning refers to skills and knowledge gained by learners before they start their apprenticeship, and must be taken into account by providers when negotiating a price with an employer to ensure cash is not being used to teach an apprentice something they already know.

A new formula that must be used to reduce the price that is agreed with the employer, to account for prior learning, has been included in the funding rules.

To reduce the total negotiated price providers must, from August 1, calculate the percentage of prior learning that the learner has, as a percentage of the off-the-job training hours that they would deliver to an apprentice with no relevant prior learning for the same standard.

The ESFA explains: “For example, if the individual’s prior learning accounts for 300 off-the-job training hours and typically, for the same standard, you would deliver 1,000 off-the-job training hours to an individual with no prior learning, this would equate to 30 per cent prior learning.

“Reduce the price by at least 50 per cent of the prior learning percentage, from the maximum funding band (the 50per cent reduction recognises fixed costs). For the example above, where the apprentice has 30 per cent prior learning, this means there must be a reduction in price of at least 15 per cent of the maximum funding band. This reduced price is the maximum that will be paid using apprenticeship funding (e.g., £8,500 for a £10,000 funding band).

“This new maximum funding amount becomes the starting point for further negotiation on price with the employer. Additional discounts could be applied, for example, where the apprentice is part of a large cohort.”

Rule changes will ‘further improve’ apprenticeships

The ESFA said that having reformed the apprenticeships programme over the past five years, it now wants to “make it simpler to use for employers, training providers and apprentices themselves”.

Announcing the rule changes to this effect, skills minister Alex Burghart said: “We now want to focus on making the system as simple and user-friendly as possible, reducing bureaucratic burdens on employers and providers and giving apprentices the best possible experience.”

Plans to de-merge Lewisham College from NCG revealed

Talks are under way for a London-based college to de-merge from its northern-based parent group, FE Week has learnt.

Lewisham College is understood to be in negotiations to be transferred from NCG to its neighbour London South East Colleges (LSEC).

In a joint statement, the two college groups said: “In view of the government’s levelling up agenda and the vital role that further education is set to play in this, NCG and London South East Colleges are engaging in early discussions regarding FE provision in Lewisham and opportunities to collaborate.”

“No decisions have yet been made,” the statements added, however, “discussions are wide-ranging and we look forward to exploring all options together, with a shared focus on continued high-quality FE provision in south-east London.”

London South East Colleges already operates across eight campuses in the London sub-region. According to its website, the group, through its constituent local colleges, can trace its roots in south-east London back to the early 1900s.  

In the event a “re-merger” does happen, it will be something Lewisham College will be fairly used to.

Lewisham College, which has campuses in Lewisham and Deptford, south-east London, has been subject to several controversial changes over the past ten years. Its merger with Southwark College in 2012 sparked “fierce criticism” from the University and College Union at the time over the near £300,000 cost of its rebrand to ‘Lesoco’.

Two years later the brand was dropped and it became Lewisham Southwark College. In the years that followed, the college endured two consecutive grade four Ofsted inspection results, becoming the first – but not the last – college do so, and then faced local opposition to proposals to merge with Newcastle-based NCG.

In April 2017 the merger went ahead. Then, 18 months later, NCG announced that it would be splitting Lewisham Southwark College back to two distinct institutions – still part of NCG, but with their own principals.

UCU reps at both colleges wrote to the FE Commissioner in April 2019 claiming that the NCG merger had resulted in mismanagement and a deterioration of terms of conditions.

They called for the FE Commissioner to investigate whether the colleges’ future “could lie elsewhere”. NCG said UCU’s claims were “wholly inaccurate”.

FE Week understands that Southwark College will remain part of NCG.

Local areas can use Multiply to unlock wider investment

Multiply represents a menu of interventions for local areas to draw on and tailor to the local context, writes Alex Stevenson

Multiply, the government’s new £560 million adult numeracy programme, is a rare new spending boost for adult essential skills.

As mayoral combined authorities and upper-tier local authorities across England write their investment plans, it’s timely to think about how the programme can achieve maximum impact.

Funding for adult learning and skills via the adult education budget has fallen from £2.8 billion in 2011/12 to around £1.5 billion today, a real-terms cut of over 50 per cent. Rising inflation is now set to reduce its real value further.

While Multiply money is certainly welcome, it only represents a fraction of what has been lost in investment and learning opportunities.

And, with the programme envisaged to last just three years, it falls short of the sustained, long-term investment that Learning and Work Institute has argued for.

Multiply presents an important opportunity to raise awareness and boost participation in numeracy learning. Adult participation in numeracy learning has fallen by more than 60 per cent over the past decade.

Meanwhile, our 2021 adult participation in learning survey shows that only two in five adults are aware of the existing entitlement to fully funded English and maths learning up to level 2. 

Adults who left full-time education early, adults with low qualification levels and adults who haven’t participated in learning recently are all less likely to be aware of the current adult numeracy offer.

The local authorities tasked with delivering Multiply face a sizable challenge but evidence and data can support them to target effectively, improving reach and impact.

Over the past eight months, we’ve been running evaluations of innovative, place-based interventions to look at what works at a local level to engage learners in essential skills learning.

Our evidence suggests that tailored messaging will be vital. Learner engagement must shift away from marketing courses towards showing how learning leads to outcomes that are relevant to people’s motivations in life and in work.

Our evidence suggests tailored messaging will be vital

As the Multiply programme isn’t intended to replace or duplicate numeracy provision delivered through the AEB, this is where things get interesting. The Multiply prospectus sets out a ‘menu’ of interventions for local areas to draw on and tailor to the local context.

This includes options for different contexts and cohorts for numeracy learning, such as the workplace, community groups, parents and people recently released from prison.

This is particularly encouraging, given our findings that contextualising learning, and working with trusted community organisations, are vital for engaging adults.

Delivery can offer flexible routes to qualifications, or be offered as non-accredited learning to boost engagement and confidence in everyday maths.

This aligns well with what the evidence tells us is effective practice in adult essential skills provision. 

Reductions in funding rates and moves away from non-accredited learning over recent years mean that much of the outreach work providers do to work flexibly with employers and community groups has been lost.

Meanwhile international practice in adult essential skills often has a very different ratio of accredited to non-accredited learning, and a much greater emphasis on working with employers. So the workplace is seen as a key setting where learners can be engaged and skills developed.

To achieve impact on the wider essential skills picture – including numeracy, but also literacy, digital skills and ESOL, where skills needs are arguably just as acute – the trick will be for local areas to use Multiply investment to unlock wider benefits.

Multiply partnerships forged with wider stakeholders, such as employers, schools, community groups and housing associations, could also boost referrals and participation into other kinds of essential skills learning. This would also ensure that Multiply is accessed by those who would benefit from it most.