ESFA scraps provider achievement rate reports

Colleges and training providers will not have access to qualification achievement rate (QAR) reports to use internally for 2019/20, the Education and Skills Funding Agency has announced.

At the beginning of lockdown the agency said that it would not publish institution-level achievement rates for the current academic year due to disruption caused by Covid-19 pandemic.

Officials also confirmed that the data will not be used by others, such as Ofsted, local authorities or devolved authorities or within ESFA, to hold institutions to account.

Yesterday, the agency revealed that they have now taken the decision to “not supply 2019 to 2020 QARs for institutions to use internally themselves”.

Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief policy officer Simon Ashworth said this was an “eminently sensible” approach because “the agency was clear that it didn’t want to use the QAR to hold providers accountable for the unforeseeable consequences of the pandemic”.

“The coronavirus is impacting on delivery in many ways beyond providers’ control and it will continue to do so for at least the remainder of 2020 as the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has recognised in its approach to maintaining Covid-related flexibilities,” he added.

The 2019/20 academic year includes learners who were due to pass between 1 August 2019 and 31 July 2020. Achievement rates would have been published in March 2021.

The ESFA said they are currently still reviewing what data “we will publish for statistical purposes in 2021 for the 2019 to 2020 QARs but, it will not contain any data at institution level”.

QARs calculate what proportion of learning was successfully completed in each academic year by providers.

They are produced for apprenticeships, adult education and 16 to 18 programmes.

The latest achievement rates were published in March and showed the overall national rate for apprenticeships dropped 2.2 per cent points last year to just 64.7 per cent.

The achievement rate for the new apprenticeship standards was particularly low, averaging just 46.6 per cent compared to 68.7 per cent for frameworks.

The ESFA minimum standard threshold sits at an achievement rate of 62 per cent.

If more than 40 percent of a provider’s provision fails to meet the minimum standard then intervention can be as severe as contract termination, in line with the ESFA’s “oversight of independent training providers” operational guidance.

Monthly apprenticeships update: May starts fall 60%

Apprenticeship starts for the month of May 2020 fell 60 per cent on the previous year, figures published this morning show.

According to Department for Education data, there were 22,300 starts in May 2019 but this dropped to 9,000 12 months later, which would have been caused by the Covid-19 lockdown.

Young people appear to be the hardest hit as starts for those aged 16 to 18 plunged by 79 per cent, from 2,900 to 600.

Starts on level 2 apprenticeships have also fallen more than any other level – from 8,000 in May 2019 to 2,100 (74 per cent) in May 2020.

Today’s data also shows that starts have continued to fall by around half since lockdown started in March.

There have been 34,690 apprenticeship starts reported to date between March 23 and June 30, 2020, fewer than the 72,800 reported for this period at this point last year, a decrease of 52.3 per cent.

The DfE’s statisticians note that final data will not become available until later in the year, therefore “at this point it is unclear what the true number of starts in the affected period was or if the level of reporting at this point in the year has been affected by the lockdown”.

Latest apprenticeship vacancy data, from the government’s Find An Apprenticeship website, has been released and shows a considerable drop.

Vacancies in April, May and June 2020 – the three full months for which data are available since the coronavirus restrictions were implemented – were 2,120, 1,850 and 4,030, which compares to 10,900, 13,030 and 12,100 in April, May and June 2019 respectively.

The DfE has also, for the first time, published data about its ‘Skills Toolkit’ – a website which directs people to existing free courses.

An estimate of “at least 136,000 registrations” were recorded on the courses that featured on the toolkit since it was launched in late April 2020.

The DfE said this is a “provisional” estimate as there “may be a data lag in reporting”. The department also doesn’t hold comparible data for registrations on the courses pre-Covid, so it is unclear whether their popularity has increased or fallen.

Association of Employment and Learning Providers managing director Jane Hickie said today’s starts numbers, including the “big drop” in advertised vacancies, show why the government “made a serious error in deciding that its Covid provider relief scheme should not cover the large majority of apprenticeship provision“.

“Providers are now having to take very difficult decisions about reducing capacity despite the measures announced by the chancellor in his summer statement,” she added.

“The government’s Plan for Jobs will be an acid test for getting the apprenticeship programme back on its feet.  The key question is whether the new employer incentives will be large enough to really make a difference.”

Responding to today’s data, apprenticeships and skills minister Gillian Keegan said: “Apprenticeships are a fantastic way to get ahead in a wide range of exciting industries and will also play a vital role in delivering the skills our economy needs to grow after coronavirus.

“To help create more high quality apprenticeship opportunities we are providing £2,000 to employers for each new apprentice they hire aged under 25 and £1,500 for each new apprentice they hire aged 25 and over.

“We are also investing £111 million this year to triple the number of work placements available across England to help more young people gain the skills, experience and confidence they need to enter the world of work.”

300 redundancies planned at England’s largest apprenticeship provider

England’s largest apprenticeship provider is planning to slash around 300 jobs as it battles with “significantly reduced” learner numbers caused by Covid-19, FE Week can reveal.

The move by Lifetime Training Group will see its workforce drop by up to a quarter.

Chief executive Alex Khan said that historically his provider has averaged around 1,800 apprenticeship starts a month but since the pandemic hit they have averaged around 350. 

He told FE Week: “Lifetime’s workforce is built based on the number of learners that we have on programme and undertaking assessment.

“Following a period of significantly reduced apprenticeship enrolments combined with learners continuing to achieve their apprenticeships, we expect to see a downturn in learner numbers across the group while the economy rebuilds over the coming months.”

As a result, Lifetime Training has now entered a period of consultation with its staff and propose to make reductions of circa 20 to 25 per cent – around 300 job losses across a “range” of roles.

Khan added that his provider is just one of a “large” numbers of training firms needing to make headcount reductions to stay afloat as the impact of the pandemic bites.

Last month, FE Week revealed that another one of the country’s largest apprenticeship providers – QA Ltd – was also planning to make hundreds of redundancies.

Colleges, such as Bradford, are also having to make large scale redundancies following a drop in apprenticeship business caused by Covid-19.

Lifetime Training Group has grown considerably in recent years after private equity firm Silverfleet Capital acquired a majority stake for a rumoured £115 to 120 million, according to Edu Investor.

Aside from their apprenticeship provider, the group includes awarding body Innovate Awarding and Edtech provider Skilltech Solutions and currently employs just over 1,200 staff.

Lifetime Training stands out as by far the largest apprenticeship provider in the country, with a cohort planned to finish in 2018/19 of 16,060 apprentices, more than double the British Army, the next largest provider.

Lifetime also topped the list of providers receiving funding from levy-paying employers last year after it was paid £51.5 million – almost double the next closest provider QA Limited on £26 million.

In 2014/15, Lifetime Training recorded 15,530 apprenticeship starts, which increased to 23,020 in 2018/19.

Khan said his provider’s starts figures have dropped to around 16,000 this year, with the lockdown months of April and May experiencing the largest fall.

While Lifetime Training is forecasting higher numbers next month when the government’s employer incentives kick in, the learner volumes on programme in the short to medium term “do not justify” the current headcount.

Khan added that it will take “some time to return to our historical averages” but it is “likely that in the future we will rebuild capacity”.

Lifetime Training currently offers apprenticeships in sectors including retail, business and management, hospitality, fitness, childcare and teaching, health and social care and clinical health.

The provider is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted and recorded a turnover of £62 million and profit of almost £11 million in its most recently published accounts for the financial year ending July 2018.

The government has offered providers extra financial support if they are struggling with low starts numbers through their Covid-19 supplier relief scheme, which allows bids for apprenticeship and adult education budget funding in advance of delivery.

However, any apprenticeships funded through the government’s digital system – mostly with levy-paying employers – are not eligible for the support.

Khan said Lifetime Training has not has not applied to the relief fund because around 90 per cent of their apprenticeships are with levy-paying employers and are therefore ineligible.

How EdTech can transform further education post-lockdown

The silver lining of the Covid-19 pandemic could well be a revolution in how further education utilizes the power of EdTech, writes Dana Dabbous

It has long been accepted that technology in education is vital for filling the digital skills gap. Successive governments have promoted greater use of EdTech in the FE sector. This includes the Department for Education’s 2019 EdTech strategy and, more recently, the EdTech demonstrator schools and colleges programme. The closure of schools and colleges during the Covid-19 pandemic has only turbocharged this need. In short, lockdown has focused minds.

Since September 2019, the Edge Foundation has been conducting a vital piece of research. The study looks at how four FE colleges across the UK have successfully integrated digital technologies into their practice. Although we knew this would be insightful, little could we know just how important our findings would soon be.

Following Covid-19, there is now a greater need for educational institutions to adopt digital tools, and at a faster pace than ever before. Luckily, many FE colleges are already well underway with this transformation. Existing digitalisation has helped many to respond well and adapt to the situation we now find ourselves in. This is particularly important for colleges. They are front and centre in minimising the UK’s technical and digital skills gap. In turn, this allows the economy to keep up on the world stage.

Because each of the colleges in the study had well-established digital strategies, we knew they would offer valuable insights. But what did we find? And how can these findings help other FE colleges as we emerge from lockdown?

Firstly (and reassuringly) we found that EdTech undoubtedly improves digital literacy. All the colleges in the study showed that, when applied effectively, EdTech can support learning and teaching. It gave students a taste of how digital tools are used in the workplace. Staff were also impressed by how technology could streamline administrative tasks, freeing up time and creating scope for a greater range of classroom activities. 

Perhaps more importantly though, the research identified challenges. One key issue, for instance, was staff confidence. Lecturers across all the colleges in the study were often disheartened by tech mishaps, especially if these occurred in front of students. To tackle this—and other teething problems—constant and consistent support was needed. Where possible, a dedicated digital support team proved highly effective in helping staff and students to adapt. Combined with on-hand support, CPD workshops and individual training, this promoted a graded cultural shift towards greater creativity, collaboration and openness.

Anyone who has implemented digital tech knows the practical challenges it can pose. Hardware issues, poor Wi-Fi, and just ensuring that tech-use stays industry-relevant are common factors (all are highlighted in the study). Ultimately though, these problems are manageable. This leads to perhaps the most interesting finding: staff and students needed to understand the transformative potential of EdTech before fully embracing it. A widespread concern—especially among those unaccustomed to digital tools—was that tech ‘holds all the power’. But once staff and students understood how EdTech could democratise the learning process (i.e. giving them power, rather than taking it away) then uptake vastly improved.

As staff confidence increased they were keen to share their newfound skills. One college highlighted how lecturers shared blended learning techniques with staff from other disciplines. This included traditional teaching, video feedback, learning apps and games to support students. This led to completely new approaches. Ultimately, integrating digital tools in and out of the classroom increased student engagement. Staff remarked how students’ enjoyment of learning visibly increased.

The challenge for other colleges, then, lies in reaching this goal. How do we break down resistance to change, and help staff and students understand the benefits that digital tools can bring?

The full report details each college’s digital strategy, offering insight for how others can follow suit. It explains how they developed their digital frameworks, the technologies they adopted, how they created physical and digital spaces, and—crucially—how they supported their staff and students. While each college had different objectives, a common aim was to create a culture of openness, support and experimentation. Before the pandemic, this was desirable. Today, it is essential. To discover all these insights, you can download the full research report here.

In these uncertain times, ready-access to education is more important than ever. The events of the last few months have only highlighted this fact. Despite the pandemic, though, I believe there is a glimmer of hope. The silver lining in all this could well be a revolution in how further education utilizes the power of EdTech. Because if now is not the time to fully embrace it, when will be?

ESFA ‘withdraws’ AEB funding clawback plans following sector backlash

The Education and Skills Funding Agency has “withdrawn” plans to clawback this year’s unspent adult education budget grant funding following criticism from the sector.

Last week the agency announced that providers and colleges would retain their full 2019/20 allocation only if they attempted to continue delivering during the Covid-19 period and they delivered 80 per cent of activity in the whole year.

Where providers fall below this threshold and under deliver by more than £10,000, the ESFA said it would fund the “actual costs”.

Original guidance published in March by the agency said they would “not carry out the final reconciliation for grant funded providers in receipt of ESFA funded AEB” in 2019/20 due to the pandemic – there was no mention of the 80 per cent threshold.

Susan Pember, a former director of FE at the Department for Education and now policy director of adult education network HOLEX, quickly took issue with last week’s announcement.

“[The announcement] goes back on all the funding reassurances that were given by DfE in March,” she tweeted.

“Providers acted in good faith, quickly moved on line, followed government advice on not using the job retention scheme, protected their learners and now this.”

The Association of Colleges deputy chief executive Julian Gravatt also hit out at the move, stating that the 80 per cent “may seem like a low threshold but the unprecedented closure of buildings for more than four months has meant that some colleges won’t reach this”.

He also pointed out the announcement, which was made on July 22, was less than nine days before the end of the college financial year and that most colleges would have already set their budgets for the new academic year.

Luke Rake, principal of Kingston Maurward College, tweeted that “sadly this the norm for college information and needs to change soon”.

And Chris Todd, principal of Derwentside College, tweeted: “I would have no issue with it, if it had been made clear at the beginning. We’ve agreed all of our financials with our board last week. Hopefully they will see sense.”

The ESFA appears to have listened.

In an update published today, the agency said: “We have received helpful feedback from providers on the AEB reconciliation article published in update on 22 July and while we consider this feedback and review delivery at the R12 submission, we are withdrawing the published approach.”

The agency will provide an update and further guidance “after we have considered the data and views in August”.

“Our original guidance issued in March was produced quickly to respond to the developing crisis and may not operate fairly across all providers,” they added.

“It remains our intention to fund grant providers during the coronavirus (COVID-19) period and ensure a stable financial footing going into the next funding year, whilst also ensuring the appropriate use of public funds.”

Second round of ESFA Covid-19 supplier relief attracts 112 provider bids

Just 112 providers applied for the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s second Covid-19 supplier relief scheme – and 35 of those were colleges.

The majority of bids – 70 – were to claim apprenticeship support only, while 14 applications went in just for adult education budget (AEB) relief.

A total of 28 submissions were for both types of funding.

The ESFA’s second round of supplier relief opened last month and allowed FE providers to bid for apprenticeship and adult education budget funding in advance of delivery for the period July to October 2020.

The first of the schemes, which are being run to support providers suffering from reduced learner and apprenticeship numbers caused by the pandemic, covered the period from April to June. It resulted in 165 applications, a third (58) of which were rejected.

FE Week analysis shows there are 734 providers with a procured adult education budget allocation and/or non-levy apprenticeship contract with the government – nearly all of which would have been entitled to bid for the scheme.

Karen Woodward, the ESFA’s deputy director for employer relations, told a previous FE Week webinar that many providers failed in their first round bids because they struggled to “prove need” for the financial support and not many eligible providers applied because they did not feel “comfortable” in sharing the financial information that was being requested by the agency.

Of the 112 bids in the second round, 77 came from independent training providers while 35 came from colleges.

In June, Association of Colleges boss David Hughes told MPs on the education select committee that college sector income, which currently totals around £7 billion annually, could fall by £2 billion next year as the “enormous impact” of Covid-19 bites.

He said the AoC had recently surveyed the 17 colleges that provide apprenticeships and they predicted a 50 per cent drop in starts next year, which would equate to a £30 million loss just to those 17.

A day after Hughes’ appearance FE Week revealed that Bradford College was to make over 100 staff redundant after their apprenticeship Covid provider relief application was rejected. The college’s principal, Chris Webb, branded the government as “short-sighted” following the rejection.

While non-levy apprenticeships have been eligible for the ESFA’s relief scheme, any apprenticeships funded through the government’s digital system – mostly with levy-paying employers – are not.

The agency claimed this was because the contract is directly with the employer and provider rather than government. The Association of Employment and Learning Providers challenged this legally but dropped the action in June after weighing up the costs.

The ESFA announced last week that it was due to begin notifying bidders of their outcome for the second supplier relief round from July 22. The agency expects to release all outcomes by August 6.

ESFA plan traineeship funding tender despite history of tendering woes

The Education and Skills Funding Agency is to launch a tender to “quickly” widen the provider base for adult traineeships despite a recent history of botched procurements.

It follows chancellor Rishi Sunak’s announcement that the government is to invest £111 million to triple the number of people taking part in the pre-employment programme as part of the country’s economic recovery from Covid-19.

Details about how the ESFA will manage new traineeship opportunities for 16 to 18-year-olds have not been finalised yet but the agency promised the plans will be published “shortly”.

The procurement to deliver 19 to 24 traineeships, which are funded through the adult education budget, will grant successful providers additional funding but there is no launch date yet.

The ESFA said it will be looking for providers with the capacity to start providing “high-quality” traineeships “quickly” through a ring-fenced contract for service.

The tender will be handled through the Department for Education’s e-sourcing portal.

As well as an investment of £111 million for 2020/21, the ESFA confirmed that there are new flexibilities to widen access of traineeships. They include:

    young people qualified up to level 3 (rather than level 2 previously) are now eligible for a traineeship

    minimum work experience of 70 hours (previously 100 hours), with multiple employers if needed

    ESFA said it wants to see flexible content and qualifications that prepares trainees for progression to apprenticeships and jobs through a direct line of sight to the occupational standards

    an increased AEB traineeship learning aim cost of £1,500

    employers who offer new traineeship work placements will receive £1,000 per learner (up to ten learners) to support engagement and assist with costs such as the purchase of additional PPE for trainees

    traineeships can now last up to 12 months, allowing twice as much time on a programme for those young people with particular needs who need it

The ESFA said it will publish an updated traineeships framework for delivery and funding rules over the next month.

Introduced as a flagship pre-employability programme in 2013, traineeships are eligible for 16 to 24-year-olds and training providers are funded by the ESFA to deliver pre-employment training and arrange work placements.

But traineeship starts have been on a rapid decline, from a high of 24,100 in 2015/16 down to just 14,900 last year.

Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief policy officer Simon Ashworth said it’s good to see that the government is “not wasting any time” on its plans to boost traineeship numbers as “we will see youth unemployment shoot up as the furlough scheme unwinds”.

“The procurement should reward existing expertise and capacity among those providers who have stayed loyal to traineeships and turned them into a highly effective programme,” he added.

“But at the same time, it should allow quality controlled market entry to others to meet the new ambitious growth target.  AELP also hopes that the design of the revamped programme will be much more responsive to in-year demand.”

The decision to run another tender may concern some in the sector, especially those who were part of the previous AEB procurement run in 2017.

The tender was plagued with delays and had do be completely redone after the ESFA realised it was botched. And when the final outcomes were released most providers had their funding slashed – including one case of a 97 per cent cut.

Providers teamed up to threaten the ESFA with legal action before the agency found additional funding to top up contracts.

Later in 2017 the ESFA had more issues with its tender for non-levy apprenticeship funding. For example, the agency awarded a contract to an defunct provider but an ‘outstanding’ college was rejected.

And just last year, the ESFA delayed its European Social Fund tender three times following technical errors as well as claims the agency broke procurement rules which led to more threats of legal action.

Ofqual wants admissions ‘flexibility’ for students with ‘one or two lower grades’

Post-16 providers have been urged to “offer greater flexibility” in admission decisions to ensure students who get “one or two lower grades” still get the courses they’ve been offered.

Sally Collier, Ofqual’s chief regulator, said providers could focus less on this year’s calculated results and instead place more weight on other evidence, such as speaking to the student’s school to assess their potential.

It comes after Ofqual warned last week that a “substantial” number of learners will have at least one grade that has been adjusted under the standardisation process, and most probably to a lower mark than teachers wanted.

You may wish to consider whether you can offer greater flexibility in your admissions decisions

The Sunday Times also reported yesterday that Oxford University will award places to pupils from poorer backgrounds even if they drop a grade or two below their offer.

Collier, in a letter to heads of centres published today, urged those with post-16 courses to “consider whether you can offer greater flexibility in your admissions decisions than you would in any other year, to allow students to progress to the courses you offer”.

If a student had missed one grade, for instance, Collier said providers “may want to consider the profile of their grades and put slightly less weight on the one or two lower grades.

“Or you may wish to consider giving slightly more weight than usual to other robust evidence in admissions decisions, for example if you already know a student and their potential well or can determine this from speaking to their previous school or college.”

She also urged flexibility for private candidates who might not have been given a calculated grade and students not given a vocational and technical qualification because there was “no way in which a valid result could be issued”.

It comes after reports Oxford University will accept top pupils from poorer-performing schools this year even if they fail to get the required grades.

Decisions on students who fail to meet an offer will be made based on factors including the candidate’s postcode and school region.

Samina Khan, director of admissions at Oxford, told The Times: “We want to be flexible with students who have had a rough ride this year … (and) will apply a degree of clemency.”

Ofqual: ‘Not true’ that teacher grades won’t be used

Ofqual has revealed that this year’s centre-assessed grades were up to 12 percentage points more generous than results achieved by pupils last year.

In anticipation of this, Ofqual had made clear its standardisation model would place more weight on the statistical expectations (such as a school’s previous results), rather than teacher grades.

The regulator tested 12 different standardisation models before selecting the ‘Direct Centre-Level Performance’ approach.

Slides published from Ofqual’s annual symposium last week appear to show that the actual teacher-assessed grades do not form part of the standardisation process, instead they focus on a school or college’s prior results, pupils’ prior attainment and the rank order of pupils submitted by schools and colleges this year (see below).

But, following reports of the omission, Ofqual said it is “not true to say the centre assessment grades are not being used – they are an important component of this year’s arrangements and have assisted centres when developing their rank orders”.

A spokesperson added: “They have been instrumental during testing to identify the fairest process, and are being used to quality assure the outputs.”

However centre-assessment grades will be the primary source of evidence to calculate grades for small schools and colleges and those without previous results, such as new free schools.

The regulator has also reiterated that centre-assessed grades and rank orders can not be shared with students or parents before results day to “protect the integrity of the grading process, and to avoid staff being put under pressure”.

Any “inappropriate” disclosure will be investigated as potential malpractice.

Learners can submit a subject access request to find out their teacher grade and rank – but schools and colleges are exempt from providing this information until after results day.

Where this information is later provided, Ofqual is encouraging schools and colleges to “consider what additional information and guidance is provided, so that students understand the context in which their final calculated result has been decided”.

ESFA reveals spending and audit rules for £96m 16-19 Covid tutoring fund

Colleges and other 16 to 19 providers will be paid at least an additional £150 per disadvantaged learner next year to help them catch-up with the studies they missed during the Covid-19 pandemic.

But providers will need to prove that the funding has been spent to support tuition activity “above and beyond the programmes of education already planned for 2020/21” and funds will be recovered if this cannot be demonstrated.

Providers’ use of the funding may also be taken into account by Ofsted in future inspections.

The Education Skills Funding Agency today revealed the spending and audit rules for the £96 million 16 to 19 tutoring fund that is being granted next year as part of their £1 billion Covid catch-up scheme.

Colleges and 16 to 19 providers were originally excluded from the fund but the government U-turned on this decision earlier this week.

The ESFA said today that providers using the fund need to consider what will be “most effective for their students, considering students’ needs and local circumstances”.

Providers have “flexibility” to decide the most appropriate approach to resourcing the delivery of small group tuition.

This “may include a mix of both teaching and learning support staff as appropriate” and resourcing “could be through paying for more hours from existing staff, hiring new staff, or buying in a service from a third party provider”.

The agency made clear that the tuition fund is ring-fenced for 16 to 19 small group tuition only.

They will allocate the funding using the agency’s “existing proxy measure” for disadvantage: learners with low prior attainment, meaning those who did not have a GCSE grade 4 or above in English and / or maths at age 16.

The ESFA will allocate each provider “£150 per instance for full time students without GCSE grade 4 or above in English and/or maths based on the numbers in their current 2020 to 2021 academic year allocation”. There will be pro-rata funding for part time students.

The extra funding will be paid through 16 to 19 funding allocations for 2020 to 2021 academic year and providers will start to receive payments from November 2020.

Providers “must accept or decline the extra funding once we have confirmed funding amounts in August” and the agency will only distribute the funding to those providers that “confirm they will be able to spend this effectively and in line with this guidance”.

All providers, as a condition of the receipt of this funding must:

    produce a concise statement explaining how they will use this funding in line with our guidance to prioritise support for disadvantaged students

    publish the statement on their website in the autumn term

    record the use of the funding, including reference to the individual students that receive the support, the needs of those students, the number of hours of tuition delivered, and retain the necessary evidence of the tuition provided,

    deliver the extra tuition and spend the associated funding in the 2020 to 2021 academic year

    notify ESFA of any unspent funding from this fund for it to be reclaimed

The ESFA said it will run “spot-checks” of a sample of providers as part of the compliance process for this funding.

“We will look for evidence that institutions have used their tuition fund correctly, that is, the funding has supported additional small group tuition for 16 to 19 students in English, maths, or other courses where learning has been disrupted, and that delivery has been in the 2020 to 2021 academic year,” the agency continued.

“Institutions must be able to identify the students supported, and evidence the delivery of provision to the students. In line with usual practice, institutions must retain original documents including, for example, attendance records, enrolment records and learning agreements.”

The ESFA will look to recover funds where there is no delivery or where “we identify the institution is not able to demonstrate at spot checks, or audit how the delivery meets the purposes set out in this guidance”.

Providers’ use of these funds to deliver small group tuition “may also be taken into account by Ofsted, including through the interim visits planned for the autumn term and through full inspection, which is intended to resume from January 2021”.