Putting SEND learners at the heart of the college means all my students are back

Whether it’s providing farm placements or much-needed structure through digital platforms, putting SEND learners front and centre always makes sense, writes Paul Phillips

Since 2001, my mission has been to place inclusive practice at the centre of Weston College. When offered the chance to run a college “my way’” it was daunting – miles from home, failing and in poor financial health.

But these circumstances allowed me to fulfil my vision of placing SEND learners at the heart of my strategic plan. The reason?

I believe that if you get teaching right for these learners, then you get it right for everyone. Outstanding teaching and learning is about a “personal individualised” approach, and the best practice we have developed for SEND learners here has gone on to benefit everyone.

I had some inspirational staff. ahead of their time regarding SEND strategies. However, it was not easy to convince governors and wider staff of the direction of travel. Back in 2001 the college had eight SEND learners, taught in dilapidated facilities at the back of the site.

I placed these learners in the most visible location to set the scene for the new college mission, “creating brighter futures”. To their credit, staff quickly got on board. Since then we’ve transformed ourselves from an FE provider offering pockets of inclusion to a fully inclusive organisation delivering FE.

This has been achieved through investing in continuous professional development to degree level, a motivational career structure, SEND support hubs at every campus and about £2.5 million invested in specialist facilities, such as an autism residential training facility and sensory learning base.

Today we have more than 1,300 SEND learners (511 with high needs) on employability, apprenticeship and degree programmes. Progression rates are exceptional (97 per cent) with 33 per cent into employment (compared with six per cent nationally). We’ve won the Queen’s Anniversary Prize for Inclusive Practice and became one of only three National SEND Centres of Excellence in the country (the others are Derby College and City College Norwich).

The aspirational place that SEND holds within the college’s strategic plan has been even more evident during Covid. The senior leadership team designed our lockdown EdTech strategy to focus on “digital inclusion”; the impact of this meant over 90 per cent virtual attendance from SEND learners throughout the pandemic.

We launched a #MyVirtualCollege concept, which meant all learners and especially SEND learners still felt part of the college through digitally accessible courses, timetables, support sessions, tutors and the wider college community.

Even the most anxious learners have finally returned because of our latest innovation

Innovative virtual teaching operated through Microsoft Teams, involving fun team challenges and activities including mindfulness to reduce isolation. This provided learners with a much-needed structure to establish new routines.

In using these real-world technologies, learners maintained friendship groups and developed wider skills and behaviours that will be transferable to the workplaces of the future. For some, removing the distractions and anxiety of a classroom setting has had an extremely positive impact on achievement and is a lesson learnt for our future curriculum design.

However, coming back to college presented its own challenges. Anxiety has been high – many have not left their home for six months. To help, we ran transitional programmes throughout the summer. We quickly realised that a “recovery curriculum” focused on mental health and reducing anxiety was needed. In the main, learners have settled into the new environment and are excited to be back.

We have been taken aback by their resilience and adaptability. Even the most anxious learners have finally returned because of our latest innovation.

We’ve invested in Butcombe Farm, a nearby chilli farm, as an alternative classroom to provide a pathway to the “new normal”. Here, working with specialist practitioners, we use the concept of “Engagement to Employment” to nurture the talents of SEND learners as employees for the future.

It’s crucial that SEND learners are not lost at this critical moment in their education. If colleges prioritise them, these learners have brilliant opportunities ahead of them.

College dependent on merger to survive has latest bid rejected by ESFA

A merger that was planned to save a cash-strapped college from going bust has been rejected by the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

City College Southampton and Itchen Sixth Form College had been due to merge in August 2021 but today announced the move was off.

A spokesperson for the colleges said the ESFA had told them that it cannot support the proposed merger because of “too much uncertainty around financial viability”.

This was the third attempt by City College Southampton to amalgamate with another provider, after proposed partnerships with Southampton Solent University and Eastleigh College both fell through – the latter at the last minute because the ESFA rejected an emergency funding request.

Principal Sarah Stannard said the college was “extremely frustrated” this latest merger was refused.

However, she added that she was “reassured by the knowledge the ESFA has told us they are determined to find a sustainable future for Southampton.

“City College has worked collaboratively with each of the proposals put forward over the last five years, and we are determined to find a solution that will provide a sustainable future for further education in Southampton.”

Itchen principal Alex Scott echoed Stannard’s frustration, stating that “we were seeking to find a solution for the good of the city”.

As previously reported by FE Week, City College Southampton was handed £2.5 million in emergency funding last year, and the its 2018-19 accounts issued a dire warning that its cash could run out by October.

If the merger failed, the accounts further cautioned, then the grade three college would “require additional financial assistance” to stay open.

Those accounts, for the year ending 31 July 2019, were signed off on a “non-going concern” basis after the college generated a £1.65 million deficit, up from £585,000 in the previous financial year and £257,000 the year before that.

Southampton Itchen MP Royston Smith said he was “very frustrated” the ESFA declined to support the merger, which he said “presented a great opportunity to bring together two well regarded further education providers in our city”.

“I made it clear to ministers that I thought this merger was the right way forward,” he continued. “When I met with a minister about this, they seemed to understand the significance of this.”

City College Southampton received a financial health notice to improve from the ESFA in February, which said it had ‘inadequate’ financial health and was in formal intervention.

When asked why the ESFA had declined the merger, a spokesperson said they “do not comment on individual cases,” but will continue to work with City College to find a sustainable solution.

What Ofsted found during their pilots of autumn visits

Pilots of Ofsted’s autumn visits suggest that the FE and skills sector is more than rising to the challenges of these highly unusual times, writes Paul Joyce

In July we announced that we would be carrying out visits across all the areas we inspect this Autumn – schools, further education and skills, early years and children’s social care.

The visits are not inspections and won’t result in a graded judgement. They have a simple but important aim – to reassure parents, learners, employers and government about what providers are doing to get education and training back up and running, and to make sure that learners are safe.

Over the past fortnight we’ve been piloting these visits across FE & Skills providers, testing our approach before the full visits begin in earnest later this month. From my point of view, it’s been striking just how receptive the sector has been to the visits and how well providers have engaged with the process.

Learning from our pilots

The pilots were about making sure that our approach is sound. We’ve done 14 pilot visits, covering a range of providers at all grades, across each of Ofsted’s regions.

We visited independent learning providers (ILPs), one major national provider, community learning and skills providers, further education and sixth form colleges, and an independent specialist college. Thirty inspectors took part, around a third of our HMI workforce. These inspectors are now back in their regions, sharing their perspective and helping to train their colleagues.

Overall, the pilots have been very successful. They show that our methodology works, and that the visits work in practice, despite the unusual circumstances we all face. We’re confident that we can carry out the visits safely, with minimum disruption to provider’s day to day business.

Our inspectors have been made to feel very welcome. Providers taking part really understood our rationale and embraced the visits as a constructive and collaborative process. Leaders and other staff were rightly proud of what they’d achieved, and what they have done to get learners up to speed after so long away. Some found the visit a relief, others said it was reaffirming – a chance to have their hard work acknowledged.

Safety is our priority

The pilots also allowed us to see what the visits would be like with social distancing rules in place. Arrangements will obviously vary from provider to provider, so our visit teams will abide by whatever providers have put in place to keep learners safe. The safety of our staff, and that of learners and provider staff is, of course, our utmost priority.

This example from one large college group gives an indication of how a visit can work in practice. Our visit team (two inspectors) were set up in a large meeting room that allowed for social distancing. They stayed in the room for the whole day, while small groups of senior leaders, teachers and learners joined them for discussions – around 9 meetings over the course of the visit. The room was cleaned between meetings. We didn’t make any learning observations, carry out deep dives, or move around the college.

What will the visits focus on?

Visits will be based around three themes, a set of conversations with leaders and staff. First, we’ll be asking about the strategic actions taken to maintain the curriculum or get it back up and running. Second, what have you been doing operationally to deliver online and face to face learning. And finally, we want to talk about safeguarding. How are you making sure that learners are safe in these unusual circumstances. We’ll summarise these discussions in a published report, although for our pilot providers this won’t be published.

The visits will take place over two days, but these will be shorter days – starting later than an ordinary inspection and finishing earlier. This frees up provider staff in the mornings and keeps disruption to a minimum.

The way forward

There’s no doubt that colleges and other providers have been up against it since the lockdown in March. In the ILP world (largely apprenticeships and adult training) the situation is very tough. Some providers have ceased training, and we know that some apprentices haven’t been able to return to their jobs after furlough.

We are acutely aware of how difficult the past few months have been, and our visit teams are sensitive to this. We are not here to make life difficult. Ultimately, we want to understand the challenges the sector faces, so we can help government and policymakers understand them too. And we hope that our published reports will be useful to providers as they consider their own approaches, sharing good and innovative practice. 

Given the hunger for more information about effective online learning, we’ll also be using our visits to add to the debate about what works. In July, we published some interim findings from our online learning review. The visits will build upon this work, and we hope to publish some more findings early next year. 

It’s really good news that those taking part in the pilots were positive about their experience. This, combined with the fact that parents, learners and employers want to know how well prepared providers are, reinforces the importance of our visits. And while it’s a small sample, our pilots suggest that the further education & skills sector is more than rising to the challenges of these highly unusual times.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 327

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

Sue Sturgeon, Chair, Activate Learning

Start date: August 2020

Previous job: Managing director, Guildford Borough Council

Interesting fact: She enjoys motorbike adventure touring on the back of her partner’s BMW

Ian Wiggans, Operations director, Skillnet Limited

Start date: August 2020

Previous job: Operations and programme director, TotalMobile

Interesting fact: He lived in Canada for three years and enjoyed a range of hobbies including snowmobiling and wakeboarding

James Scott, Principal, Trafford College Group

Start date: August 2020

Previous job: Vice principal, Trafford College Group; Campus principal, Stockport College

Interesting fact: He still raves in Ibiza every year – except for this year

Is Ofsted really ready to inspect all apprenticeships?

Ofsted will need to prove it can handle the higher levels if they are to inspect all apprenticeships, writes Adrian Anderson.

Let me start by saying that universities have nothing to fear from an appropriate Ofsted inspection system. Universities are committed to high-quality delivery and have an excellent track record in delivering and accrediting work-based programmes that accredit occupational competence.

The best example is a nursing degree, where a degree acts as the licence to practise for what is the most pressing skills shortage occupation in the UK labour market.

UVAC has, for some time, opposed Ofsted inspection of degree apprenticeship. Our reasons are straightforward.

Universities already, and will continue to, operate under internationally recognised quality assurance systems, to deliver and accredit programmes that recognise professional occupational competence.

We have also questioned Ofsted expertise and ethos. If Ofsted inspection of degree apprenticeship is introduced and is to support the government’s apprenticeship reforms, there are three issues that need to be tackled.

Ofsted’s expertise

Ofsted’s expertise in apprenticeship has been primarily developed on the basis of levels 2 and 3 apprenticeships.

Apprenticeship has changed and quality assuring a level 6 registered nurse (where the Nursing Midwifery Council has already approved the higher education institution to deliver) or level 7 architect degree apprenticeship (fully accredited by the Royal Institute of British Architects and Architects Registration Board) is a very different proposition from inspecting a retail, business administration or customer service apprenticeship followed by a 17-year-old. The Department for Education needs to ask Ofsted to outline, as a matter of urgency, how it intends to review and revise its inspection process, so it is appropriate for degree apprenticeship provision, and what plans it has to recruit senior managers with higher education experience and expertise and, of course, new inspectors.

Ofsted’s ethos

Ofsted is going to have to rapidly shed its reputation as an organisation that wants to prioritise lower-level apprenticeships for school leavers and presumably restrict the ability of, say, NHS trusts and police forces to use level 6 and 7 apprenticeships to train the nurses, police constables and managers they need.

Post-Covid 19, apprenticeship will increasingly focus on the jobs needed in a high productivity economy.

This will mean far more provision at levels 4 to 7 and less level 2 provision.

Ofsted will presumably fully support the secretary of state’s desire for universities to expand degree apprenticeship provision.

Employers, professional bodies, regulators and, I suspect, some key government departments, in addition to universities, will expect an assurance that Ofsted fully, and without qualification or reservation, embraces the growth of degree apprenticeship.

Partnership with OfS, QAA and professional and statutory regulatory bodies

While Ofsted may inspect apprenticeship, what is beyond doubt is that the Office for Students will retain the statutory regulator role for the degree in a degree apprenticeship and, indeed, for the university delivering the provision.

Given the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education’s preference for the integrated degree apprenticeship model where the degree delivers, assesses and accredits the required knowledge, skills and behaviours, Ofsted will inspect and OfS will regulate exactly the same programme. Around the table will also often be a regulator or professional body, say the College of Policing or NMC. Ofsted will be one of several quality assurance players – therefore, it will share responsibility.

This will call for innovative approaches to inspection given the range of organisations with a statutory role in assuring quality in degree apprenticeship.

Get it wrong and we will have a regulatory nightmare with different quality bodies, often publicly funded, demanding different and possibly contradictory requirements.

Ofsted will need to listen, learn and, in many cases, adopt a new way of working.

I will conclude by wishing Ofsted every success. While we would profoundly disagree with a decision to ask Ofsted to inspect degree apprenticeship, we would do all we can to support the introduction of an appropriate inspection approach if this is the government’s decision.

Degree apprenticeship will be pivotal to training the new police constables, social workers, registered nurses and advanced clinical practitioners (including leaders and managers) our public sector need. Presumably, in this regard the expectations of the home and health secretaries will be high.

Elsewhere, the chancellor will be looking for apprenticeship to train individuals in the high-level, high-productivity jobs the post-Covid 19 economy needs. Getting it wrong and hampering the growth of
degree apprenticeship will not be an option for Ofsted.

Struggling Gateshead in merger talks

An embattled college is in merger talks with two neighbouring college groups after a surprise £6 million deficit crippled its finances.

Gateshead College is currently undergoing a structure and prospects appraisal with the FE Commissioner, following an independent investigation into the college’s “inaccurate” budget forecast.

Now, FE Week understands the college is in merger talks with Tyne Coast College and the Education Partnership North East.

A spokesperson for Gateshead College would not be drawn on the merger talks, but said: “We can confirm the college is engaged in a strategic prospects appraisal process which has yet to conclude.

“This will assess the options for the best future constitutional structure for the college, including consideration of both remaining standalone and merger.”

When approached for comment, Tyne Coast College, which was created from a merger of South Tyneside College and Tyne Metropolitan College in 2017, said it was aware of Gateshead’s appraisal, but had no further comment to make at this time.

EPNE, which incorporates Sunderland College, Northumberland College and Hartlepool Sixth Form College, declined to comment.

There remains a high degree of secrecy around the events surrounding Gateshead College’s deficit.

Gateshead’s accounts for 2018/19, covering the period when the shortfall was uncovered, have yet to be published. A spokesperson told FE Week in March they were expected to be finalised by April.

And FE Commissioner Richard Atkins’ intervention report into Gateshead, expected to cover how the deficit came about, is also yet to see the light of day.

The Department for Education has said the publication of the commissioner’s reports were paused due to the Covid-19 pandemic, though they have now been shared with the colleges concerned.

A departmental spokesperson said publication would resume “in due course”.

FE Week first reported last December that Gateshead’s governors had called in independent investigators to explain why the deficit had come about.

The ensuing forensic audit found the income position had been overstated and the expenditure substantially understated.

However, the college has repeatedly stressed that investigation “did not determine that there has been any misappropriation of college funds”.

The discovery of the deficit precipitated an upheaval at the college: principal Judith Doyle, once the highest-paid principal in the country with a salary of up to £350,000 in 2017/18, retired with immediate effect the same month.

The chair John McCabe, who had only been in post for six months, was replaced by former deputy FE Commissioner John Hogg in January. Gateshead was also handed a financial health notice to improve by the Education and Skills Funding Agency that month after it entered formal intervention.

The college announced a redundancy process as well, with 26 jobs at risk, to address what it called “short-term financial pressures”.

Ofsted then busted the college down from a grade one to a grade three following an inspection in January.

A report published in February said the “information leaders have provided to governors about the college’s finances over recent months has not been sufficiently accurate”.

Former Kensington and Chelsea College boss Andy Cole was appointed to replace Doyle on an interim basis in February, after deputy principal Andy Toon filled in for her.

A new three-year financial plan has also been agreed at the college, and it is hoped that will return it to surplus by 2020/2021, after achieving one of £748,000 in 2017-18.

Tripling traineeships: Large colleges refuse to rise to the challenge

More than two-thirds of colleges in England chose not to run any traineeship programmes in 2018/19, FE Week can reveal.

The news comes as some of the largest college groups say they have no intention to deliver the pre-employment scheme despite a significant funding rate increase and an extra £111 million to triple starts this year to over 40,000.

Part of the government’s strategy to combat a rise in youth unemployment is to increase traineeship starts but the Department for Education recognises that the current provider base alone will not be sufficient.

A freedom of information request for the latest provider-level data shows that 113, or 68 per cent of all 167 general FE colleges, recruited no traineeships in 2018/19.

The vast majority of traineeships are delivered by around 150 private training providers and Skills Training UK topped the table in 2018/19 with 950 starts.

Of the 54 colleges that did deliver the programme in that year, 21 delivered fewer than 20 starts.

Some colleges subcontract to private training providers and with 330 starts, Eastleigh College saw the most collegefunded traineeships in 2018/19.

A tender to bring on board more providers, such as from the apprenticeship sector, was announced in July but has yet to be launched after suffering from delays.

Traineeships are funded for 16 to 18-yearolds from the study programme budget and for 19 to 24-year-olds from the adult education budget.

Introduced in 2013, the funding pays for an unpaid work placement for up to six months and this year the funding rate for 19 to 24-year-olds has risen from £970 to £1,500.

Employers are now entitled to receive up to £10,000, at a rate of £1,000 per trainee that they take on.

There has also been a change to the eligibility criteria for trainees this year, allowing people with level 3 qualifications, such as A levels, to participate.

Additional flexibilities have also been introduced to encourage take-up, with the minimum work placement hours reduced from 100 to 70 and allowing placements to be split across two employers.

FE Week asked the 10 colleges with the largest cohorts of young people in England that did not offer any traineeships if they planned to change this following chancellor Rishi Runak’s funding boost. Six said they had no intention of offering the scheme, three declined to comment and just one had plans to start delivering them.

Why are colleges continuing to turn their backs on traineeships?

Capital City College Group, the largest college group in London, said they are not planning to deliver traineeships in 2020/2021 because they have not found the programme to be “beneficial to our students” and it is “too restrictive to support the needs of the individual” even with the new flexibilities.

The group created a number of alternative pre-apprenticeship programmes some years ago which “utilise study programme and adult education budget funding streams appropriately” and will continue to offer those instead.

Sunderland College said they are “unable to secure employer commitment to traineeships as a model in the north east generally”, which has been exacerbated by the impact of Covid-19.

A spokesperson added that they have also decided not to offer traineeships because there are now multiple government initiatives, such as the Kickstart scheme, which “run the risk of confusing employers and asking too much of them, particularly at this challenging time”.

West Herts College in Hertfordshire, Chichester College Group in West Sussex and South Thames College in London all said they would not be expanding into the traineeships market this year owing to a lack of demand from employers and potential students.

And Activate Learning, which has seven colleges spread mainly across Oxford, said they would not be applying to the government’s tender at this time as “we feel there are other priorities of much greater scale and need”.

Nottingham College, EKC Group in Kent and New City College in London all refused to comment.

The one large college that said they would start offering traineeships this year was Harrow College & Uxbridge College.

A spokesperson told FE Week: “We currently have a cohort of high-quality apprenticeship candidates, particularly in the areas of accountancy and construction, where the impact of the coronavirus has resulted in a reduction of paid apprenticeship opportunities in these industries.

“We are therefore looking at traineeships in these areas as a substitute route to increase the chances of the trainees securing an apprenticeship in the future.”

HCUC’s spokesperson added that the “increased flexibility” in access to traineeships, particularly with entry now being allowed up to level 3 as compared to level 2 previously, will “enable broader uptake for both employers and students”.

Traineeship starts have been on a rapid decline, from a high of 24,100 in 2015/16 down to just 14,900 in 2018/19.

Data for 2019/20 only currently covers the first three quarters of the year and shows 11,000 starts.

Colleges have historically struggled to offer the programme.

Asked if the Association of Colleges is now actively encouraging its members to get more involved in traineeships this year, senior policy manager Teresa Frith said: “We remain optimistic about the funding for traineeships and hope that an expanded and more flexible traineeship branded programme to provide a re- or pre-employment offer will go hand in hand with a renewed effort to offer more apprenticeships, which have been hit hard due to the pandemic.

“AoC continues to work with EFSA to ensure colleges are aware of the procurement opportunities, employer incentives and how the delivery framework will help providers.”

A DfE spokesperson said the National Careers Service and Jobcentre Plus are “making sure as many young people as possible are made aware of fantastic opportunities traineeships offer, including how they can help them to get ahead in a
range of exciting industries”.

She added that the DfE is also working “at pace” on the procurement for traineeships for 19 to 24-year-olds and options for new providers to access 16 to 19 traineeship funding.

The spokesperson insisted the tender has not been delayed but is being run at an “accelerated timetable”, explaining that a
procurement process of this type requires a “significant amount of due diligence”.

However, she admitted that the procurement was expected to run over the summer, with the aim of having contracts in place as “early as possible in the academic year”.

Some colleges have been able to buck the trend when it comes to offering traineeships in recent years, and told FE Week that they will continue to increase their delivery this year.

How to deliver traineeships successfully as a college

London South East Colleges delivered 100 traineeships in 2018/19 and said it was working hard with employers to use the government’s new incentive payments.

Neil Coates, vice principal for adults, apprenticeships and partnerships at the group, explained that their success in the pre-employment programme can mostly be attributed to the college’s “strong employer engagement strategy – employer advantage – which takes a membership approach” and “ensures that we develop strategic relationships rather than transactional ones”.

He said the college group’s traineeships have also been positively impacted by the decision to put all of their employer-focused teams into one department, which has “ensured that the teams work collaboratively with curriculum colleagues to ensure any student at risk of dropping out is identified quickly”.

In addition, LSEC’s programme of traineeship starts are profiled across the year – which links directly to their drive on
apprenticeship recruitment. “Therefore, when a candidate applies for an apprenticeship vacancy, but is not quite ready for a full apprenticeship, we support them onto a traineeship programme,” Coates said.

Weston College in Somerset delivered 150 traineeships in 2018/19 and is “definitely” planning on delivering more this year.

A spokesperson said their traineeship model is delivered in-house by a specialist team, with “extensive experience” working with learners at a “crossroads in their educational journey”.

Weston’s traineeship delivery is “regularly reviewed using Labour Market Intelligence, in the concept of ‘career creation’ with bespoke traineeships pathways created around sector, employer and regional need, to ensure recruitment levels are sustainable in sectors with potential for high growth”.

Provider disputes £2.6m clawback following ESFA investigation

The parent company of a recently-purchased apprenticeship training provider is disputing a £2.6 million clawback and remains suspended from recruiting apprentices, FE Week can reveal.

Prospects Training International, which trades as Geason Training and was bought by the Speedy group in December 2018, is challenging an Education and Skills Funding Agency investigation over alleged overpayments.

Following Speedy’s buyout, Geason was found to have made ‘insufficient progress’ in two areas of an early monitoring visit by Ofsted, conducted in April 2019.

Receiving an ‘insufficient progress’ rating means apprenticeship providers like Geason, which at the time had 1,017 apprentices, are banned from taking on new starts until they score a grade three at a full Ofsted inspection.

Geason passed this threshold this year, when an inspection report published in May graded it as ‘requires improvement’.

The Speedy group is in discussions with the funding agency to resolve the matter

Inspectors credited a newly-appointed leadership team with overhauling the “not fit for purpose” curriculum, and reported employers could see apprentices were now “swiftly improving and developing their skills”.

However, at the time of going to press Geason was still listed as “not currently starting new apprentices” on the government’s Find Apprenticeship Training website and register of apprenticeship training providers.

When asked why Geason was still suspended from new starts, the ESFA said it does not comment on “individual cases”.

Speedy would not be drawn on why their subsidiary company was still suspended.

However, it comes after Speedy’s accounts for 2019-20 reported that they were notified in April that the ESFA was suspending payments and seeking to claw back £2.6 million from Geason.

This was after an analysis of a small sample of learner documents over a three-year period brought up errors.

At the time the accounts were published, Speedy said it was “not possible to make an accurate estimate of the timing or amount that may be repayable from this, or other potential claims we may receive”.

Speedy engaged lawyers to respond to the agency and set aside £3 million for costs associated with the investigation, including legal fees.

Geason had performed below expectations that year, due to lower-than-expected learner enrolments and the set-up of a number of regional training centres “which have yet to reach critical mass”, the accounts also said.

When asked for comment on the investigation, the company pointed FE Week to an investors’ update from earlier this month, which said Geason: “Received a claim from a funding agency in late April 2020 alleging poor financial controls and overpayments of up to £2.6 million for the three-year period commencing August 2017.

“The Speedy group is in discussions with the funding agency to resolve the matter.”

The ESFA said it would not comment on individual investigations.

According to the government’s Find Apprenticeship Training site, Geason delivers apprenticeships for such standards as professional accounting/taxation technician, digital marketer and property maintenance operative.

‘Worrying’: University groups voice concerns over Ofsted inspections

Handing Ofsted powers to inspect degree apprenticeships is “worrying and unnecessary”, a university membership organisation has said.

MillionPlus, which represents 24 “modern” universities, has expressed concern at the watchdog’s expertise to inspect the provision and called for inspectors to have mandatory HE academic employment experience in order to review university-based provision.

It comes after FE Week revealed government plans for Ofsted to take on responsibility for overseeing all apprenticeships, including those at the degree levels of 6 and 7 from the Office for Students, for the first time.

Writing for FE Week, chief executive Greg Walker said that degree apprenticeships, which launched in 2015, have “such exciting potential” but it is “extremely disappointing to see the government clipping the wings of this policy before it has a chance to really fly”.

He said that while Ofsted has a “great deal” of experience in its field of school and college inspections, that “does not mean it is suitable to regulate the complex, diverse educational provision in higher education”.

Walker claims his members have “already seen some issues with Ofsted oversight of university provision” at levels 4 and 5.

He said: “A tricky compromise between Ofsted and the OfS meant the former reviews some elements of level 4 and 5 apprenticeships offered by universities. This has been a challenging experience for universities, dealing with a significant lack of understanding and a desire by Ofsted to simply overlay a wider inspection framework on to university learning.

“This has led to worrying assumptions that did not match reality – including seeing drastically different judgements about teaching excellence from the OfS’s TEF [Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework] evaluation and from Ofsted inspectors, despite both organisations reviewing the same provision.”

Walker recommends that if the proposal for Ofsted to inspect all apprenticeships becomes policy, the watchdog’s criteria to become an inspector for degree apprenticeships should be amended so that it is “obligatory to have had HE academic employment experience in order to review university-based provision”.

Adrian Anderson, chief executive of the University Vocational Awards Council, has also questioned Ofsted’s HE experience, saying the inspectorate should urgently outline “what plans it has to recruit senior managers with higher education experience and expertise”.

Ofsted declined to comment.

Last week, the Russell Group, which represents the 24 “leading” universities in the UK including Cambridge, did not pour cold water over the plan for Ofsted to inspect their members.

A spokesperson said the group will continue to work with government on delivery and expansion of the apprenticeship route, including how to avoid “overburdensome or disproportionate regulation”.

The Department for Education said it will “provide further updates in due course” about the future regulation of level 6 and 7 apprenticeships.

Making Ofsted the sole regulator for all apprenticeships was a recommendation in Philip Augar’s review of post-18 education.