Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

The Church of England wants to serve a new generation as we have always done

The Church of England isn’t trying to infiltrate FE colleges in some secret plan, as suggested by two secularists, writes Nigel Gender

Further education institutions transform lives by preparing people to enter the workplace, go on to further study, retrain or change careers and provide the skilled workforce we need for the future.

Their importance is affirmed in the Church of England’s recently published vision for FE Vocation, Transformation & Hope, which talks about the ways the Church wants to be more involved in FE colleges.

Colleges are communities strengthened by staff and students of all faiths and beliefs working and learning together. It is right that our ambitious aim to build a family of Church of England FE colleges should be subject to proper consideration.

So what’s in it for us? Quite simply, an opportunity to serve, and to meet a genuine need.

Our experience gives us something distinctive and important to offer – we have been an education provider at a national level for nearly 200 years.

The Church of England provided a free education some 70 years before the state, and today runs almost 5,000 schools in partnership with local authorities and trusts. We’re also involved with universities and teacher-training institutions.

Of course, we also have much to learn. The Bishop of Durham acknowledged recently that the Church of England itself must become younger and therefore do more to engage with younger people.

An article in FE Week last week by the National Secular Society rather bizarrely tried to argue that this was part of some secret plan.

On the contrary, we are unapologetic about seeking to engage with and serve a new generation, as this is what we have always done.

Suggestions that spiritual guidance and support offered by chaplaincies is either unwanted or a niche provision also miss the mark.

A recent ComRes poll showed that almost half of adults (44 per cent) say they pray. And one in four people pray regularly (at least once a month) ̶ a number that has increased six percentage points since a pre-pandemic survey.

Positive responses are even higher in the 18-to-34 age group, with 30 per cent saying they pray regularly, and 34 per cent having watched a broadcast religious service during the pandemic.

By this measure, the idea that faith has no place in modern society is decidedly pre-pandemic in its worldview, especially among younger age groups.

Staff and students don’t leave their faith or beliefs at the college gates

Staff and students don’t leave their faith or beliefs at the college gates. They face the same questions about their lives and their purpose as anyone else, encountering grief and loss, joy and success, celebration and mourning.

So while chaplains will share some ground with counsellors, support officers and others providing pastoral care, they have a unique role in helping students and staff to explore those areas that have a spiritual dimension.

That’s why we are challenging our own church to engage much more systematically in this sector that educates over 2 million people every year.

This will mean more chaplains working with their FE college and local diocese to offer more coordinated support.

Colleges have valued the contribution of chaplaincies in providing pastoral support for students, working alongside student services, linking colleges with communities, contributing to curriculum enrichment, religious literacy and to good relations on campus.

Meanwhile, far from constraining what is taught, theological insight can enable a lively and holistic approach to forming the curriculum and the values which underpin it.

Our recommendations are simply about doing more of what we already know works; reaching out to all those who are trying to serve the common good, to tackle injustice and, in the current phrase, to build back better from the pandemic.

We do so from our profound conviction that everyone is a person of value, made in the image of God, and that society urgently needs that sense of human dignity and worth to be embodied in all our social institutions.

Among these we count our own church, and are determined that it too will become younger and more diverse.

Here’s what you need to know about staff with ‘gender critical’ views

A landmark judgment has ruled that it is lawful to hold a belief that may offend or shock others, writes Jane Hallas

It is unlikely that Miss Jean Brodie would have cared very much whether she could express her admiration for Mussolini as often as she does in the classic novel by Muriel Spark.

But today college leaders have to be ever mindful of how far they can allow freedom of expression and belief in colleges.

Under Section 4 of the Equality Act 2010, religion or belief is a “protected characteristic”. Section 10 of the Act defines “belief” as any religious or philosophical belief (or a lack of belief).

But how far can an individual express their own beliefs, before it potentially clashes with someone else’s protected characteristic?

Such philosophical as well as legal conundrums can lead to real challenges in colleges, particularly over employment prospects, discrimination claims, as well as the “no-platforming” of individuals.

Where does free, healthy, open debate in a democratic society end and hate speech ̶ where people feel marginalised, threatened and afraid ̶ begin?

A landmark judgment from the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has now ruled that in a free-thinking and democratic society, it is lawful to hold a belief that may offend or shock others.

In Forstater v CDG Europe, Ms Forstater held the belief that gender is an immutable biological fact; a person is born either male or female.

Previously, in 2010, the EAT had given guidance about the types of belief that should be protected, referring to Article 9 of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) which allows freedom of thought, conscience and belief. The EAT’s criteria were that:

The belief must be genuinely held
It must be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint
It must relate to a “weighty and substantial” aspect of human life and behaviour
It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance
It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity, and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.

There has been increasing debate and media coverage over freedom of speech in relation to the issues of gender identity and gender fluidity.

In Ms Forstater’s case, her fixed-term contract was not renewed after she publicised on social media her belief that a trans woman is not in reality a woman.

She also said that while a person can identify as another sex and ask other people to go along with that choice, and can change their legal sex, this does not change their actual, biological sex.

Such postings attracted complaints.

Ms Forstater brought her claim on the basis that she had been discriminated against because of her beliefs. She lost at the Employment Tribunal stage and appealed.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal noted that freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, which cannot exist without pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness.

It didn’t think it was for the court to look into the validity of a person’s belief and felt that the state should essentially stay out of such arguments and instead look to make sure there was tolerance on both sides.

Beliefs that upset or shocked others are capable of being protected in a liberal society

Beliefs that were an affront to ECHR principles, such as propagating Nazism or hateful speech against minorities, were not protected.

But beliefs that upset or shocked others are capable of being protected in a liberal society and are capable of respect in a democratic society.

This includes what have been called “gender critical” beliefs.

The ruling essentially underlined the importance of the right to express a belief that is contrary to someone else’s belief and which they find offensive.

It is important to note that this case doesn’t give people freedom to harass or discriminate against members of the transgender community.

College leaders must still ensure that they do not tolerate such actions in the workplace.

However, the court emphasises freedom of speech and belief. For these reasons, it is worth reviewing any relevant training or policies to check they are compatible with this ruling.

This is why a ‘digital Baker clause’ is needed

Students will expect to access all the information about their future options in one place online, writes Katie Bell

This week, the education select committee recommended that schools be limited to a ‘requires improvement’ grade if they do not allow training providers to speak to learners.

It’s an effort to ensure they are in line with the Baker clause, which exists to enable colleges and training providers to go into schools to tell them about vocational and technical courses and apprenticeships.

At UCAS we know that young people are increasingly interested in these routes. The number of higher and degree apprenticeship starts (those at level 4 or above) has risen from 39,300 in 2018-19 to 51,400 in 2020-21, according to government data. They now make up more than three in ten starts across all apprenticeships.

We also know these numbers will climb, as the boom over the past decade in children entering primary and secondary education is about to hit post-16 education.

The number of 18-year-olds in the UK is set to increase consistently over the next ten years, and by 2025 we forecast there will be one million applicants globally applying for higher education in the UK.

As the 18-year-old population grows, so will the competition for these opportunities. It is only right that these students are able to assess their options in a way that ensures they make the right decision for themselves.

Last month we published Where Next? Improving the Journey to Becoming an Apprentice, the latest in our “Where Next?” series examining the student journey. It showed that of those looking to apply to higher education in 2022, half are interested in receiving information about apprenticeships.

The most common apprenticeship areas of interest are engineering, computer sciences and architecture, building and planning. They are also more likely to be from geographical areas with the least participation in higher education.

The report also highlighted the challenges faced by students when exploring these opportunities. For undergraduate routes, students are able to go to a central digital location, view engaging content and compare various opportunities like-for-like.

However, the experience for students exploring apprenticeships is not comparable. Only around a quarter (26 per cent) of those interested in apprenticeships told us they found it very or somewhat easy to find information about apprenticeships, compared to almost three-quarters (73 per cent) looking at university options.

But the challenges in understanding these opportunities start even earlier. Of a self-reported sample, only around one-third of students reported receiving their legal entitlement to information from apprenticeship providers or FE colleges, despite the Baker clause.

As Ofsted were warned again this week, our report indicates that students are not receiving information about the full range of options available to them.

We also see evidence that students don’t understand the potential value of apprenticeships. Students report that they viewed a university degree as most prestigious and more likely to lead to a good job.

Again, this underlines the importance of students being able to understand and assess their options fully, and the value they provide.

So we now have a clear ambition to act as a “digital Baker clause”. We want to provide comprehensive information, advice and content tools to help students make informed and aspirational post-secondary choices.

Students will expect to be able to access information about these in a single location

That’s why we’ve launched the UCAS Hub.

We know teachers and advisers are working hard to inform students about their options (we work with over 4,000 directly every single day) and we know how complex this maze can be.

And those pathways are continuously changing. Through the Skills for Jobs white paper, and subsequent Skills and Post-16 Education Bill, the government plans to bolster higher technical qualifications at levels 4 and 5.

Students will expect to be able to access information about these in a single location.

Apprenticeships listed on the “career finder” tool of the UCAS site have already been viewed over 1.2 million times in the past 12 months.

We want our service to be as strong for would-be apprentices as it is for prospective undergraduates, bringing true parity to the student journey.

High-street names cite cost as they exit apprenticeship training market

Several major retailers have turned their backs on delivering their own apprenticeship training, with one blaming the costs of training as the reason for their exit.

Sixty-four providers made “unplanned exits” from publicly funded provision in 2019/20, as revealed in the impact assessment for the government’s landmark Skills and Post-16 Education Bill, published in May.

A freedom of information request by FE Week has now uncovered major retailers such as Boots Opticians, Halfords, Thomas Cook and Greggs were among those that stopped delivering.

All of them have now handed training over to external providers.

Cost led retailer to ditch direct provision

Halfords, a major retailer of motoring and cycling goods, already canned its level 2 provision, which the vast majority of its apprentices were part of, in April 2019.

It made a full exit from training apprentices in May 2020, with a spokesperson saying they began using an outsourced training provider as it was “a more cost-effective way to deliver apprenticeships and ensure the quality of our apprenticeship programmes”.

While the retailer did not expand on its reasons for leaving publicly funded training, it previously said dropping level 2 provision was caused by costs incurred from slashes to government funding.

An internal email seen by FE Week in 2019 revealed managers believed the 20 per cent reduction in funding for the level 2 retailer standard from £5,000 to £4,000 in December would “adversely impact on the quality of programme Halfords can offer, impacting the current curriculum, which received praise during our recent inspection”.

Halfords received a ‘good’ grade from Ofsted for its provision to over 1,000 apprentices in 2019.

Optician giant wanted to be more ‘responsive to business need’

Boots Opticians Professional Services Limited, an arm of the high-street pharmacists, told FE Week it abandoned direct training in May 2020 as the new model means “we can be more responsive to business needs”, but refused to
elaborate.

It had been graded ‘requires improvement’ by Ofsted, but made ‘reasonable progress’ in every area of a monitoring visit covering over 100 apprentices in 2019.

Bakery chain Greggs, which binned its training in 2019, also did not elaborate on its decision not to reapply for the register of apprenticeship training providers that year.

A spokesperson would only say: “We remain committed to supporting the development and growth of our people and continue to run apprenticeship programmes and a number of other schemes to help encourage people into employment across the business, both internally and with external providers.”

Resurrected travel firm ‘absolutely keen’ to start new apprentices

Holiday company Thomas Cook, which had yet to be visited by Ofsted, entered liquidation in September 2019, the same month it made its unplanned exit.

The following month, its retail arm was acquired by Hays Travel, headed by DfE non-executive director Irene Hays. The new owners offered all of Thomas Cook’s former employees a job and a spokesperson told FE Week 31 apprentices chose to continue their programme with Hays Travel.

The Thomas Cook brand has since been bought up by Chinese company Fosun Tourism Group and re-established as an online-only service.

A spokesperson for the new brand said they are “absolutely keen to bring in apprentices as the travel industry rebounds.

“We hope that 2022 will bring a more stable holiday-buying pattern so that we can grow sustainably, bringing in fresh talent to our core areas of digital and customer service,” though the spokesperson said they would only bring in a “handful” of learners.

While it is not set in stone, the spokesperson indicated they would use a hybrid of in-house and outsourced training delivery.

Virgin Trains ceased trading in December 2019 after it lost the franchise to run train services on the west coast to Avanti, which took on their employees.

Over 100 apprentices came with them, and their training is now being delivered by organisations external to Avanti.

Most ‘unplanned exit’ providers had negative Ofsted ratings

Of the other providers that made unplanned exits from ESFA-funded provision in 2019/20, 19 left after a new-provider monitoring Ofsted report found them making ‘insufficient progress’.

A further eight left after receiving a grade three or four from the watchdog.

Twenty-one had either a grade 2 or had made ‘reasonable’ or ‘significant’ progress according to a monitoring visit.

Sixteen did not have a report published when they exited.

Independence questions as Williamson ally put forward for Ofqual job

Gavin Williamson has put forward his own policy adviser to be the next chief regulator of Ofqual, prompting warnings over the body’s supposed independence.

The Department for Education announced last week that Dr Jo Saxton, who founded and ran the Turner Schools academy trust before moving to her current job, was the education secretary’s preferred candidate to take up the role from September.

The appointment comes at a time of crisis for the regulator, which has been without a permanent head since Sally Collier resigned last year in the wake of the exam grading fiasco.

Former chief Dame Glenys Stacey initially returned for three months, and ex-exam board boss Simon Lebus has been interim head since January. Ian Bauckham, another adviser to the government, is its interim chair.

Appointment ‘sends shivers down my spine,’ says critic

The proposed appointment of another close government ally to an independent position has raised eyebrows across the education sector. It follows the appointment of Dame Rachel de Souza, a close friend of former academies minister Lord Agnew, as children’s commissioner last year.

Saxton has links to another former academies minister – Lord Nash – who appointed her as chief executive of his Future Academies chain in 2012.

Dennis Sherwood, an exams expert and vocal Ofqual critic, said the appointment of a government adviser to the role “sends shivers down my spine”. He has warned that the regulator is not fit for purpose and should be “disbanded”.

He added: “Appointing someone close to [Williamson] seems to me to signal a fast reversion to the status quo… when what we really need is a new broom.”

Because the appointment of Saxton would be a permanent one, she must first appear in front of the Parliamentary education committee next week.

Can Saxton restore Ofqual’s reputation?

Federation of Awarding Bodies chief executive Tom Bewick said the committee would “want to assure itself that the chief regulator can restore Ofqual’s status to being a strong independent body, capable of inspiring public confidence in all forms of qualifications and examinations”.

Tom Bewick

He added: “In the past, being a close confidante and policy adviser to the secretary of state for education would be seen as a straightforward disqualification for a non-ministerial departmental role like this, but clearly the civil service recruitment panel and Gavin Williamson has taken a different view.”

Former colleagues speak highly of Saxton.

Mike Buchanan, chair of Turner Schools, described her as “inspiring”, and said she had been “fearless in tackling low expectations and underperformance”.

He added: “I’m sure she will bring similar rigour, clarity and drive in her challenging new role.”

Another Saxton ally, who did not want to be named, said she was “absolutely single-minded about doing everything possible for the most disadvantaged kids”.

“She is whip-smart and doesn’t suffer fools. If anyone can sort out this mess, Jo can.”

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the ASCL school leaders’ union, said his organisation had a “very positive relationship” with Saxton “and our experience is that she listens to the views of school and college leaders”.

“This is a crucial appointment at any time but particularly given the challenges ahead with next year’s public exams following the disruption caused by coronavirus. We will need Ofqual to be responsive to circumstances, clear in its communications, and to maintain a good dialogue with the sector. We think that is what Jo will deliver.”

‘Chasm’ between Saxton’s rhetoric and her trust’s outcomes

Saxton’s time at Turner Schools was not without controversy. Set up in 2016, the trust is now made up of five schools, including two that were stripped from the failed Lilac Sky academy trust.

Despite the trust’s size, Saxton was paid almost £150,000 a year.

Writing on the Kent Independent Education Advice website, former headteacher Peter Read claimed there was a “chasm” between Saxton’s “rhetoric” and the outcomes at Turner Schools.

Only two of the trust’s five schools have been inspected since joining. Morehall Primary school was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted in 2019. Martello Primary received a “requires improvement” grade in 2018, though the report did rate leadership as ‘good’ and praised Saxton’s “passion to ensure the highest standards”.

At Martello, 41 per cent of pupils reached the expected standard in reading, writing and maths in 2019, compared with 65 per cent nationwide. Folkestone Academy’s progress 8 score was -0.61, well below the national average.

Read also pointed to high exclusion rates at the schools in 2017-18. But a trust spokesperson said fixed-term exclusions had fallen from 790 at Folkestone Academy and 21 at Martello in 2017-18 to 106 and three respectively in 2019-20.

A spokesperson said: “Turning around schools that have been struggling for years takes time and, in the early days when expectations on behaviour were being reset, exclusions were high.”

HR T Level ‘ceased’

A new human resources T Level has been pulled from the flagship qualifications’ rollout after no awarding organisations could be found to develop it.

An update from the Education and Skills Funding Agency today revealed development work had ceased on the T Level as of this month.

“We were not able to award the contract for the development of this T Level to an awarding organisation during the recent wave four procurement exercise,” it said.

The agency added that it cannot commit to a date when work on the human resources T Level, which was due to be rolled out in September 2023, might start again.

The qualification has now been removed as an option for 2023, meaning the number of T Levels has dropped to 23.

“We will publish an update when there is more information on this T Level in the future,” the agency promises.

T Level had already been delayed

This is yet another blow to the human resources T Level, which was rescheduled from a 2022 rollout just last July, along with the legal T Level.

The cultural, heritage and visitor attractions T Level was the last to be removed, which also happened last July, due to there being “insufficient employer demand” for a new technical qualification in that field.

Rollout of T Levels began last September with three qualifications in the first wave: digital, construction and education and childcare.

In September 2021, a further seven will start being taught in classrooms; while an extra six will rollout in 2022.

2023 is set to a big milestone in the rollout, with a further seven qualifications being introduced and providers at Ofsted grade three and four being allowed to start delivery, though only of the digital, construction, education and health and science T Levels for the first year.

The remaining new T Levels being delivered from 2023 are legal services; hair, beauty and aesthetics; craft and design; media, broadcast and production; catering; animal care and management; and agriculture, land management and production.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 358

Your weekly guide to who’s new and who’s leaving.

Lesley Shepperson, Trustee, VTCT

Start date: June 2021

Concurrent job: Managing director, Shepperson and Shepperson Consultants Ltd

Interesting fact: She has been wild camping on a bike in South Island, New Zealand.

Katy Quinn, Trustee, VTCT

Start date: June 2021

Concurrent job: Principal, Strode College

Interesting fact: One of her first jobs was working as an overseas rep in Tenerife, which she says gave her “excellent transferable skills”

Palvinder Singh, Principal, Kirklees College

Start date: June 2021

Previous job: Group deputy principal, NCG

Interesting fact: He “had the honour” to take part in the celebrations in India for Guru Nanak Dev Ji, the 550th birthday of the founder of Sikhism

Andrew Mondon, Trustee, VTCT

Start date: June 2021

Concurrent job: Chief finance officer, Change Grow Live

Interesting fact: He has climbed most of the peaks in Britain, and his next challenge will be Ben Nevis, “although this may be one climb too many!”

New provider hits out at validity of Ofsted inspection done ‘on limited contact time’

A new apprenticeship provider has expressed its “frustrations” with the validity of an Ofsted report that now threatens its ability to recruit.

MRG Services UK Limited’s 76 apprentices were found to “not develop substantial new knowledge, skills and behaviours” among a litany of criticisms, in a monitoring report published on Tuesday that resulted in ‘insufficient progress’ judgments in every area.

Inspectors discovered “too many cases” where the apprentices, studying the level 5 operations/departmental manager, level 2 fenestration (glass-fitting), or level 3 and 4 business and teaching standards were “simply deepening their understanding of topics and consolidating existing skills”.

Inspector had ‘very limited contact time’

But the Merseyside-based provider has hit back, saying that while it accepts the inspection process is “vital” to ensuring improvement, “our frustrations, which have unfortunately continued through the complaint process, centre on the validity of evidence in the one-and-a-half-day visit”.

Inspectors, the provider said, visited while many of the staff were still working from home or furloughed, which “inevitably led to very limited contact time”.

The inspector covering themes one and two of the inspection – ensuring that the provider is meeting all the requirements of successful apprenticeship provision, and ensuring that apprentices benefit from high-quality training that leads to positive outcomes – did so from home, allegedly.

As such, they did not have direct access to any observations of teaching and learning, MRG’s enrichment programme, session evaluations, or action reports, the provider claimed.

Ofsted comments ‘not based upon fact’

The report says leaders “do not have an accurate oversight of apprentices’ progress”, so do not adequately support learners who fall behind.

A lack of challenge from the governing board meant apprentices receive a “poor” standard of training.

Tutors do not teach the curriculum for the level 5 standard in a “logical order”, with apprentices attending monthly management workshops and having to choose online topics to learn in between them.

Yet MRG says the comments regarding its delivery “are not based upon fact”.

Ofsted also found the provider did not have “effective safeguarding arrangements in place”, and do not carry out “appropriate checks” when hiring new people.

Apprentices did not know who to report safeguarding concerns to at MRG, and only knew how to keep themselves safe in the workplace because of training by their employer, Ofsted said.

MRG Services said they take safeguarding “very seriously”, adding: “We must seek to maintain a robust system.”

However, they also said they would challenge the overarching judgments.

“Thankfully, the due process is for a repeat visit to take place within a very short period of time, when we believe that our frustrations over the validity of this monitoring visit will be vindicated.

“We welcome this further visit at Ofsted’s earliest convenience.”

Provider was praised for up-to-date learning

The inspectorate did say apprentices nearing the end of their programme understand the requirements of their assessment.

Leaders were also praised for providing subject-specific training for staff, so tutors attend leadership development webinars on “agile leadership”.

Tutors develop their occupational knowledge and provide learners with up-to-date learning.

A provider is usually suspended from recruiting apprentices if they score at least one ‘insufficient progress’ judgment in a new provider monitoring report, in line with Education and Skills Funding Agency rules.

DfE goes back out to advert for Skills Reform Board chair

The government is struggling to find candidates to chair a “key” new board that will oversee skills reforms.

The Skills Reform Board was formed in March 2021 in the wake of the publication of the Skills for Jobs white paper and prime minister Boris Johnson’s announcement of a lifetime skills guarantee.

The board is made up of civil servants and its role is to “provide oversight, decision-making and assurance across the skills reform portfolio to ensure that the key aims of the reform are delivered”, according to a Department for Education spokesperson.

It is intended to be the “key governance mechanism” for the skills reform delivery portfolio. The board is meant to thrash out solutions for any problems that arise with the portfolio and advise on decisions that cannot be resolved by individual civil servants.

DfE wants to ‘best possible selection’ for skills board chair

But the hunt for somebody to become the independent chair for this “high-profile” and “exciting” opportunity has proved problematic.

The role, offering a three-year term with £400 per meeting for 12 90-minute meetings a year, was originally opened for applications in April, with a deadline of May 10.

But the department relaunched the advert on June 18.

Asked why they had gone back out to advert, a DfE spokesperson said: “Given the importance of the role, we want to ensure that we have the best possible selection of candidates available. We have therefore extended the advertisement application period to allow for this.”

The DfE refused to disclose how many people, if any, had applied in the first round.

Chair has to be able to think ‘independently’

Last year, the DfE appointed Sky executive Stephen van Rooyen to lead its new Skills and Productivity Board, advising the government on how courses and qualifications should align to the skills that employers will need following the pandemic.

The Skills Reform Board is different and is being chaired on an interim basis by the DfE’s lead non-executive board member, former Co-Operative Group chief executive Richard Pennycook. It has met three times since its formation three months ago.

The government has been recently rolling out a multitude of new skills and further education programmes and reforms.

This includes the entitlement to a first, full level three qualification; the lifelong loan entitlement; as well as new and revitalised training programmes such as the skills bootcamps, Kickstart and traineeships.

Further reforms, such as new intervention powers for the education secretary and a local skills improvement plans, will be coming in future years once the Skills Bill is put into law.

Applications for the Skills Reform Board chair will close on July 18, and the DfE hopes to announce the appointment in September.

An advert on the Cabinet Office’s Public Appointments website reveals the department is looking for “someone who is confident and constructive in their approach, and who can think both broadly and independently”.

Candidates have to show experience of working at a high level in business or at another organisation, with senior-level management in addition to, or in place of, board experience.

Extensive experience of risk management is also essential, as is an understanding of how to deliver “complex and board programmes/ portfolios” and an ability to think strategically.