Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

College collaboration is a gamechanger for driving improvement

Initial challenges to making best use of the College Collaboration Fund were tackled by both sides, write Rebecca Conroy and Sam Parrett

“Collaboration” brings to mind teamwork and shared goals.

This is what we were thinking of last year when London South East Colleges applied for a grant to work with East Sussex College Group from the Department for Education’s College Collaboration Fund.

The £9 million fund was introduced by the government in February 2020 in a bid to improve governance and leadership at colleges.

It followed the Strategic College Improvement Fund, which ended in 2019. Bids of up to £500,000 can be submitted by groups of colleges to “share good practice and expertise” over a 12-month programme.

As with all new relationships, we came up against challenges on the way, but managed to tackle them and achieved more than we had initially hoped.

LSEC led the project and was awarded funding based on a comprehensive bid, focusing on four main areas: financial resilience, SEND quality, leadership and governance and digital transformation.

The DfE’s match funding requirement of 25 per cent was covered by LSEC, as we were confident the benefit of the project outweighed these initial costs.

Throughout the project, we have delivered four virtual conferences around our selected workstream. We also developed digital transformation strategies for both colleges, established nine new online courses (focusing on healthcare, digital and warehousing) and collaborated with eight additional colleges to see what further lessons we could learn from them.

Both of our college groups are also on track to reduce costs for subcontracting to zero by the end of 2021-22 to ensure that we are meeting the specific needs of our communities.

We have packaged this programme into a college improvement framework called #ChangeMakers – a comprehensive resource we will share with the sector.

An independent project manager was also recruited

But, as with any new venture, reaching these positive outcomes has required flexibility, lateral thinking and a common purpose.

Initially, it was difficult for ESCG to find the time needed for staff to dedicate to the project. Focus was understandably on the day-to-day running of the college during a global pandemic!

However, we both understood that staff buy-in was crucial and people had to be supported in terms of their time and workload. So we used some of the funding to backfill some roles and free up other staff to commit fully to the partnership.

An independent project manager was also recruited to facilitate conversations across both our colleges. This unbiased oversight proved invaluable by keeping us all on task.

As CEOs, our positive relationship with each other from the outset also helped ensure that our teams were encouraged to work well together.

We were aware of potential resistance from staff to this new partnership and to the changes being suggested. However, we established a systemised leadership approach, which is about embedding processes you know work, delivered by the people on the ground who have tried and tested the techniques.

It also provided excellent CPD opportunities for staff

For instance, LSEC staff at all levels shared their experiences of what genuinely works for them in practice, while ESCG staff listened, asked questions and fed back. Both teams then came up with solutions together. The staff could see the real value of what we were trying to achieve and felt involved in making changes.

It also provided excellent CPD opportunities for LSEC staff, through mentoring and supporting others.

Having to conduct the entire programme of work virtually had its limitations, particularly in relation to our special educational needs workstream.

LSEC’s expertise in this area has helped ESCG to develop a new and consistent offer across its sites – but owing to the pandemic, it was not possible for ESCG staff to visit LSEC’s facilities.

We tackled this issue using virtual tour technology, which was adequate but not quite the same. With restrictions now easing, our teams are planning proper site visits.

Our strong college-to-college partnership and commitment of staff has been crucial – but in reality, the project would not have been a success without the funding.

This model is a gamechanger for FE, facilitating real collaboration and harnessing the expertise and talent we know is widespread in our sector.

A history of the Learning and Work Institute as it turns 100 today

Through its many incarnations, the Learning and Work Institute has supported initiatives that are still with us now, writes Alan Tuckett

The Learning and Work Institute celebrates its hundredth birthday today. Despite never being blessed with a surfeit of cash, the LWI can look back on 100 years of advocacy and research for lifelong learning.

Along the way it has fostered a range of successful innovations that led to the establishment of major national and international institutions. It has throughout been a critical friend to governments, challenging and supporting policy around adult education.

The LWI was founded as the British Institute of Adult Education (BIAE) in 1921. It was the brainchild of Lord Haldane (who went on to become Lord Chancellor) and Albert Mansbridge, who also created the Workers’ Educational Association.

I was an active member from 1974, and led its work from 1988 until 2011. Its membership when it first opened was limited to individuals rather than institutions, drawn from universities, voluntary bodies and local government. They recognised the value of a national voice promoting adult education that could also research and share good practice.

In the 1920s it fought budget cuts and launched two inquiries, one on broadcasting and adult education, and the other on the role of film in national life. These led to the BIAE helping to create the British Film Institute, and the BBC’s education advisory council.

In 1934 the BIAE’s charismatic secretary, W.E. Williams, noticed the lack of public art in provincial towns and established Art for the People, taking exhibitions of borrowed works to municipal settings.

Parallel initiatives in music led to the creation of the Council for Encouragement of Music and the Arts, which from 1945 became the Arts Council, eventually led by Williams.

Meanwhile, Williams also became chief editor of Penguin Books, and during the Second World War, the BIAE seconded him to run the Army Bureau of Current Affairs, too. The weekly discussion materials sent to soldiers about current affairs are often cited as contributing to Labour’s 1945 landslide.

In 1945 local authorities established the National Foundation for Adult Education, with local authorities and other providers as institutional members.

BIAE was strapped financially, and in 1948 the two amalgamated as the National Institute of Adult Education.

NIAE’s international work helped create the European Bureau of Adult Education in 1954 and the International Council for Adult Education in 1974.

From 1975 NIAE hosted the government-backed Adult Literacy Resource Agency and its successor bodies, playing an active role in the establishment of English as a Second Language courses.

Throughout the 1980s it also supported activist member committees on gender and race equality, and promoted learners’ voices.

Its work had a major influence on the expansion of adult opportunities between 1997 and 2003

Then in 1973 the NIAE became the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, to mark a broadening brief. Until 1991 it hosted two additional innovative government-funded agencies, REPLAN – for unemployed adults – and the Unit for the Development of Adult Continuing Education.

NIACE returned to advocacy with a bang in the run-up to 1992 legislation, where the government threatened to end public funding for community adult education.

Working with the National Federation of Women’s Institutes and local government, NIACE co-ordinated a campaign that saw the proposal reversed in just six weeks.

At the same time NIACE launched Adult Learners’ Week, to celebrate existing learners and encourage others to participate, with free helplines and in partnership with television companies. It was a striking success, was adopted by UNESCO and spread to 55 countries.

NIACE’s annual adult participation surveys have also helped the government to focus on who doesn’t participate, and its qualitative studies have put forward solutions.

Its work had a major influence on the expansion of adult opportunities between 1997 and 2003, and has been essential in the fight to limit cuts as public policies have narrowed in the years since.

The latest name change came in 2014, with the amalgamation of NIACE and Inclusion, which was the research organisation that developed from the unemployment unit.

As it celebrates its centenary, the LWI’s work is as relevant and vital as ever.

How the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education is growing in stature

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education is “looking forward to playing an even bigger role” following the publication of the Skills Bill. But how will the quango change its operation going forward? Billy Camden explores

Launched in 2017 to spearhead the government’s apprenticeship reforms, the then-known Institute for Apprenticeships has seen its responsibilities and workforce expand over the past four years.

“Technical Education” was added to the quango’s name and brief in 2019 as the authority also took over the content of T Levels and procurement for awarding organisations.

The institute had around 80 full-time staff in its first year of operation before growing to 160 in March 2019; 186 a year later; and up to 216 by March 2021 – a 170 per cent increase over four years.

And to cater for the sharp rise in workers, the institute’s annual budget from the Department for Education has shot up by 184 per cent, from £9.7 million in 2017-18 to £27.5 million in 2021-22.

The organisation appears to be preparing for another recruitment drive as it gears up for new “powers” as set out in the FE white paper and last week’s Skills Bill, such as defining and approving new categories of technical qualifications as well as reviewing those already on offer and withdrawing their approval where they are no longer performing as expected.

Two new job-sharing strategy directors, Rachel Cooper and Beth Chaudhary, were announced this week by the institute. The pair previously held the same joint role in the Cabinet Office but will come onboard to help the institute deliver on its new functions.

Their overarching goal is to make sure that “entry level and new higher technical qualifications meet employers’ skills needs and support learners into successful careers”.

The institute is also in the process of forming three new “employer-facing groups”. A job advert has gone out for a person to “lead a team of around 10 delivery experts” in this area.

A spokesperson said the purpose of the groups will be to “make sure that our work is employer facing, and properly understands different parts of the economy…it is about us listening even more to what employers say and helping them to play a bigger role”.

They explained that when the institute formed, it was organised into “functional orientated groups” but as it has matured “it has honed its processes” and is moving to a “more route-based structure”.

“As we begin to engage in the approval of technical qualifications beyond T Levels, we now believe that we could optimise our performance further by transitioning to a structure that better reflects the communities we work with closely, including sectors of the economy.

“We are therefore working on developing three teams with particular industry expertise that will embrace apprenticeships and all forms of technical qualification in an integrated and coherent fashion, for the benefit of employers, learners, apprentices and the sector as a whole.”

The spokesperson said the institute is “still refining our plans” and will be engaging with stakeholders and providing further detail in “due course”.

They were unable to give a rough estimate of how many extra staff the organisation will need to hire in total to meet the new functions set out in the Skills Bill.

An impact assessment report for the Skills Bill explained the rationale for handing new powers to the institute.

It said: “Many employers struggle to find people with the skills that they need, and these gaps will be exacerbated as we look to the future – as the pace of technological change continues, our economy adjusts following the Covid-19 pandemic, and we build a green economy.

“To ensure that technical qualifications better meet employers’ needs, we intend that they should be aligned with employer-led standards.”

The document warned the current system “does not currently have the mechanisms to ensure the reforms can be delivered such that they deliver high quality, rigorous qualifications that meet employers’ and individuals’ needs, and avoid proliferation and a ‘race to the bottom’ on quality, as identified by previous reviews of the skills market”.

It goes on to state that both Ofqual and the institute have “key roles to play” in assuring the quality of technical qualifications, but the current statutory framework for approval and regulation has “scope for unnecessary duplication, and inconsistency between the two bodies with potential impact on the quality of the qualifications and the burden on awarding organisations”.

By extending the institute’s approval powers in the Skills Bill, the “risks of duplication and inconsistency are increased”.

As such, the institute will be required to cooperate with Ofqual to create a “single approval gateway” for technical qualifications.

The institute’s new powers will allow them to determine new qualification categories and approve qualifications against “associated criteria” in the future.

It will also be allowed charge awarding bodies for qualification approval and introduce a moratorium on the approval of further qualifications where there is evidence of proliferation.

Commenting on the new responsibilities, an institute spokesperson said: “We are committed to working closely with employers and everyone across the skills sector to continue the journey of improvement that we are on.

“We are looking forward to building on our successful work so far and playing an even bigger role with employers to build a unified skills system and will make sure that we are ready to deliver.”

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 355

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

Vicki Stott, Chief executive, QAA

Start date: October 2021

Previous job: Executive director of operations and deputy chief executive, QAA

Interesting fact: She is a “keen” runner and during lockdown last summer, she ran 1,000 miles in a virtual race across Tennessee (and so put more miles in her knees than in her car last year)

Paul Boyle, Chair, Jisc

Start date: May 2021

Concurrent job: Vice chancellor, University of Swansea

Interesting fact: He likes to run socially and has participated in the race up the Empire State Building.

Cheryl Smith, Principal, Printworks campus, Leeds City College

Start date: April 2021

Previous job: Head of curriculum, Salford City College

Interesting fact: She enjoys “all things digital,” including photography and documentary-making, as well as spending time with her son.

Beth Chaudhary, Strategy director, Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education

Start date: May 2021

Previous job: Strategy director, Cabinet Office

Interesting fact: She has qualified and worked both as a pool lifeguard and mountain biking guide before joining the civil service in 2004.

Rachel Cooper, Strategy director, Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education

Start date: May 2021

Previous job: Strategy director, Cabinet Office

Interesting fact: She was part of the smart energy team in the government who first agreed with Ofgem how large-scale batteries could be licensed within the electricity system.

Colleges publish ethnicity pay data in bid to increase diversity

Colleges are revealing the pay gaps between their staff’s ethnic groups in a bid to tackle under-representation in the sector.

Three colleges in England have so far committed to publishing the data annually as signatories to Business in the Community’s (BITC) Race at Work Charter.

Jeff Greenidge, joint-diversity director for the Association of Colleges (AoC) and Education and Training Foundation (ETF), told FE Week this is the first instance he has heard of where colleges are choosing to publish ethnicity pay gap data.

He called it a “stepping stone” towards a “comprehensive strategy” with wider implications for “recruitment, retention and progression of individuals”.

It comes amid a push from within the sector to increase diversity among staff as well as students.

As well as Greenidge’s recent appointment, an equality, diversity and inclusion steering group has been set up by the AoC and Lia Nici, the Conservative MP for Great Grimsby, has been made chair of the government’s apprenticeship diversity champions network.

‘You have got to know where the problem is’

Milton Keynes College is one of the four colleges publishing ethnicity pay data. Arv Kaushal, its equality, diversity and inclusion manager, told FE Week the problem they are trying to tackle is the lack of an “evidential approach towards any kind of change”.

He said: “There have been various reports and articles in the education sector saying that, for example, representation within leadership in education is not where we want it to be.”

Kaushal said he has traced such reports way back to 1976 and all the way up to Department for Education non-executive director Ruby McGregor-Smith’s 2017 Race in the Workplace report. There was also a report on diversity by consultants McKinsey last year.

Kaushal added: “My challenge is, why hasn’t anything happened as a result of that?”

One of the key aspects, he said, is that for change to happen in our “metric-driven” world, “you have to have a base of evidence to work with”.

While “the data itself is not going to do anything”, in order for the sector to have a “strategic approach” to tackling underrepresentation, “you have got to know where the problem is to start off with”.

College had identified ‘serious concern’ through its pay data

Greenidge said there was “a whole story that pay gap begins to tell”, especially about the roles ethnic groups hold in the public sector.

He said the AoC and ETF were interested in the data as it could inform how they help sector staff.

Croydon College, though not a signatory to the charter, published its ethnicity pay gap for 2020 last March. It found the mean pay gap between black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) employees and its white staff was 15.1 per cent compared to the London average ethnicity pay gap of 23.8 per cent.

Despite this, the report noted that the college “finds this data concerning and will ensure that, as part of the HR strategy and equality action plan, initiatives are put in to place to address this”.

A “serious concern” identified in the report was in the upper pay bracket where there was “only 20 per cent representation for BAME staff”.

As such, a key performance indicator has been implemented to increase the percentage of BAME staff in management roles at the college.

Publishing ethnicity pay data could become mandatory

Colleges publish ethnicity pay data in bid to increase diversity Sandra Kerr, race equality director for BITC, said companies began signing the charter in a drive to be “transparent on pay and demonstrate they are committed to making sure everyone’s getting the right pay, everyone’s getting the opportunity to progress”.

She believes publishing ethnicity pay gap data will become mandatory for companies, just as publishing gender pay gap data is for companies with 250 or more employees.

McGregor-Smith’s report recommended that all listed companies and businesses or public bodies with more than 50 employees should publish a breakdown by race and “ideally” by pay band.

BITC sent an open letter to Boris Johnson last October, signed by the Confederation of British Industry and the Trades Union Congress among others, calling for the government to make it mandatory for employers to report their ethnicity pay gap.

The other England-based colleges to have signed up to the charter are Waltham Forest College, Middlesbrough College. None have published ethnicity pay gap data so far and there is no set date for publication.

Secrecy fuels suspicions as DfE refuses to share AEB clawback evidence

The government has refused to share the evidence used to justify its controversial adult education clawback plans – fuelling suspicion among sector leaders.

Principals have demanded transparency after the Department for Education said that any college or community learning provider which delivers less than 90 per cent of its national adult education allocation this year must repay funds.

The DfE and skills minister Gillian Keegan, who FE Week previously revealed was forced into the decision by the Treasury, have repeatedly said their data shows the 90 per cent threshold is a “fair representation of the providers’ average forecasted delivery for the 2020/21 academic year”.

FE Week requested the evidence to back up this claim under the Freedom of Information Act, but the department has refused to hand it over.

In its response, the DfE admits there is a “general public interest” in disclosure.

However, the request was turned down on the grounds that “it relates to the formulation or development of government policy”.

It adds: “We are monitoring the performance of the adult education budget (AEB) delivery during 2020 to 2021 funding year and until the year is fully reconciled the policy is being monitored, lessons will be learnt, and future decisions may still depend on the use of the data as a baseline.

“We will also be using this data as a baseline for future policy decisions, and we believe it is in the wider public interest that we have the space and time to ensure this future work is carried out effectively.”

Leicester College faces having to pay back £4 million under the plans and told FE Week it also had a similar FOI request rejected by the DfE.

A spokesperson for the college said it was “very disappointing that the Education and Skills Funding Agency has so far declined to provide information that should be readily available to it and is clearly in the public interest”.

Ian Pryce, chief executive of the Bedford College Group, previously called for the DfE to share the evidence.

After hearing of the department’s secrecy, he said: “There wouldn’t be the uproar if the evidence supported the 90% average. Why wouldn’t you share the data if it supports that figure?

“From college returns it should be easy to spot colleges whose AEB recruitment has been affected by lockdown and spot any that have simply taken their foot off the gas assuming a low threshold.

“The decision feels arbitrary, and the response doesn’t rectify that.”

‘Why wouldn’t you share the data if it supports that figure?’

The Association of Colleges collected data itself in April from a third of colleges and found the average performance reported was 77 per cent – amounting to a total clawback of £59 million.

Deputy chief executive Julian Gravatt explained that, while “recognising there are still some months to go, and the DfE hoped the high threshold would encourage colleges to increase activity – it is very unlikely that colleges will be able to make up for the severe disruption caused by the long spring lockdown”.

Adult and community learning providers are also being stung by the clawback plans.

Their membership body, HOLEX, recently ran a poll and found the majority of members will hit between 60 and 80 per cent delivery.

Sue Pember, a former director of FE funding in the DfE who is now the policy director of HOLEX, said her organisation had also asked the government to publish its evidence because there is a “suspicion that the data was not disaggregated and therefore the impact on adult community and institutions was not seen”.

She added: “It is a shame the DfE refuses to share the information as it is adding to that suspicion.”

Since the threshold was announced in March, colleges have written to the prime minister requesting that he intervenes and warning that the plans risk courses being scrapped and jobs lost.

The all-party parliamentary group on FE has also written to education secretary Gavin Williamson to call for a reversal, or at least to allow colleges to submit business cases to plead for a clawback exemption.

Lessons learned from training through the pandemic

College leaders have shared the key lessons and insights they have learned from delivering training through the pandemic in a new report.

The Collab Group of colleges has published “Reflections from Further Education Leaders on the Impact of Covid-19” to share best practice from the past year. It is based on interviews with leaders including incoming FE Commissioner and Chichester College Group chief executive Shelagh Legrave, NCG leader Liz Bromley and City of Bristol College boss Andy Forbes.

Here are four key findings from the report…

1. Digital transformation ‘disengaged’ students

The lockdown in March 2020 pushed colleges into online delivery, with interviewees saying this presented a “challenge” for teachers.

Aside from having to learn new digital skills, a common issue facing lecturers was getting students to engage during class, as learners kept their cameras off, so it was hard to tell if they were paying attention.

To get staff up to muster, NCG held three days of digital activity training while London South East College Group monitored lessons and addressed staff needs accordingly.

There was “significant” disengagement, the colleges reported, with students on vocational programmes.

While teachers created videos of practical demonstrations to compensate, Legrave said her staff “struggled with those very practical courses” as “however innovative we were, people didn’t necessarily engage”.

But some students appreciated the transition to digital, with Forbes saying: “Something like 30 per cent of students actually found online learning, which is what they’d switched to from last year, perfectly OK and, in some cases, they thought it was better than what they were getting before.”

Adult learners especially enjoyed the flexibility that online learning granted to manage studies alongside other commitments, the report noted.

2. Concerns digital divide ‘may exacerbate inequality’

Getting devices and dongles out to students who otherwise would struggle to access internet learning “presented a significant challenge” to colleges.

Chichester College provided 600 laptops for its students while Belfast Metropolitan College repurposed refurbished laptops for students, as well as giving those with limited wifi access a £60 stipend.

Last April, the Department for Education also launched an online portal for colleges to apply for free laptops. But the report reflects colleges’ concerns that “digital poverty may exacerbate other forms of inequality”.

“The digital divide has shone a very harsh spotlight on societal differences, societal expectations, and a whole generation of young people who have been really disadvantaged because they simply don’t have access to the space, the technology or the bandwidth,” Liz Bromley said.

3. Central government advice created ‘challenges’ for colleges

College leaders said they felt supported by government, especially local authorities which helped them access digital equipment and virtual work experiences.

But, while providers were “sympathetic” to the challenges which central government faced early on in the pandemic, “there were occasions where government policy resulted in practical challenges for colleges”.

This happened, for example, over arrangements for exams in January, when the sector was left in the dark after it was announced only that the summer’s assessments were cancelled. It was eventually revealed that individual centres would have to decide if January exams should go ahead.

“The abrupt nature of this announcement left colleges with little time to implement changes to keep students and instructors safe,” the report reads.

Legrave recalled how “for a lot of the students doing BTECs and City & Guilds qualifications they had their qualifications delayed because clearly you can’t be certified as an electrician if you can’t prove that you can wire as an electrician”.

The Greater London Authority was particularly praised for the “Covid-related funds” it made available. London South East Colleges principal Sam Parrett said the authority had been “excellent” as, “although you had to bid competitively for the funds, we accessed around £200,000 from the GLA to help us provide students with digital devices to support online learning.

“They sprang into action really, really quickly to support colleges.”

4. Dramatic changes to economies

“Drastic” changes to local economies led to apprentices being furloughed, colleges having to set up virtual work experiences and having to reskill adult workers, the report found.

However, opportunities in some sectors such as health and social care and logistics have continued to rise and, as people begin to be allowed to travel again, colleges reckon this will stimulate skills demand in the sector.

But, with “jobs disappearing” due to the pandemic, college leaders found “a real need to reskill workers, especially adult workers”.

London South East Colleges has been trying to stay ahead of changes in the employment market by sitting on the boards of CBI London and the South East London Chamber of Commerce.

However, Andy Forbes warned: “One of the longer-term issues is trying to read whether there are going to be permanent changes to the labour market, which would mean we would have to permanently reorganise our supply of skills into those sectors.”

Legal apprentice provider penalised by watchdog

A leading commercial training provider for the legal profession has been reprimanded by Ofsted for being too “inexperienced” to deliver high-quality apprenticeships.

Datalaw Limited, which has provided professional development for law firms for more than 20 years, made “insufficient progress” in two areas of a new provider monitoring visit conducted last month.

The company moved into the apprenticeships market two years ago and trains about 100 apprentices on standards in leadership and management at levels 3 and 5, as well as the level 3 paralegal and technical salesperson apprenticeships.

Under Education and Skills Funding Agency rules, any new training provider that receives at least one “insufficient” score is suspended from recruiting new apprentices.

Coaches not trained in ‘craft’ of delivering apprenticeships

Ofsted praised the provider’s coaches for their experience in the legal sector, but warned they were “inexperienced in teaching apprenticeships”.

Inspectors found Datalaw’s leaders “do not provide training for coaches on the craft of teaching or the delivery of apprenticeships”.

As such, the coaches “do not understand the requirements of an apprenticeships”.

Datalaw is based in Liverpool but operates across multiple regions.

Ofsted found that leaders have not ensured its apprentices receive enough training.

Rather, the apprentices were “left to learn independently with very little teaching”.

Coaches carry out monthly coaching calls to apprentices which, inspectors reported, often last less than half an hour. Between these calls, apprentices are left with little or no support from their coach to complete questions and research.

The watchdog did highlight that the provider had a “clear rationale” for delivering apprenticeships, by focusing on upskilling law firms’ administrative staff through the level 3 paralegal curriculum.

But its leaders did not ensure they met the principles of an apprenticeship: not coordinating what apprentices learnt on and off the job, and making them complete units in the same order, regardless of their job.

Due to their lack of knowledge, leaders were not able to challenge the consultants on whom they relied “too much” to set up and run apprenticeships.

Apprentices had ‘limited’ knowledge of final exams

Provider bosses had also been slow to identify and engage with assessment organisations, and apprentices were found to have “limited” knowledge of the requirements for their final exams.

Level 3 team leader learners “have not received adequate training and support to prepare them for their final assessment”, inspectors warned, despite them nearing the end of their course.

Furthermore, leaders had “no plans” to complete functional skills examinations.

Apprentices were left to do their own research into how to become a solicitor or court advocate, as Datalaw does not provide them with careers advice or guidance.

Inspectors did find that the provider had made “reasonable progress” with its safeguarding measures, with apprentices reporting they feel safe.

Datalaw did not respond to requests for comment.

Government must act now to make colleges financially sustainable

The FE sector will play a vital role in retraining workers and filling skills gaps, writes Meg Hillier, but it cannot do so without more support

The further education sector in England receives around £7 billion of public funding each year, to educate and train around 4 million learners of whom more than half are taught in FE colleges.

The financial health of the college sector has been a cause for concern for many years and too many colleges are financially precarious. In 2018/19, one in three colleges reported an operating deficit.

Financial pressures are having a detrimental impact on what colleges can offer students, including through cuts to mental health and other support services.

Meanwhile, the economic impact of Covid-19 means the sector has become even more important in addressing labour market skills gaps and retraining workers.

The Public Accounts Committee recently examined financial sustainability in the further education sector and, as I highlight in my annual report, our inquiry gave me little comfort that a long-term solution is in sight.

We found that the bodies responsible for funding and oversight have been slow to address the emerging financial and educational risks, despite the potentially serious consequences for learners and local economies.

The college principals we spoke to told us that they had been forced to make decisions that affect the life chances of their learners and limit skills in the local economy. For example, they had closed whole classes, including modern foreign languages and English language provision for those who may lack the linguistic skills to find work; they dropped specific types of qualification, including some A-levels; and they had been unable to upgrade their buildings or invest in online learning.

Colleges’ autonomy can hamper the central departments’ ability to protect learners and safeguard taxpayers’ money. For example, colleges are free to borrow sums that they may struggle to repay, and to run with financial deficits year after year. But colleges are also grappling with issues beyond their control.

Perennially late funding decisions, overly complex funding arrangements, and iniquitous VAT rules between sixth-form colleges and other post-16 education all add pressure.

Some colleges also face serious problems arising from the historic Building Colleges for the Future programme. When the programme was suspended, 79 capital project applications had been approved in principle by the former Learning and Skills Council, but only 22 subsequently received final approval. Reductions in funding since then have left some colleges with new premises that are under-used, or large debts that they are struggling to repay.

The National Audit Office reported that, in February 2020, the government was intervening in nearly half of colleges for financial health reasons, and in recent years the taxpayer has stumped up over £250 million in emergency funding, alongside other support, to ensure the continued functioning of colleges.

Oversight arrangements are complex, sometimes overlapping, and too focused on intervening when financial problems have already become serious rather than helping to prevent them in the first place. While the introduction of the Further Education Commissioner has been a positive development, there remains confusion over who is responsible for intervening and in what circumstances.

As the focus turns to rebuilding and reskilling following the chaos caused by Covid-19, this is a chance to develop the proper, integrated vision for the college sector that has been lacking for so long. The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills and the Department for Education appear to see area-based reviews of post-16 education as a fix-all solution to the current problems, but the reviews do not cover all types of provider and it is not clear how they will deliver a robust and financially sustainable sector.

Colleges need more proactive support from the centre to manage the significant financial challenges they face. Some need to step up their governance as further funding cuts cannot be ruled out. Decisive action and intervention are needed to put the further education sector back on a financially sustainable footing.