Around a third of the funding pot set aside for the Turing Scheme will go to further education providers, FE Week can reveal.

£105 million in total has been promised to pay for 35,000 placements for the UK’s new international student exchange programme, which is set to get underway in September.

In an interview with FE Week, Ecorys, the co-delivery partner with the British Council for the Turing Scheme, revealed that £35 million will go to further education, £60 million will go to universities and £10 million to schools.

This roughly equates to about 10,000 further education placements, 20,000 higher education placements and 5,000 school placements.

The scheme, named after scientist Alan Turing, was unveiled in December as the replacement to the UK’s participation in Erasmus+ following Brexit.

It will allow students to study and work abroad on placements ranging from between two weeks and 12 months.

Bids for a slice of the funding are set to launch this month and the Department for Education plans to issue funding decisions in July.

A new Turing Scheme programme guide was published on Wednesday and provides detail of how the funding will work.

For FE providers, they will get £315 per participant in “organisational support” for the first 100 participants, and £180 for groups bigger than that.

In terms of travel costs, they will receive a fixed amount depending how far away the destination is. For sending learners anywhere between 100 to 499 km away it’s £165 – while visiting Tanzania, for instance, at 11,000 km, would qualify for £905.

Learners will also get £135 each to access language resources if they are going away to a non-English speaking country for more than 19 days.  

Thereafter, daily funds will depend on whether the learner and accompanying staff member is in a group 1, 2 or 3 destination country, which is ranked according to local living costs.

Learners in group 1 countries get £109 a day for two weeks, and £76 a day after that. Those in group 2 countries get £94 a day then £66 a day, and those in group 3 countries get £80 a day and £56 a day after that. 

Meanwhile, FE providers need to identify the “anticipated points of expenditure” when they will require the funds. They will be paid 80 per cent of costs at these points, with the final 20 per cent once a special report is completed showing all went to plan.

FE providers will also need to undergo “financial capacity checks” before their application is accepted.

Read more about the upcoming Turing Scheme and how it may differ from Erasmus+ in tomorrow’s edition of FE Week.

The volume of subcontracted training will be capped at 25 per cent for providers from next year – but plans for a further phased reduction beyond this amount have been binned.

However, providers will be allowed to submit a request to be exempt from the cap.

Further details about reforms to FE subcontracting were published today by the Education and Skills Funding Agency following its consultation outcome published in June.

Many of the measures have stayed the same, but there are some important clarifications.

The most significant for providers will be the ESFA’s decision to introduce a straight 25 per cent cap on subcontracted provision from 2022/23.

The agency’s consultation had proposed that the cap should be further reduced to 17.5 per cent in the following year and then to 10 per cent the year after.

But most respondents disagreed with the proposal and the agency then set off to further evaluate the “right threshold”.

Today’s updated guidance said: “By 2022 to 2023, we do not expect any provider (excluding local authorities and European Social Fund provision) to be subcontracting 25 per cent or more of their provision unless they have written permission from us to do so.”

There is no further detail about which providers would qualify to be exempt from the cap.

The ESFA previously asked all providers to produce a plan during the 2020 autumn term setting out how they will achieve a reduction in their volume of subcontracted activity over the next three academic years

For providers who are currently subcontracting 25 per cent or more of their provision, the ESFA said it will conduct a “targeted exercise, writing to providers to request a copy of their reduction plan (if we do not receive an exemption case) to inform the progress that providers have made in their plans for a reduction across the three years”.

Another key change announced today is that the adult education budget has been removed from the agency’s proposal for prior approval for whole programme subcontracting.

The ESFA’s consultation had proposed to introduce “stricter controls on the circumstances in which the whole of a learner’s programme could be subcontracted, and providers will be required to obtain agreement from the ESFA before doing so”.

This rule will now only be introduced for students whose whole programme of 16 to 19 provision is subcontracted from 2021/22.

The agency said it concluded that introducing “such a requirement for AEB programmes above a specified length is not practical and we will not be proceeding with this”.

 

We are not prohibiting or banning all subcontracting

ESFA chief executive Eileen Milner embarked on a major review of subcontracting in 2019, expressing concerns about the “continued rise” in cases of fraud linked to subcontracting arrangements managed by agency.

The ESFA has since announced a series of measures it will take to “significantly” reduce subcontracting in FE over the next three years.

In publishing the additional detail about the measures today, the agency made clear they are not “prohibiting or banning” all subcontracting.

“Where it is done well, for the right reasons, and properly overseen, it can enhance the learner experience and add value,” they added.

Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief policy officer Simon Ashworth welcomed today’s changes.

“The adult education budget not being included in the whole programme subcontracting proposal is a common sense approach,” he said.

“Jointly delivering qualifications and joint delivery of training programmes are two very different beasts, and the exclusion should be welcomed.

“On the cap, we’ve moved away from the blunt and arbitrary phased reduction over three years as first muted, which is a positive change. The ESFA is now proposing a threshold of 25 per cent, but it will helpfully allow providers to submit for an exemption.”

Chancellor Rishi Sunak delivered his spring budget today and confirmed a number of new investments for the FE and skills sector.

They include a doubling of apprentice incentive payments for employers, a further boost to traineeships and a new “Help to Grow” scheme for small businesses to upskill.

FE Week has the key points:

 

1. Cash incentives for employers to hire new apprentices doubled

Apprenticeship financial incentives were first introduced by Sunak in August and currently offer firms £2,000 to take on apprentices aged 16 to 24, while those that employ new apprentices aged 25 and over are paid £1,500.

The chancellor said today that the bonuses, set to end this month, will be extended for a further six months to September.

And any employers who hire a new apprentice between 1 April 2021 and 30 September 2021 will receive £3,000 per new hire, regardless of the apprentice’s age.

This is on top of the £1,000 payment already provided for new apprentices aged 16 to 18 and those under 25 with an Education, Health and Care Plan, meaning that some employers could receive £4,000 in total.

 

2. £126m for traineeships

Sunak said the government will provide an additional £126 million in England for “high quality” work placements and training for 16- to 24-year-olds in the 2021/22 academic year.

This is hoped to attract a further 40,000 traineeship starts next year. Employers who provide trainees with work experience will continue to be funded at a rate of £1,000 per trainee.

It builds on the £111 million the chancellor set aside in 2020/21 to triple the number of traineeships.

 

3. ‘Portable’ apprenticeships set to be launched

The government will introduce a £7 million fund from July 2021 to “help employers in England set up and expand portable apprenticeships”.

The budget document says this will enable people who need to work across multiple projects with different employers, such as in the TV and film industries, to “benefit from the high quality long-term training that an apprenticeship provides”.

Employers will be “invited to bring forward proposals here, and in particular the Creative Industries Council will be asked to do so in recognition of the potential benefits of this new approach for the creative sector”.

Trailed last Friday, the Treasury called this scheme “flexi-job” apprenticeships. The first of these are  expected to start in January 2022.

 

4. ‘Help to Grow’ scheme for SMEs to upskill

The budget document says the government will offer a new UK-wide management programme to upskill 30,000 small and medium-sized enterprises over three years.

It states: “Developed in partnership with industry, the programme will combine a national curriculum delivered through business schools with practical case studies and mentoring from experienced business professionals.

“Over 12 weeks, and 90 per cent subsidised by government, this programme will equip SMEs with the tools to grow their businesses and thrive.”

The budget’s costing document shows the government has set aside £60 million for this scheme in 2021-22 and then £75 million for 2022-23.

It is unclear at this stage what government department will be responsible for this scheme.

FE providers will each receive up to 7,500 face masks from government for free as they reopen to more students from next week.

A key new recommendation for onsite teaching from March 8 is for all students and staff to wear face coverings in the classroom until at least Easter.

Under Department for Education guidance, officials “expect” every 16-to-19 student will “attend their FE provider in person and will undertake the majority of their planned hours on site”. Adult learners will also return but a more flexible mix of remote learning can be used for them.

To support the return of onsite education and to ensure “maximum compliance with the system of controls”, the Department of Health and Social Care is distributing ‘Type IIR’ disposable medical masks to FE providers.

Announcing the move today, the Education and Skills Funding Agency said this supply is for “use only as the settings’ contingency stock of face coverings”.

FE providers should expect to receive a delivery of between 5,000 and 7,500 units by the end of the week commencing 8 March and be “sufficient to cover your contingency stock until the Easter, with larger settings receiving further stock if required”.

For any queries on delivery or missing items, providers are told to contact the DHSC PPE helpline on 0800 8766802, identifying as an education setting, or email dfeppequeries@unipart.com.

Telecoms companies have extended their free data offer to young and disadvantaged students in further education just as they are about to return for face-to-face teaching.

It was announced by the government today that mobile providers including EE, Lycamobile, Sky Mobile, Tesco Mobile, Virgin Mobile, BT Mobile, Vodaphone and iD Mobile have all agreed to widen the offer beyond school-aged children.

The extension will now apply to students aged 16 to 19 and those aged 19 to 25 with an education, health and care plan.

In its weekly update, the Education and Skills Funding Agency said: “During the Covid-19 outbreak a number of mobile network operators are offering free data for financially disadvantaged families who do not have broadband at home and rely on mobile data to access the internet to help children participate in education remotely.

“Although, from the 8 March, the majority of students will be expected to return to onsite education, this offer may continue to be important for students who, for example, need to self-isolate or shield during this period.”

This means that FE providers who have registered with the government’s “Get Help with Technology Service” will be able to request free data for financially disadvantaged students who: do not have fixed broadband at home; cannot afford additional data for their devices; are experiencing disruption to face-to-face education.

The free data scheme was made available to school students to help them learn remotely during the national lockdown and is currently set to end in July.

Requests for free data must be made by someone in an FE provider who has been “nominated to order devices through the Get Help with Technology Service”, the ESFA said.

“Providers will need to submit student’s mobile information through our online service.”

The agency added that if increasing mobile data is not a suitable option for some young people, or if a request for additional data is unsuccessful, FE providers can also request 4G wireless routers.

And when providers request support, the Department for Education will “seek confirmation about how you have identified the number of disadvantaged students without broadband at home, who are experiencing disruption to their onsite education, through for example, contact with students/parents and/or surveys.

“In providing evidence of need you should not include any personal information about the students such as their names, addresses or date of birth.”

Today’s announcement comes six weeks after the DfE extended its free digital devices scheme to independent training providers.

Public bodies may be “less willing” to use statistical models to support decisions in future after the system to award exam grades last year failed to “command public confidence”, the statistics watchdog has warned.

A review by the Office for Statistics Regulation, the regulatory arm of the UK Statistics Authority, found the grading system prompted “widespread public dissatisfaction”, and that “limitations” of the statistical models used were not fully communicated.

Although it found qualification regulators and exam boards “worked with integrity” to develop the system used, the watchdog warned that “guidance and support” from government should be improved.

Exams were replaced by a system of centre-assessment grades standardised by computer algorithm last year, but the approach was abandoned after a fierce backlash over the downgrading of results, with students instead issued with the grades provided by their schools and colleges.

This week, in a report on lessons learned from the fiasco, the OSR said it feared public bodies will now be “less willing to use statistical models to support decisions in the future for fear of a public acceptability backlash, potentially hindering innovation and development of statistics and reducing the public good they can deliver”.

The watchdog said this was illustrated by the emphasis placed on an algorithm-free approach in 2021, with education secretary Gavin Williamson promising in January to “put our trust in teachers rather than algorithms”.

Regulators and boards ‘worked with integrity’

In the wake of last year’s fiasco, ministers were widely reported to have attempted to lay the blame with exams regulator Ofqual, and chief regulator Sally Collier resigned shortly afterwards.

The prime minister Boris Johnson also sought to blame the “mutant algorithm” for the problems when he addressed students in the summer.

But the OSR found that teams in regulators and exam boards in all four UK nations “worked with integrity to try to develop the best method in the time available to them”.

“In each country there were aspects of the model development that were done well, and aspects where a different choice may have led to a different outcome.

“However, none of the models were able to command public confidence and there was widespread public dissatisfaction of how the grades had been calculated and the impact on students’ lives.”

The OSR’s main conclusion is that achieving public confidence in statistical models is “not just about the technical design of the model – taking the right decisions and actions with regards transparency, communication and understanding public acceptability throughout the end to end process is just as important”.

It also concluded that guidance and support for public bodies developing models “should be improved”.

Government has a “central role to play in ensuring that models developed by public bodies command public confidence”, the OSR said.

This “includes directing the development of guidance and support, ensuring that the rights of individuals are fully recognised and that accountabilities are clear”.

‘Limitations’ not fully communicated

The OSR said regulators and exam boards faced “numerous challenges” in developing the system last year, which meant it was “always going to be difficult for a statistical algorithm to command public confidence”.

However, the “limitations of statistical models, and uncertainty in the results of them, were not fully communicated”.

“More public discussion of these limitations and the mechanisms being used to overcome them, such as the appeals process, may have helped to support public confidence in the results.”

And while regulators undertook activities to communicate information about the models to those affected by them and published technical documentation on results day, full details around the methodology to be used “were not published in advance”.

“This was due [to] a variety of reasons, including short timescales for model development, a desire not to cause anxiety amongst students and concerns of the impact on the centre assessed grades had the information been released sooner.

“The need to communicate about the model, whilst also developing it, inevitably made transparency difficult.”

‘Limited professional statistical consensus’

Although regulators drew on expertise in the qualifications and education sector, there was “limited professional statistical consensus on the proposed method”.

The methods were “not exposed to the widest possible audience of analytical and subject matter experts, though we acknowledge that time constraints were a limiting factor in this case”.

There was also “limited public discussion ahead of the release of results about the likely historical patterns in the underlying data and how they might impact on the results from the model”.

Regulators carried out equality impact analyses, which were “based on the premise that attainment gaps should not widen, and their analyses showed that gaps did not in fact widen”.

Despite this analytical assurance, there was a “perception when results were released that students in lower socio-economic groups were disadvantaged by the way grades were awarded”.

“In our view, this perception was a key cause of the public dissatisfaction.”

‘Key lessons’ for government

The OSR said there were “key lessons to be learned for government and public bodies looking to develop statistical models to support decisions”.

It said that for statistical models used to support decisions in the public sector to command confidence, the bodies developing them need guidance and support “to be available, accessible and coherent”.

“Our review has found that there is a fast-emerging community that can provide support and guidance in statistical models, algorithms, AI and machine learning.

“However, it is not always clear what is relevant and where public bodies can turn for support – the landscape is confusing, particularly for those new to model development and implementation.”

Ofqual said it welcomed the OSR’s work to “build public confidence in statistical approaches”, and said the report “recognises the challenging task Ofqual – and our counterparts in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland – faced in awarding grades in the absence of exams last summer”.

“We have learned lessons from last summer. We continue to work with other government departments to make data available for wider scrutiny and we recently set out, jointly with the DfE, our approach to awarding grades in 2021, after our largest-ever public consultation.”

The DfE was approached for comment.