The volume of core education delivered in prisons across England will reduce by up to 25 per cent, ministers have admitted.
Regulators and MPs have sounded the alarm over reported cuts to prison education budgets since new Prison Education Service (PES) contracts came out last October.
The Ministry of Justice consistently maintained there was no cut to the total budget in cash terms, but acknowledged it had not kept up with “significant” rises to the cost of delivering education in prisons.
In a response to a justice select committee report, prisons minister Lord Timpson today admitted “some” prisons faced a reduction in education delivery hours due to “difficult” decisions made to maximise value for money.
Nationally, the government expects a reduction of between 20 to 25 per cent to the volume of core education, which offers prisoners literacy and numeracy courses up to level 2, as well as ICT and English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses.
MPs said the cuts to prison education delivery hours risked jeopardising prison rehabilitation, and called the ministerial response to their concerns “both weak and disappointing”.
Jon Collins, chief executive of Prisoners’ Education Trust, said the cuts were now “beginning to bite”.
“We are seeing courses axed, staff made redundant, and support for people with additional needs put at risk,” he said.
Paul Bridge, head of further education at University and College Union, this month estimated around 300 teaching staff had been made redundant and warned more would follow.
‘Revised’ funding formula to be rolled out
Prisons were informed of their budgets under the new PES for October 2025 to March 2027 last April. Nearly £148 million was earmarked for core prison education across 94 jails.
Provision is delivered by three procured providers: Milton Keynes College, PeoplePlus, and Novus, part of Manchester-based LTE group.
Earlier this month, arms-length body the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) accused the Prison Service of downplaying cuts after finding evidence through a survey of prisons of “seismic” reductions to core education and “dramatic” cuts to Dynamic Purchasing System budgets.
Timpson was urged to explain the IMB’s findings of budget cuts that extended “far beyond” inflation which “appears to contradict” statements given by the Prison Service.
Today’s response by the government rejected the accusations of large budget reductions.
“The national prison education budget has not been cut. However, the cost of delivering high-quality education has increased significantly in recent years,” said a government spokesperson.
“Although the budget has slightly increased in cash terms, it has not kept pace with these rising costs. This has meant some prisons are facing a reduction in education delivery hours.”
The government confirmed it had calculated a “revised” funding formula to ensure “fair” allocation to prisons based on population numbers and regional cost differences.
It said this means some prisons will see bigger reductions and some could receive an increase.
The government stressed that the changes only apply to core education contracts and do not affect libraries, careers advice or vocational training.
The justice select committee’s inquiry into reoffending and rehabilitation demanded that the government set out plans to ensure “all prisons retain the funding necessary to deliver core education provision”.
The government’s response was that future funding “is depending on cross-government spending decisions”.
Justice committee chair Andy Slaughter said: “It’s deeply concerning to hear core education provision is being reduced despite the government’s own recognition of the positive impact that education has on reducing reoffending and the committee’s recommendation to improve both participation and quality in prison education.
“Access to learning is crucial and any reduction risks jeopardising rehabilitation efforts.”
Ex-apprenticeships boss Peter Marples has been ordered to stump up most – but not all – of the Department for Education’s legal bill following the collapse of his £37 million High Court claim.
A sealed court order shows the High Court ruled Marples and his family of co-claimants must pay £1.05 million “on account of the defendant’s costs”, after the DfE achieved a “complete victory” by successfully defending the case in full.
FE Week understands that the claimants’ own legal costs topped £1 million.
The payment to the DfE does not cover the department’s total legal bill. The judge, Mr Justice Rajah, made clear the sum represented around 60 per cent of the department’s anticipated costs at an earlier stage of proceedings.
The DfE had argued its overall legal costs were significantly higher, with written submissions stating they hit “approximately £2.8 million”. But the judge declined to order a higher payment, noting there was “no costs schedule or evidence of that figure” and “no explanation as to why it is so greatly in excess of the costs anticipated”.
The combined costs highlight how legal action against the DfE is effectively out of reach for most training providers, given the financial risks involved.
‘A complete victory’
The ruling follows last year’s High Court judgment dismissing Marples’ claim in its entirety.
He had claimed negligence and misfeasance in public office, alleging the DfE’s then Skills Funding Agency acted with malice when refusing to sign off on a change of control that scuppered a planned sale of apprenticeship giant 3aaa to Trilantic Capital Partners in 2016.
As previously reported by FE Week, the court rejected allegations that the DfE had acted unlawfully or with bias, with the judge concluding there was “no grudge” against Marples and that the department had achieved a “complete victory”.
The trial took place over multiple weeks in June and July, with judgment handed down in October.
Marples had the option of applying for permission to appeal the decision but this was not taken up.
In the recent costs order, Mr Justice Rajah said the claim had failed on all substantive grounds and this justified applying the general rule that the losing party should pay the successful party’s costs.
He added that a “fundamental failure” of Marples’ legal team was their “failure to recognise that the defendant had a good defence to this claim”.
A “compromise approach” to a dispute about forcing colleges to move the start of their financial year from August to April has been announced.
Rather than submitting accounts halfway through their academic year, colleges will instead be asked to provide spending data throughout the year to the Department for Education’s group accounts.
In an update on Thursday, DfE officials said the approach would avoid the “undue burden” of making colleges align their financial year, which runs from August to July, with the government’s financial year which runs from April to March.
The move, which has been welcomed by the Association of Colleges, follows disagreements between the Treasury and DfE over “unaligned financial year-ends” following the reclassification of colleges as public sector bodies in 2022.
A “dry run” is now planned for 2026-27 that will require finance teams to submit “more granular actual spend information” throughout the year ahead of “effective implementation” in 2027-28.
It follows a pilot of the approach carried out with 14 FE colleges this year that has now been “endorsed by Parliament”.
Although “work is underway” to decide exactly how the financial information will be collected next year, officials said colleges would need to submit “taut and realistic” spending plans at the start of the government financial year.
They will then be asked to present actual spend during the year that will help create a “consolidated sector position” for the Office for National Statistics and the DfE’s group accounts for the year to March 31, which are subject to audit by the National Audit Office.
The update said the approach was an attempt to develop a “simple and efficient” way to ensure reporting obligations can be met “without introducing undue burden”.
The 2026-27 academic year will now be a “sector-wide test” of the compromise approach, that aims to reduce the risk that FE colleges spend “significantly more or less” than the DfE’s spending plans agreed by Parliament at the start of the year, which could have a “consequential impact” on available funding for the education sector, the update added.
Incorporating college finances into the DfE’s group accounts is seen as a necessary measure for Treasury officials who compile the ‘whole of government accounts’ report each year. The report combines the assets and liabilities of more than 10,000 public sector organisations across the UK.
Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes welcomed the announcement as a “pragmatic approach” after 18 months of “hard work” between college finance directors and officials.
He said: “The original plan to change the sector’s financial year end would have taken up enormous resource in every college, so this use of adapted but existing data returns will greatly smooth the process.
“There is still extra work from college finance teams at a time when they are already fully stretched, but we welcome the fact that a co-creation and piloting approach was used to test a solution and the results were evaluated in a way that changed some of the decisions.”
The AoC boss previously branded government proposals to force colleges to adopt the public sector financial year as “a disastrous move” that would take them out of line with the academic year cycle.
Sixth Form Colleges Association deputy chief executive James Kewin also previously called the idea “an exercise in futility” that would place an unnecessary burden on colleges.
The apprenticeship system is entering one of the most pressured periods in its history. The rapid growth of the programme means that demand from employers is now butting up against the arbitrary budget that the Treasury has given the Department for Education and now the Department for Work and Pensions. To tackle rising NEET (not in employment, education or training) levels, government plans to ‘streamline’ how employers use levy funds for apprenticeships and ‘tilt’ apprenticeship spend towards younger apprentices. We understand this desire – but how government makes the change is critical.
Done badly this is a disaster waiting to happen. Employers, young people and the provider base (the engine without which skills development doesn’t happen) will be violently ejected from the boat and into the treacherous waters of an economy that is retreating from skills, not embracing them.
Done well, and ministers could be taking the plaudits for navigating the rapids successfully, through to calmer waters where the right longer term investment decisions can be made.
The government knows that rapid defunding does not work: the cliff edge defunding of level 7 for learners over the age of 21 has had exactly the opposite financial impact of that intended. The rush to get in before the defunding deadline has tied up apprenticeship funding, not released it – exactly as we said would happen.
Sudden lurches derail planning and investment, trigger unpredictable survival behaviour, and erode employer confidence and buy-in, which relies on stability and time to adjust.
There is also a flawed assumption at the heart of the debate: that cutting adult apprenticeships will automatically create more opportunities for young people. That is not how labour markets work.
Apprenticeships – as with the wider labour market – function as a whole ecosystem. When existing staff upskill and move into higher-level roles, entry-level vacancies open up – the most precious component in the NEET reduction machine. A successful entry level opportunity for a NEET needs a good line manager and we know we don’t have enough of them.
This progression, combined with good line managers, creates the capillary effect (hat tip to Rob Nitsch at the Federation of Awarding Bodies for the metaphor) allowing the same job role, over time, to support multiple young people into gainful employment. Choking off progression and good line management chokes off opportunity for the very people you want to help.
This is why AELP is supporting the Chartered Management Institute (CMI)’s campaign to protect management apprenticeship options. We are firm advocates for other standards that could be in the firing line. For many independent training providers, these types of programmes are core to their offer. They underpin business models, cross-subsidise other provision and support investment in staff, quality and innovation. Pull funding too rapidly and providers will not be able to “pivot” and may exit. Capacity will be lost permanently.
We are hearing from members that some major employers, long-time champions of apprenticeships, are questioning whether to walk away from the system altogether and treat the levy as just another tax. If it becomes acceptable for leading brands to disengage, others will follow, then SMEs (small and medium sized businesses). Starts will fall. The reputational damage among young people will be severe and once employer confidence drains away, past experience is that rebuilding it is painfully slow.
Ending the Treasury top-slice (which AELP estimates at anywhere between £500 million and £800 million) means these are tough choices that shouldn’t need to be made. But even if funding constraints mean prioritisation is unavoidable, there are safer ways to do it.
First, be transparent. Set out the budget position and the scale of savings sought. Providers and employers can plan for tough realities if they understand them.
Second, use co-funding and tapering, not cliff edges. Step-down models over a couple of years can release funding while keeping employers engaged and giving providers time to adjust.
Third, prioritise more intelligently. Age-based incentives within standards, for example a stronger focus on under-30s, are far less destabilising than removing standards entirely. And any major shift must be sequenced with credible alternatives, such as apprenticeship units, being ready at scale. And use existing mechanisms to bend these programmes towards the NEET problem: insist on a focus on how to manage young people.
Reform carried outwith the sector can strengthen apprenticeships. Reform imposed on the sector risks turning a budget squeeze into a system failure. That would be a catastrophe for providers, employers and, most of all, the young people this reform is meant to help.
City & Guilds CEO Kirstie Donnelly’s pay surged past the half-million-pound mark before the charity sold its awarding and training business, accounts reveal.
The charity’s latest filings also suggest it banked £166 million from the sale to Greek-owned certification giant PeopleCert last year. This is the first time an actual sale price has been reported.
In the 12 months to August 31, 2025, Donnelly was paid a £335,000 salary, £64,195 in benefits and a £126,321 bonus – almost twice the size of the bonus she received the year before.
The £525,516 total pay packet in 2024-25 was 17 per cent higher than the previous year’s package of £448,174, which comprised a salary of £324,960, benefits of £56,214 and bonus of £67,000. Remuneration for executives was decided by the charity’s remuneration and nominations committee, made up of six trustees.
The pay disclosure comes after the Charity Commission opened a formal statutory inquiry into the sale of City & Guilds’ commercial arm, following reports that buyer PeopleCert handed Donnelly (pictured) an additional £1.7 million bonus shortly after the deal closed on October 31, 2025, plus a pay rise of around £100,000 that pushed her salary to £430,000.
Donnelly and finance director Amid Ismail have since been placed on leave, with PeopleCert launching its own internal probe into “events before and after the sale” and the “individual conduct of executives”.
Ismail is reported to have received a £1.2 million bonus, along with a 30 per cent salary increase to £430,000.
Trustees of the charity have repeatedly insisted they were “not involved” in any discussions about bonus payments before or after the sale.
However, earlier this month, City & Guilds Foundation admitted there were “discussions” among trustees last May about the “possibility” of an “incentive payment” to executives to “help secure the greatest residual value to the charity for its future use”.
The board claimed to have “subsequently decided not to establish such an incentive” and claimed to record this decision in its October board meeting minutes.
Kirstie Donnelly
Sale price revealed?
The accounts – for City & Guilds Foundation, the charity that continues to exist after the sale of its awarding operation – also appear to confirm for the first time how much money the organisation made from the deal.
They state: “The divestment of the group’s commercial activities will have material impacts on the group’s and institute’s future activities and its financial statements in the next financial year as its income and expenditure related to commercial activities will cease from November 1, 2025 and assets and liabilities related to those activities will be disposed.
“Estimated net proceeds for the disposals, after selling costs, was £166 million.”
The foundation confirmed to FE Week the £166 million figure “refers to the net cash proceeds received directly from the sale transaction itself”.
The foundation previously said that financial terms of the transaction were “commercially confidential”, but added the charity would receive a “very significant financial benefit” which includes “gross assets of approximately £180 to 200 million being available to the charity, including the proceeds of sale and the provision of office space for a period of five years”.
Trustees are understood to have believed the historic operating model was becoming increasingly unsustainable and therefore feel that they acted decisively and responsibly to protect the charity’s long‑term mission.
A foundation source said: “This was unequivocally the right strategic decision. Retaining the commercial businesses would have required major ongoing investment and carried growing financial risk.
“The sale removes that burden, places CGLI on a very strong financial footing, and allows the charity to focus fully on delivering social impact at scale.”
The City & Guilds transaction generated further controversy after it was discovered the new owners planned to reduce staff headcount at the awarding body, including moving some jobs to its home country of Greece where labour costs are lower.
New chair wanted
City & Guilds Foundation is now searching for a new chair following the departure of Dame Ann Limb, who is stepping down to take a seat in the House of Lords. The FE sector grandee suffered her own controversy recently when she admitted to falsely claiming she held a PhD.
In a recruitment advert published this week, the charity described the moment as an “incredibly exciting time” and said it was looking for a new chair to help deliver “the greatest societal impact and long-term systems change”.
Employers and training providers have been urged “not to step back” from foundation apprenticeships after rollout figures revealed the flagship policy suffered a “sluggish” start.
Just 36 young people began one of the government’s new foundation apprenticeships in the first three months after their launch last summer.
The figures, published today and covering August to October, sparked concern about employer awareness. It is also feared the initial set of seven foundation apprenticeships are too focused on industrial strategy sectors rather than labour market need.
Leaders of training providers involved in the early delivery of the programme insist the figures should be a reason for the foundation apprenticeship offer to be “strengthened”.
Foundation apprenticeships are level 2 programmes for people aged 16 to 21, or up to 24 if the person has an education, health and care plan, is a care leaver or has been in prison. The programmes are paid jobs lasting eight months and are designed to be a stepping stone to a full apprenticeships and work in industry.
The seven foundation apprenticeships launched in August included three for the construction sector, two for digital, one for engineering and manufacturing and one for health and social care.
Incentive payments of up to £2,000 per foundation apprentice are on offer to employers, in addition to the existing £1,000 payment businesses receive for 16 to 18-year-old apprentices.
The most popular was the onsite trades foundation apprenticeship with 17 starts, FE Week analysis of the data found.
Next was building services engineering with eight recruits, followed by engineering and manufacturing with five, health and social care with four, and then hardware, network and infrastructure with two.
Two foundation apprenticeships – in software and data and finishing trades – are yet to get off the ground as nobody started on them in the period.
The government’s dataset described foundation apprenticeships as a “new programme which will be building over time”.
Exeter College was the biggest provider, having recorded 16 starts on the onsite trades programme during the first quarter of 2025-26.
Mike Blakeley, Exeter College’s group executive director of partnerships and apprenticeships, said foundation apprenticeships had “opened up a valuable new route into industry” and were “positively received by both employers and learners”.
He told FE Week his college is “sharing our experience of foundation apprenticeships with other colleges and key employers, and we expect momentum to continue to build over time”.
Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief executive Ben Rowland warned in November that the initial delivery of foundation apprenticeships had been “a damp squib” because the government “began by taking them to industrial strategy sectors who didn’t ask for them, need them or want them”.
FE Week understands the government hopes to have them up and running by April.
Simon Ashworth, AELP’s deputy CEO and director of policy, said: “There is an underlying danger that an over-fixation with industrial strategy sectors becomes a distraction. This shows why a broader, more inclusive approach should be taken to help create jobs, address skills gaps and tackle the NEET crisis.”
He told FE Week that if the government is serious about foundation apprenticeships helping tackle NEET numbers, it should “speed up development in sectors like retail and hospitality” as these areas have “strong entry-level opportunities and employer demand”.
“That would give the programme the boost it needs after a sluggish start,” Ashworth added, and urged ministers to announce next steps for more foundation apprenticeships during next month’s National Apprenticeship Week.
Apprenticeship giant Lifetime Training started four foundation apprentices on the health and social care programme between August and October and has since enrolled more.
They are all employed by Manchester-based social enterprise PossAbilities.
Lifetime Training CEO Charlotte Bosworth said this week’s starts figures “are not a reason to step back from foundation apprenticeships; they are a reason for government to strengthen them”.
She called for officials to give the courses “greater clarity of purpose” because employers lack a “concrete understanding of how foundation apprenticeships differ from level 2, what they are designed to achieve, and how progression works”.
“Without a clear and consistent message, the model will continue to struggle to gain traction,” Bosworth warned.
She told FE Week that tighter alignment to real labour market need was also “vital”, with clearer frameworks to prevent foundation apprenticeships becoming “simply a level 2 substitute”.
“The first 36 starters show the model is still bedding in, but with clearer policy, employer-led design and better communication across the system, foundation apprenticeships can become a powerful tool for widening opportunity and tackling skills shortages,” Bosworth said.
A government spokesperson said: “We’re investing £1.5 billion to get hundreds of thousands of young people earning or learning – including through an expansion of apprenticeships and training.
“As part of our plans, £725 million is going towards reforming the apprenticeship system, helping 50,000 more young people into work and driving economic growth.
“It’s fantastic to see the first cohort of learners successfully entering employment in critical sectors. We’re determined to go further to support young people to succeed.”
Sport-mad MP Kim Leadbeater, who entered politics after the murder of her sister Jo Cox, tells Jessica Hill she hopes to draw from her career in further education to champion the sector
Kim Leadbeater offers me a can of Coke from a small fridge hidden away in her Westminster office, and cracks open one for herself.
Leadbeater, who is best known for spearheading the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill, is a rare species these days as an influential politician who has also experienced life on the coalface of FE. She is refreshingly down to earth for an MP, perhaps because she never intended to become one in the first place.
After taking a degree in exercise and fitness at Dewsbury College (now part of Kirklees College), Leadbeater spent 10 years teaching at Bradford College and describes herself as a “passionate advocate for FE”.
Her route into Parliament followed the murder of her sister Jo Cox, propelling the unassuming college lecturer into the national spotlight.
Kim Leadbeater
Horrific attack
It was seven days before the EU referendum, and Leadbeater had taken the day off from her Bradford College job to look after her partner who had just had an operation.
As keen football fans, the pair were about to watch a match on TV. Leadbeater had just dashed out for a run to collect her car from a service when she received the call about her sister.
Cox, who was married with two children, was leaving her constituents’ surgery when she was attacked by a gunman who shouted ‘Britain first’ as he stabbed and shot her.
Leadbeater had been lecturing on an exercise course three days a week while teaching “cheesy eighties aerobics classes” on other days, but planned to quit her college job to start a Master’s degree.
Cox’s death “changed everything forever” for her, and she instead took on the mantle of championing the causes of community cohesion and civility in politics that had been so dear to her sister.
Kim Leadbeater at Bradford College
Joining politics
Cox had entered Parliament for Batley and Spen the previous year. Her first Commons speech, in which she said“we are far more united and have far more in common than that which divides us”, struck a chord with those who felt the country had become uncomfortably polarised in the run up to the EU referendum.
Leadbeater worked with others who knew Cox to set up the Jo Cox Foundation, to continue her sister’s work of bringing communities together.
She spent the next five years working on initiatives like the Great Get Together campaign, in which community events take place across the UK each year on Cox’s birthday weekend in June.
Then in 2021, Tracy Brabin, who had replaced Cox as MP for Batley and Spen, stood down to run for mayor of West Yorkshire. When it was suggested Leadbeater should stand in her place, “absolutely not” was her initial response.
But she also felt strongly that as a lifelong resident of the area, the seat should not go to someone who “didn’t care about the community in the way that I did”.
“My view was that it would always be Jo’s seat, and it would be very upsetting for us as a family if somebody without the emotional connection and loyalty to the area was doing that job.”
The Labour Party “wasn’t in a great place at the time”, having lost a byelection in Hartlepool. Leadbeater ran against George Galloway and his Workers Party of Britain in a “very toxic” campaign. At one point she was chased to her car and required police protection.
“It was a really poor example of how politics should be done, which is precisely what I didn’t want,” she says.
She won by 323 votes and sees her victory as a “triumph of good over evil”.
Kim Leadbeater
Sidelining education
Since Labour came to power in 2024, being in the party of government has created “a whole set of new challenges” for Leadbeater.
She believes Labour has “really prioritised healthcare”, and “we need to start looking much more at education and what we can do”.
She credits prime minister Keir Starmer with being “pretty open and honest” that Labour needs at least two terms in power to “turn things around, after such a long time of being allowed to go into decline”.
But she also acknowledges that “nowadays, people don’t have any patience” to wait for change.
The prospective impact on communities of having a Reform government “terrifies” her.
She is vice chair of an all-party parliamentary group on compassion in politics, which is “all about setting civil and respectful political discourse”. She fears that “if we can’t show political leadership on that, then the country’s got no chance”.
The group is pushing for an amendment to the Hillsborough Law currently making its way through Parliament, which would make it a criminal offence for politicians to mislead the public.
In the run up to the next general election, Leadbeater believes it is “really important” for colleges to become “arenas where young people can debate subjects and not feel like they’re being blocked”, and can “listen to people who they might disagree with”.
As a lecturer, she did not shy away from encouraging her learners to debate controversial topics in their professional development lessons – a “classic” debating topic being “all fat people are lazy – discuss”.
Votes at 16
Leadbeater is a “very big supporter” of the government’s decision to lower the voting age to 16, but “as long as it’s accompanied by political education”.
Public First research on young people who will be the first under-18s eligible to vote at the next general election indicates that much more needs to be done. None of those interviewed knew the voting age was being lowered, and right-wing figures such as Nigel Farage and the late Charlie Kirk were found to be more widely recognised than the prime minister.
Leadbeater is concerned about Reform UK’s dominance on TikTok, and speculation that the party is receiving funding indirectly through far-right groups in America.
Some of the rhetoric used by senior leaders of Reform against teachers has been “really dreadful to hear”.
She believes colleges must be enabled to do more to “educate young people on misinformation, disinformation and media literacy… so when they do make that decision on who to vote for, they’re making it based on facts, not on a 30-second clip on Tiktok”.
Kim Leadbeater MP and Dignity in Dying campaigners in Parliament Square
Assisted dying
Much of Leadbeater’s time has been spent working on the private members’ bill she put forward last year proposing that adults with less than six months to live can be helped to end their lives.
It is now facing heavy scrutiny in the House of Lords, with peers tabling more than 1,000 amendments to the legal text, and could run out of time for a vote to pass before the end of the Parliamentary session.
Despite the challenges involved in getting the bill through, she believes this “massive piece of work” has been “the best example” of “genuine cross-collaboration”.
As a vote of conscience there were no party-political lines drawn, and Leadbeater worked with colleagues from other parties including the Conservatives and Reform. Reform’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, was a keen supporter, she says, having “lost a loved one under very horrible circumstances”.
She believes this kind of cross-party engagement happens a lot more in Westminster than people realise, particularly on select committees.
What most people see of politics is “a combative 45 minutes of PMQs on Wednesday lunchtime, or stuff in the papers and on social media which generally gets two people with opposing extreme views to fight it out”.
But Leadbeater claims most MPs are “somewhere in the middle” politically and “there’s a lot of genuine friendships, and certainly professional relationships across political divides”.
I joke it must feel strange for her to be talking to a journalist about issues beyond euthanasia.
But she is keen to point out her other political interests, particularly around social cohesion, women’s equality and – harking back to her days in FE – health, fitness and wellbeing.
Leadbeater is a member of the women’s parliamentary football team, made up of cross-party MPs (including sports minister Stephanie Peacock), parliamentary staff and journalists.
For two years until 2024 she was chair of the all-party parliamentary group for sport and still champions health and wellbeing in Parliament “as much as I can”. But she concedes (while sipping her Coke) that “in terms of my own health and wellbeing, I’ve probably never been less healthy”.
Kim Leadbeater at Kirklees College
The rebel
Leadbeater was a keen hockey player while a pupil at Heckmondwike Grammar School, and performed well academically. But she was also “a bit of a rebel”.
Whereas Cox went on to Cambridge University to study anthropology then social political science, when their headteacher told Leadbeater that “we’d like you to go to Oxford or Cambridge”, she thought “well, I’m not doing that then”.
“It’s hard growing up as the younger sibling because you always get compared… I thought, ‘I want to do my own thing’.”
Instead, Leadbeater went to work in a laboratory analysing carpet yarn.
She later embarked on a law degree at Leeds University, then switched to philosophy and politics. But after becoming disillusioned with that course too, she became a commercial trainee at a bed manufacturing firm.
During her 12-month programme she worked in all parts of the family-owned business. While there was no formal educational element to the programme, she saw it as a “really valuable model for entering the workforce”.
Leadbeater was quickly promoted to national sales manager, but after a stint at another bed manufacturer she decided to return to the world of education.
She admits her “friends thought I was mad” for quitting her “very well-paid job and company car” for an NVQ level two in health and fitness at Dewsbury College.
“FE actually was what I needed, when I needed it,” she says.
Kim Leadbeater in her Westminster office
Championing FE
Leadbeater appreciated the small class sizes she experienced on her NVQ and subsequent foundation degree, rather than the “lecture theatre of 200 people where you can’t ask questions or might be embarrassed because you don’t know the answer”, which was her experience of university life.
She did her teacher training at Wakefield College before she started teaching at Dewsbury, then at Bradford College.
Once the assisted dying bill is “done and dusted”, she hopes to focus more of her attention on education issues. She believes FE provides “a second chance for so many” but remains “the forgotten relation within education”.
She concedes that “Labour’s not getting everything right” on education; she has friends in the sector who are “really unhappy about some things”, including the government continuing to make schools and colleges pay national insurance contributions on staff earnings.
But she also detects “a lot of satisfaction” around the recent changes proposed in the curriculum and assessment review.
She agrees with its recommendation for a “broader” curriculum, and thinks more focus should be placed on developing interpersonal skills and health and wellbeing.
However, Leadbeater is wary about putting more pressure on school and college teachers to support young people. “There’s a role for us all in raising our children and young people, particularly parents but also wider families and communities”.
She fondly recalls how her experience of coaching the girls football team at Bradford College on Wednesday afternoons was about “friendships and teamwork” more than anything.
She would like to see colleges supported to provide more extracurricular activities, but not if it creates “more pressure for teachers who are already extremely stressed trying to be the social workers, counsellors and life coaches”.
Kim Leadbeater in his Westminster office
Bonkers, beautiful place
One extracurricular activity she strongly believes all FE colleges should do is bring learners into Parliament for guided tours.
“Every single young person should get the chance to come” she says. “Every decision that’s made in this place affects young people’s lives. They should see what actually happens here and see the history, because it’s an amazing, bonkers, beautiful place.”
Politics was not a career Leadbeater “sought out”. She finds it “all consuming” and on most days, she regrets ever becoming a politician.
The scathing comments to a recent post she made on her Facebook page, announcing more support for the Armed Forces, illustrates the challenge she is up against; one featured an AI-generated coffin full of nails. But Leadbeater sees her role as being “very much like teaching”, in that the satisfaction comes from “making a difference to people’s lives”.
She recalls how during lockdown, Zach Eagling, a boy in her constituency with cerebral palsy and epilepsy, was trolled online while doing a fundraising walking challenge in his garden. People sent him flashing images in an attempt to bring on an epileptic fit.
Leadbeater helped Zach and his mum campaign against this “outrageous” type of trolling against those with epilepsy, and succeeded in adding an amendment into the online safety bill to make it illegal.
Leadbeater shows me the picture on her wall of Zach, who is now campaigning for better public transport access for those with disabilities. “He’s an absolute legend,” she says. “The most satisfying part of my job is when you can help people make a difference.”
On those days, she does feel glad to be a politician.
For over three decades, the education charity and awarding organisation ASDAN has worked to bridge the gap between education and employment. Today, that mission is being strengthened through a renewed commitment to digital learning, skills development and equity for all learners.
Providers face persistent skills gaps, rising employer expectations for work-ready, digitally confident learners and increasing demands on staff capacity. Alongside this, digital workloads linked to assessment, tracking and compliance continue to grow. In this context, ASDAN’s focus on flexible, accessible digital solutions and meaningful skills development supports both learners and practitioners to meet labour market needs, whilst ensuring no learner is left behind.
Digital learning designed for self-directed learners
ASDAN’s new digital learning platform, Equitas, has been purpose-built to support self-directed learning within post-16 education, apprenticeships and work-based settings. Rather than replicating traditional classroom models online, the platform embeds learning within meaningful activity, reflection and evidence.
At its core is ASDAN’s long-established plan, do, review cycle – a pedagogical approach that mirrors real-world learning and workplace practice. Learners plan an activity, carry it out independently or collaboratively, and then review what they have learned, the challenges they faced and the skills they developed.
Within Equitas, this cycle becomes a clear digital workflow. Learners upload evidence, respond to structured prompts and reflect against assessment criteria, building a personal record of learning that demonstrates both achievement and progression over time.
“Plan, do, review isn’t just a teaching method, it’s how learning and activity actually happen in the workplace,” says Tori Farren, ASDAN Education Development Partner. “Equitas allows learners to practise decision-making, problem-solving and reflection in a supported environment, which is exactly what employers expect.”
Supporting equity through flexible digital frameworks
Equitas has also been designed with inclusion and equity in mind. Its flexible, evidence-based approach enables providers to tailor learning to different contexts, pathways and learner needs, making it particularly effective in FE colleges, alternative provision and apprenticeship programmes.
Because progress is demonstrated through practical activity rather than time-limited exams, learners who may have struggled in more traditional academic settings can show what they are capable of. Digital access allows learning to take place across classrooms, workplaces and home environments, supporting blended delivery while reducing administrative burden for staff.
“Equity is about recognising different starting points and valuing different strengths,” Tori explains. “When learners can evidence real skills and experience, rather than just written performance, you unlock confidence and observe progression.”
A skills-led bridge between education and work
ASDAN’s approach is underpinned by a strong focus on employability skills. Across its programmes, learners develop and evidence six core transferable skills that employers consistently value:
learning
communicating
decision making
thinking
team working
self-awareness
These skills are embedded into all learning activity on Equitas, ensuring they are taught explicitly rather than assumed. Learners apply them through practical tasks, reflect on their use and gather evidence that can be shared with employers or progression providers.
This model complements both academic learning and apprenticeships. In work-based settings, Equitas provides a structured digital framework for recording skills development, supporting reflective practice and evidencing competence over time.
“Employers want people who can explain what they’ve learned and how they apply it,” says Tori. “ASDAN’s skills framework helps learners articulate their value, which is critical for interviews, progression and long-term success.”
Michelle Storer is the Senior Business Director for Partnerships & MATs at Hays Recruitment. She shares how employers are increasingly prioritising transferable skills:
“We’re seeing a clear shift in what employers across the labour market need from young people entering the workforce. They consistently tell us that what truly sets candidates apart are the transferable skills that enable them to adapt, communicate effectively, and make sound decisions in fast‑moving environments.
With 93% of employers reporting skills shortages in the past year according to the Hays Salary & Recruiting Trends guide 2026, there is growing recognition that education must focus not only on subject expertise but on building confident, capable learners who can apply their skills in real‑world contexts.
When learners can articulate their experiences, demonstrate progression and evidence these behaviours, they transition into work more smoothly and contribute more quickly. Embedding skills‑led learning across FE will be essential in building a workforce ready for the realities of tomorrow’s labour market.”
Qualifications that support progression and independence
ASDAN’s qualifications further strengthen the link between education and employment by developing independence, project management and reflective learning.
Their Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) supports learners to undertake in-depth independent projects, developing research, planning and presentation skills valued by universities and employers alike. Recently refreshed, ASDAN’s Personal Effectiveness Qualification (PEQ) incorporates a focus on employability, enabling learners to evidence workplace skills through practical experience.
ASDAN is also preparing to introduce the Foundation Project Qualification (FPQ, Level 1) and Higher Project Qualification (HPQ, Level 2) to it’s portfolio, extending this model to a wider scope of learners and opening new progression routes aligned with both academic and professional pathways.
As ASDAN develops these qualifications, they are inviting feedback from across the sector to help inform their design and delivery. Education professionals with an interest in skills development and post-16 pathways are encouraged to share their views in a survey, exploring how FPQs and HPAs could support progression, independence and employability.
Strengthening impact through leadership and growth
ASDAN’s commitment to employability is being further strengthened through the appointment of Gareth Reynolds as Director of Impact and Growth.
Gareth brings extensive experience across FE, HE, awarding organisations and professional bodies, with a proven track record in product leadership, digital transformation and improving learner outcomes.
He will focus on developing new digital solutions, strengthening partnerships and translating policy ambition into inclusive, high-impact provision.
“As the education and skills landscape continues to evolve, there is real potential to create meaningful, lasting impact for learners,” says Gareth. “I’m energised by the opportunity to work with ASDAN to ensure innovation and growth translate into genuinely inclusive opportunity.”
With FE providers looking for approaches that are flexible, inclusive and aligned with employer needs, ASDAN’s skills-led, digitally enabled model offers a clear route forward – supporting learners not just to achieve qualifications, but to become confident decision-makers ready for the world beyond education.
To explore how skills-led learning can be implemented in further education settings, complete this expression of interest form to speak with an ASDAN curriculum expert.
Apprenticeship providers will come under scrutiny from the Department for Education if they score the bottom two ratings in Ofsted’s revamped inspection reports, refreshed rules have revealed.
Changes made to the apprenticeship accountability framework (AAF) this morning also show that three “supplementary indicators” – breaks in learning, end-point assessment organisation data, off-the-job training – have been suspended.
Experts have warned providers should be cautious of the move, which will come into effect at the end of this month, as apprentices who lapse their planned end date will also now contribute to a new threshold that could put providers “at risk” of intervention.
Ofsted thresholds
In November, the DfE said it would initially take a “proportionate” approach and not use specific Ofsted grades in its decision to intervene in apprenticeship providers.
Ofsted’s new grading scale ranges from ‘exceptional’, ‘strong standard’ and ‘expected standard’ to ’needs attention’ and ‘urgent improvement’.
The DfE has now revised its approach. Today’s AAF update said the department will consider apprenticeship providers to be ‘at risk’ if they receive an ‘urgent improvement’ judgment for leadership and governance or inclusion at whole provider level.
Providers will also be scope for an ‘at risk’ classification if they fail safeguarding inspection procedures or receive an ‘urgent improvement’ judgment for any provision-type level evaluation areas for apprenticeships.
Apprenticeship providers that are classified as ‘at risk’ under the AAF normally trigger a performance review and management conversation, which can lead to extreme decisions such as contract termination.
Meanwhile, DfE will consider apprenticeship providers as ‘needs improvement’ if Ofsted issues a ‘needs attention’ judgment for the following evaluation areas: leadership and governance or inclusion, any provision-type level evaluation area for apprenticeships, or if a training company is found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in a new provider monitoring inspection.
Providers that are classified as ‘needs improvement’ under the AAF can expect management conversation with the DfE to understand the reasons for “underperformance”.
‘Needs improvement’ providers could also be asked to create improvement plans and may face “proportionate contractual controls” or more stringent intervention if no improvement is found.
DfE added that it will not take Ofsted’s contribution to meeting skills needs into account in its evaluations.
Simon Ashworth, director of policy and deputy chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), welcomed a “pragmatic link” between inspection outcomes and intervention during transition to the new system.
“‘Needs attention’ should trigger dialogue and support, not automatic punitive action,” he said.
“The sector’s quality profile is improving, and accountability must reinforce that progress while avoiding destabilising established and high-quality providers.”
He added that the changes to the AAF were an “understandable evolutionary step”.
Caution around apprentices past planned end date
Ofsted inspections are just one of several measures in the AAF, which have also been subject to revisions this morning.
DfE has suspended three “supplementary” quality indicators and refined another on the grounds that they no longer provide “sufficient value” in assessing provider risk or underperformance.
The DfE has refined the apprentice past planned end date (APPED) indicator to focus “solely” on apprentices who are on their programme and surpass their end date.
It has removed the 90 and 180-day parameters meaning learners who are past their planned end date from day one will count towards a threshold that could put a provider ‘at risk’ of intervention.
Officials can also now categorise providers as ‘at risk’ if they have 15 per cent or more APPEDs in their organisation.
Those who have between 10 and 15 per cent APPEDs will be classed ‘needs improvement’.
“Prolonged extension of training can indicate barriers to timely completion, reduced momentum and an increased risk of non‑completion,” the guidance said.
Ashworth warned that managing apprentices past their planned end date will “remain as important as ever”.
“It’s positive to see that the DfE has decided to finally disaggregate the measure on apprentices past their end dates that always convoluted measuring timely completion and apprentices on-programme and no longer attracting funding,” he said.
He added: “This refined measure does though mean providers will need to continue to carefully focus their efforts to ensure timely planning and subsequent delivery of the programme.”
Tony Allen, apprenticeships consultant and former contracts manager at the Education and Skills Funding Agency, said the changes were bad news for large organisations.
“If you’re a provider with 500 apprentices, and you’ve got 30 or 40 cohorts and they all finish a couple of weeks, three weeks late, they will appear on your dashboard.”
DfE’s guidance confirmed as such.
“Providers with a large number of apprentices should expect closer monitoring and performance management to support continuous improvement,” it said.
Allen added that the changes were “ill-thought through” as “smart” providers would put learners on a break in learning for one day to change the planned end date to avoid being at risk.
“I think the sector needs to be on their guard around some of these changes,” he added.
Three indicators suspended… for now
The AAF will no longer include breaks in learning, end-point assessment organisation data and off-the-job training as individual indicators through the framework, but DfE said it will keep its approach “under review”.
Ashworth said breaks in learning were a “significant” post-pandemic issue but are less so now through providers re-engaging learners.
“Last years’ policy change on off-the-job training now already states minimum hours for each standard, and assessment reform means these indicators are now no longer relevant,” he added.
Last May, the government introduced minimum off-the-job training (OTJ) hours for each apprenticeship standard, meaning providers no longer had to calculate how much OTJ training each apprentice requires depending on the length of their apprenticeship.
