Last September Ofsted began inspecting apprenticeship providers using their new framework. 

Out went the Common Inspection Framework (CIF), in which inspector judgements relied heavily on achievement rates. In came the Education Inspection Framework (EIF), in which judgements focus far more on the appropriateness of the curriculum. 

Six months into the EIF, FE Week took a look at the full inspections, comparing the apprenticeship grade profile to those published in the last year of the CIF. 

The results (see right) show the proportion of providers being hit with a grade three of four after a full inspection has risen six percentage points to 52 percent. 

But perhaps most surprisingly, whilst there appeared to be little grade profile difference between new and existing providers under the old CIF, the same cannot be said so far under the EIF, with 60 percent of existing providers receiving a grade three of four. 

So what does Paul Joyce, Ofsted’s deputy director for further education and skills, make of our findings?

“We will continue to monitor this very closely, but it is obviously disappointing. Any provider that we find to be less than good is disappointing,” he says.

Should we be worried that apprenticeship quality is declining?

“If we are in the same position after a year or after two years where we see a much higher proportion of apprenticeship providers, if we are still around the 56 percentage point mark, I’ll be worried about apprenticeship provision,” Joyce states.

Do the figures suggest the new EIF is tougher than the CIF?

“The new framework is different, and inspectors focus on different things in this framework compared to the last, so we know that data carries less weight under this framework and inspectors don’t spend as long looking at internal data for example.

“What inspectors do in this framework far more is look at the curriculum, the sequencing of the curriculum, the link between on and off the job training and how that is coordinated and most importantly how apprentices develop knowledge, skills and behaviours that benefit them in their workplace and for their longer-term career.

“That’s a very different focus than the previous framework and providers that haven’t moved to that and for example are just delivering the qualification framework, they are not going to perform as well under this framework as they did under the last.” 

So existing providers could be struggling with the shift away from apprenticeship frameworks (that include unitised qualifications) to standards with end-point-assessment?

Joyce says: “I’ve said before that standards are very different to frameworks and some providers are struggling to make the move to standards from frameworks so it’s a different delivery method, it is a different assessment method with end point assessment and that requires providers to think carefully about how they deliver the apprenticeship programme.

“So it is about the curriculum and providers that are thinking about the curriculum, sequencing the curriculum, allowing apprentices to develop new knowledge, skills and behaviours to repeat and get confident and competent over time.

“They are doing much better under the new EIF than under the old CIF where some providers would focus on doing something once, assessing it once and then not revisiting it.”

Is he surprised some providers appear to be struggling to adapt?

“I’m not surprised that providers are finding the challenges of working with different employers and different sectors, the levy, subcontracting, all sorts of things that are happening within the landscape, a challenge. Some are dealing with that much better than others. We’re interested in quality, we’ll continue to monitor that quality carefully.”

But Joyce remains hopeful apprenticeship providers will quickly get to grips with the challenges and rise to the demands of the new inspection framework.

“It is interesting [FE Week] analysis six months in and obviously we’re also doing some analysis.

“It is perhaps a bit early and too few inspections for us to definitively say what’s better or what’s worse but on the broader point about the apprenticeship landscape, we are undoubtedly seeing some really good apprenticeship provision which is nice to see.”

 

It’s all about the curriculum: example statements from reports published in the past 6 months

The government is consulting on plans to dump employers when it comes to external quality assurance of apprentices – and hand all of it to Ofqual within the next two years.

The only exception would be for integrated degree apprenticeships, which would be overseen by higher education regulator the Office for Students.

The move would bring an end to substantial charges, which can reach almost £200 per apprentice, being imposed on end-point assessment organisations (EPAOs).

Sally Collier, Ofqual’s chief regulator, welcomed the expanded role, adding that “we believe the current arrangements are complex, and the proposals outlined by the Institute will simplify and strengthen the approach in the future”.

We believe the current arrangements are complex

Federation of Awarding Bodies chief executive, Tom Bewick, hailed the change to make external quality assurance (EQA) a “statutory-led service in future, paid for directly by government”.

“It was always a crazy proposition to have so many statutory and non-statutory bodies checking on the work of EPAOs, when this is not the case, for example, in how apprenticeship providers are inspected for quality,” he said.

“It has unfortunately resulted in a nascent market turning into a Wild-West market in some parts.”

A consultation on proposals to “simplify and strengthen” how EQA works was launched by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) today.

Currently there are 20 EQA organisations which monitor the EPAOs that run examinations for apprentices.

The job is done by a mix of professional bodies, employers and quangos including the IfATE and Ofqual. The institute’s own delivery of EQA, originally conceived as a back-stop in the event of failure to secure a different organisation, is now in use across around half of all standards.

Sector leaders and EPAOs have long complained about this complex and “frustrating” system, especially as many of them, including the IfATE, charge various amounts per apprentice for doing the job.

The institute said the proposed changes would allow the “opportunity to change” how EQA is funded.

It “enables government to move to a model of funding EQA directly, away from a system whereby end-point assessment organisations are charged for EQA,” the consultation document said.

Under the plans, professional and employer bodies would continue to support Ofqual and OfS in their delivery of EQA, to “ensure the employer voice remains integral”.

A new “register of professional or employer-led bodies” would be established from which the two regulators can draw occupational expertise.

The consultations said that in order to “retain confidence that only those organisations which genuinely speak for their sector operate in this role”, the institute is proposing that trailblazer groups should nominate a professional or employer-led body to register for their standard.

There are close to 300 firms on the government’s register of end-point assessment organisations; 55 of which are currently recognised by Ofqual and 46 by OfS.

Over time, the IfATE states, all EPAOs would need to become recognised by the regulators.

A two-stage transition approach is proposed and is expected to get underway in the summer.

It has unfortunately resulted in a nascent market turning into a Wild-West market

Stage one would involve moving standards where the IfATE is currently the named EQA provider to Ofqual, in a “phased approach”. No completion date for this stage has been given.

Stage two would then transition standards from all other EQA providers to Ofqual, again in a phased approach, by the summer of 2022.

Should an existing EQA provider choose to exit the market outside the transition, Ofqual would “work with the institute on appropriate interim arrangements that made sure coverage remained unaffected”.

The IfATE’s chief executive, Jennifer Coupland, said: “The institute supports employers and welcomes as much feedback as possible on how we should reform the system, so that it works better for them and everyone else involved with EQA.

“It is extremely important that EQA maintains high assessment standards and apprentices are rigorously challenged to prove they can do the job they are being trained for.”

Collier added: “We have established a strong track record of regulating end point assessments and employers and apprentices can have confidence that they are fair, consistent and signal occupational competence.”

The consultation runs for 6 weeks, closing on 9 April. The institute expects to publish its response in the summer.

The number of apprenticeship starts in England plunged by 12 per cent in December, according to government figures published this morning.

Provisional figures for December 2019, when compared to the same publication last February, reveal a fall of 1,900 in a single month.

The analysis by FE Week shows starts for those under the age of 19 decreased the most, from 3,600 to 2,800, a 22 per cent drop.

Level two saw the largest percentage decrease in December, with a 21 percent fall.

Meanwhile, higher apprenticeships went up by 4 per cent from 2,500 to 2,600.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Thanks to our reforms, apprenticeships are now longer, higher-quality, with more off-the-job training and have an independent assessment at the end. Our higher quality apprenticeships are also ensuring employers can invest in the people and skills they need.

“We do recognise there is more work to do and we are continuing to look at how the apprenticeship programme can best support the changing needs of businesses so more people can get ahead and all employers can benefit.”

The education secretary has demanded a review into the controversial MBA apprenticeship “to safeguard the integrity of the apprenticeship brand and value for money of the levy.”

The letter, sent today from Gavin Williamson to the new boss at the Institute for Apprenticeships, Jennifer Coupland, sets 1 June as a deadline for determining whether the level 7 senior leader standard will continue to be funded.

The letter comes less than a month after Coupland told FE Week that public funding for management apprenticeships is “perfectly legitimate”.

Coupland was calling on the government to find an extra £750 million to invest in apprenticeships for small employers, those that do not pay the levy.

When asked about the spiraling cost of the controversial management apprenticeships she said: “It is not government money, it comes from the levy that was levied directly to support apprenticeships.”

The Department for Education told FE Week 34 of their staff are currently studying towards the apprenticeship MBA.

The then-director of the DfE’s National Apprenticeship Service, Sue Husband, told a House of Lords enquiry in 2018 she was on a level 6 chartered management degree apprenticeship and was finding it “hugely beneficial”. She confirmed to FE Week this morning she was carrying on the apprenticeship with her new employer.

FE Week was first to report, back in 2016, that management apprenticeships were already the third most popular, proving to be “unstoppable” and would likely “rocket to the top spot once the apprenticeship levy kicks in next year.”

In early 2019, our analysis found management taking the top-spot,  including 1,220 starts on the level 7 MBA. 

The levy is paid to the Treasury, which means it is technically public funding, and its use for management qualifications has come under criticism from Ofsted’s chief inspection, Amanda Spielman, who said “we see levy funding subsidising re-packaged graduate schemes and MBAs that just don’t need it”.

The National Audit Office last year reported that these “new types of apprenticeship raise questions about whether public money is being used to pay for training that already existed in other forms”.

And more than a year ago, the then skills minister, Anne Milton, told the chief executive of the Association of Colleges David Hughes: “We will need to look ahead, when the system is really running well – and I think we’re nearly at that stage – when we need to look at do we continue to fund apprenticeships for people who are already in work, people doing second degrees.”

In a statement to the media that accompanied the letter, Williamson said: “The levy funds apprenticeships for businesses of all sizes, helping people of all ages and backgrounds make the most of their talents.

“I am committed to maintaining an employer-led system, but I’m not convinced the levy should be used to pay for staff, who are often already highly qualified and highly paid, to receive an MBA.

“I’d rather see funding helping to kick-start careers or level up skills and opportunities. That’s why I’ve asked for a review of the senior leader apprenticeship standard to ensure it is meeting its aims.”

Read Gavin Williamson’s letter in full:

Dear Jennifer,

I know the Institute and its Board share my commitment for apprenticeships to support learners to develop and progress and employers to build a talent pipeline and increase the productivity of their business.

I am absolutely determined to make sure levy funds are being used to support the people that can benefit most from an apprenticeship, such as those starting out in their careers or helping more people from disadvantaged backgrounds to get ahead, and that we ensure good value for money in the apprenticeships offer. My officials will be working closely with you through the Spending Review process to make sure that we achieve that balance.

In that context, I am unconvinced that having an apprenticeship standard that includes an MBA paid for by the levy is in the spirit of our reformed apprenticeships or provides value for money. I question whether an MBA is an essential regulatory or professional requirement to work in this field of senior leadership. It is of the utmost importance for the integrity of the programme and the apprenticeships brand that each and every standard meets our highest possible expectations. I recognise that looking again at this standard may be unpopular with some levy payers. Whilst respecting the decisions that employers make about which apprenticeships and apprentices are best for their organisation, I am of the view that we absolutely need to safeguard the integrity of the apprenticeship brand and value for money of the levy.

Therefore, I am asking the Institute, as the body responsible for the quality and content of those standards, to bring forward a formal review of the Senior Leader Level 7 standard. You should ensure that the standard meets the current policy intent and rules, including the mandatory qualifications policy, and provides value for money.

I have every confidence that notwithstanding your range of priorities you will be able to take forward this review with your employer-led groups at pace. Therefore, I look forward to hearing back from you by 1 June about the outcome of your considerations.

I am copying this letter to Antony Jenkins, Chair of the Institute.

The education secretary Gavin Williamson is launching a new £9 million “collaboration” fund in a bid to improve governance and leadership at colleges which aren’t “getting it right”.

Bids of up to £500,000 can be submitted by groups of colleges to “share good practice and expertise”, but they will be required to stump up an extra 25 per cent in match funding between them.

The 12-month programme follows the Strategic College Improvement Fund – which ended last year after £12.3 million of the £15 million up for grabs was used to help 80 colleges rated ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’ team up with better performing colleges.

Williamson told FE Week the new funding, which has partly come from the Treasury, is needed because there “have been examples where colleges haven’t been getting it right and things that we are not comfortable with have been going on”.

“We mustn’t forget that is a minority,” he added. “Where we have got good we want to make them excellent, where we have got average we want to make them good and then to excellent, and where we have poor we want to make sure that they are actually really achieving the very best on that.”

Recent cases of poor governance have led to high-profile and significant failings, including at Hadlow College, which became the first college to enter education administration last year.

Each application to the collaboration fund will need a “lead” college with at least a ‘good’ rating from Ofsted, and at least one other college with a grade three or four, or one that has ‘inadequate’ financial health. The maximum number of colleges allowed in each group is four.

Colleges are expected to apply with others within a shared geographic place, for example, the “same sub-regional level”.

Merged colleges without an Ofsted rating can still apply, as long as one of the two previous colleges meets the criteria.

Each proposed programme of work must address at least one of the fund’s three “quality improvement themes” identified by DfE: governance and leadership, financial and resource management, and quality of education.

Applications are invited for grants of a value up to £500,000 and a minimum value of £80,000.

The Department for Education’s guidance states that colleges are expected to contribute match funding equal to 25 per cent of the total grant applied for, split equally between all of the colleges in each group. “In-kind” costs will not be eligible.

The fund will have two application rounds throughout the 2020-21 financial year. Bid for the first round are open from today and will close on 8 April. The second round is due to open on 15 June.

As well as the collaboration fund, the DfE has said an additional £4.5 million will be invested in bespoke continuing professional development for college leaders.

It will be developed by the Education and Training Foundation in partnership with the Oxford Said Business School, The Chartered Institute of Accountants in England and Wales and the Association of Colleges.

The DfE said the programme will aim to provide FE leaders and governors with tailored support in a range of areas including strategic planning, finance and working with employers to address local and national skills needs.

Another £200,000 is set to go towards two governance pilots (full story here).

FE Commissioner Richard Atkins said that in order to be “successful”, colleges require “excellent governance and leadership provided by well trained and well supported chairs, governors, principals, clerks and leaders, so that learners can benefit from enrolling at great colleges”.

He added: “My team and I see examples of excellent practice during our visits across the country, but we also see examples of where support is needed if standards of governance and leadership are to improve.

“I am pleased that we will now have this expanded range of development opportunities to offer to colleges where we see this as necessary.”

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges said this package will “help colleges help themselves and each other – proper peer to peer support, developing the skills and knowledge of leaders and governors across the country to strengthen the great education colleges already provide”.

The organisation behind the UK’s performance in international skills competitions is launching the WorldSkills UK Centre of Excellence project to train around 1,000 FE lecturers.

WorldSkills UK has today announced the three-year project backed with £1.5 million from awarding organisation NCFE.

Five training managers – fresh off mentoring WorldSkills UK competitors for various skill challenges in EuroSkills Graz this year and WorldSkills Shanghai next year – will be employed full time to work for the centre.

They will be recruited by the beginning of May and it is expected that they will be drafted into colleges and training providers from September.

WorldSkills UK said provider applications to take part in the project should come from those suited to each managers’ skill area: for instance, if it is announced a training manager from a construction background has been hired, a provider focused on construction will be expected to apply.

We know what it takes in training techniques to achieve global industry standards

The manager will work with lecturers in different subjects at the provider to “train the trainer”, while “digital masterclasses”, featuring recorded sessions with training managers from other countries delivering “top-level training”, will be offered.

WorldSkills UK chief executive Neil Bentley-Gockmann (pictured centre) said his organisation was “uniquely placed to undertake such a project” as they know “just how high the global industry standards are set and we know what it takes in training techniques to achieve them”.

Providers can apply for one of twenty places in the first year if they meet certain criteria, which includes over 1,000 16 to 18-year-olds on their roll.

NCFE chief executive David Gallagher said this first year will establish the centre’s way of working: “What is the Centre of Excellence in detail? How does it work with the sector? How do we make sure it does not become another tickbox for continuing professional development (CPD)?”

A further twenty providers will be selected for years two and three of the project, ten for each year, and Gallagher says these stages will focus on “improving educational outcomes”, such as Ofsted scores and increasing the number of people competing internationally.

WorldSkills UK aims for the project to ultimately benefit 120 FE providers and nearly 1,000 lecturers through sharing of the digital masterclasses over the three years.

Gallagher hopes the centre will encourage institutions which are not heavily involved in WorldSkills to decide if they want to be more actively involved in the movement.

WorldSkills UK deputy chief executive Ben Blackledge made clear the centre “is not about us saying we can come and fix” professional development for lecturers.

“We’re saying there is excellence in the FE sector and is there something small we can do to help facilitate best practice and invest a bit in these tutors and trainers?”

Another aim of the centre is “influencing setters of training standards” and Blackledge says his organisation has had initial conversations with the Department for Education and Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education about how this can be a “more formal and systemic approach to influencing standards”.

They are having ongoing conversations with the government’s teams on FE workforce and T-levels to help with those programmes of work as well.

All apprenticeship starts will be managed through the government’s digital apprenticeship service from 1 November 2020, the Education and Skills Funding Agency announced today.

The transition will bring an end to provider funding allocations, secured through a procurement process, being used to train apprentices with small non-levy paying businesses.

Contract extensions for the allocations will however be issued at the end of this month to cover them until the full rollout of the digital service commences.

Only larger employers with an annual total pay bill of over £3 million who pay the apprenticeship levy can draw down funding for an unlimited number of starts from the online service.

Small employers were originally expected to have access to the service in April 2019, but this was delayed for another year to “ensure a more gradual transition”.

The long-awaited transition began last month, but small employers have been capped initially and can only make reservations for up to three apprenticeship starts.

So a dual running system remains in place until November, meaning employers who do not pay the apprenticeship levy are able to access training either through a limited number of providers with an unspent funding allocation or from any of the registered providers via the online apprenticeship service.

Confirming the date for when non-levy payers will be given full access to the apprenticeship service, the ESFA said today: “It is our intention that all new apprenticeship starts, for employers of all sizes, will be managed through the apprenticeship service from 1 November 2020.

“Until 31 October 2020 smaller employers will continue to be able to access apprenticeships through the apprenticeship service or via existing procured contracts held by training providers (as well as via transferred funds from employers who pay the apprenticeship levy).”

They added: “Training providers with an existing procured contract will receive an extension to their existing contracts to cover the new financial year. The extensions will fund carry over costs for existing apprentices as well as new apprenticeship starts.

“However, to align with our intention for all starts to be through the apprenticeship service from 1 November 2020, the funding for new starts using the extended contracts will only be available up to and including 31 October 2020.”

Training providers have been told they must ensure they have signed the contract extension before the current contract expires on 31 March 2020.