2018: The year in FE Week cartoons

As 2018 draws to a close we take a look back at the story of the year, as told through the medium of FE Week’s cartoons.

Skills minister Anne Milton and her boss, education secretary Damian Hinds – the stars of the final cartoon of the year – between them racked up the most appearances, with seven and five respectively.

Other sector figures to have been immortalised in cartoon form this year by the talented Bill Houston include Sir Gerry Berragan, boss of the Institute for Apprenticeships, Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman and prime minister Theresa May.

Read on to recap on the year in FE Week cartoons.

Issue 265 – December 14:  Ministerial musings – technical training must match the best academic options

Skills minister Anne Milton celebrates some of the achievements of 2018, and looks forward to developments in technical education in the coming year.

Issue 264 – December 7: Damian Hinds reacts to concerns that spend on apprenticeships is soaring

Education secretary Damian Hinds didn’t deny the apprenticeships budget was heading for an overspend, following reports there would be a £500 million shortfall this year.

Issue 263 – November 30: FE commissioner – check with me before appointing a principal

Richard Atkins urged college governors to speak to him before appointing a principal, as part of a wide-ranging interview covering interventions, insolvency and why cash is king. 

Issue 262 – November 23: Hughes accepts Ofsted’s concerns over courses with poor job prospects

Association of Colleges boss David Hughes said Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman was “quite right”,  after she raised concerns over large numbers of learners recruited to level two courses with poor job prospects. 

Issue 261 – November 16: What is behind the spate of resignations of college leaders?

Eight high-profile college leaders have stepped down at short notice in just two months. In the same week that this year’s NICDEX college rankings were published, we looked at what could be behind the exodus.

Issue 260 – November 9: Contradictory claims over UTC learner numbers from Baker Dearing Trust

The Baker Dearing Trust claimed that the number of 14-year-olds studying at university technical colleges had gone up, but also admitted that the average per institution had gone down.

Issue 259 – November 2: Ofsted boss backs calls for more 16-to-18 cash to combat falling standards

Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman wrote to the Public Accounts Committee setting out her “strong view” that 16 to 18 funding should be increased – and that the impact of funding pressures was being seen in inspection outcomes.

Issue 258 – October 19: Mayor of London plans party to celebrate AEB devolution

The Greater London Authority is planning a party to “celebrate the wider history of adult education in London” and “set out its vision for the future” when it takes control of its devolved adult education budget in 2019.

Issue 257 – October 12: ESFA WON’T ban new apprenticeship providers with poor AEB provision found in monitoring visits

The ESFA finally cleared up confusion over whether providers found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in adult education provision – but not in any other area under review – in an early monitoring visit would be barred from taking on new apprentices.

Issue 256 – October 5: Degree apprenticeships a ‘concern’, says skills minister 

Education committee chair Robert Halfon said that degree apprenticeships are his “two favourite words”, but his successor Anne Milton warned of the risk of crowding out those at lower levels – particularly those who wouldn’t otherwise have the opportunity.

Issue 255 – September 28: Principal at mega college in debt to the DfE steps down

Andrew Cleaves, one of the most highly-paid principals in the country, stepped down with immediate effect from Birmingham Metropolitan College, which owed millions in bailout cash to the government.

Issue 254 – September 21: Hinds quick to show IfA support but fails to name employers in agreement

Education secretary Damian Hinds failed to name any employers that support the Institute for Apprenticeships – despite being asked five times by FE Week editor Nick Linford – just weeks after the IfA itself similarly failed to name any names.

Issue 253 – September 14: Major cuts to apprenticeship funding bands to be confirmed ‘shortly’

Employer groups behind a number of the most popular apprenticeships were up in arms against proposals to cut the amount of levy cash that could be spent on them, in the Institute for Apprenticeships’ first funding band review.

Issue 252 – July 13 – Huge concern over surge in higher level management apprenticeships

Skills minister Anne Milton denied that apprenticeships cash could be spent on MBAs – despite evidence to the contrary – and her shadow counterpart Gordon Marsden demanded the government “urgently look deeper” at the huge rise in higher level apprenticeships.

Issue 251 – July 6 – Three ‘inadequate’ UTCs in a week as Lord Baker blames Ofsted

Lord Baker, architect of university technical colleges, said Ofsted doesn’t take into account UTCs’ “excellent” destinations, as three of the 14 to 19 technical institutions were rated ‘inadequate’ in the space of a week.

Issue 250 – June 29 – Damian Hinds defends T-levels timetable to Education Committee

Education secretary Damian Hinds and the DfE’s permanent secretary both appeared before separate select committees – the former to defend his decision to plough ahead with the tight T-levels timetable, and the latter to explain why he wanted a year’s delay

Issue 249 – June 22: Skills minister: IfA better but it’s still not fast enough

The Institute for Apprenticeships has picked up the pace on standards approval, but it’s still not fast or better enough according to skills minister Anne Milton – who told FE Week she always has her “big stick” with her when she meets with its leaders. 

Issue 248 – June 15: Atkins: Struggling colleges will still need stopgap funds

After a series of high-profile multi-million pound bailouts in recent months, the FE commissioner said colleges will struggle once the restructuring facility and exceptional financial support are withdrawn – and there will always be a need for some funding to oil the wheels. 

Issue 247 – June 8: Big five awarding giants compete for T-levels

As the controversial tender process for the first three T-levels got underway, FE Week looked at which awarding bodies might bid for the exclusive licences.

 

Issue 246 – May 25: Mayor of London blames DfE for having to top-slice AEB

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, defended topslicing three per cent of its devolved adult education budget for administration costs, saying that the Department for Education had refused his request for a separate budget for this purpose. 

Issue 245 – May 18: Minister admits to confusion over apprenticeship quality accountability

During a select committee hearing skills minister Anne Milton admitted it wasn’t clear who was ultimately accountable for apprenticeship quality, after the ESFA lifted a ban imposed on one provider that was blasted for its poor provision by Ofsted. 

Issue 244 – May 11: Staff at colleges striking for up to 7 days in exam season

Staff at a number of colleges across the country went out on strike during exam season as part of an ongoing dispute over pay – action that David Hughes, boss of the AoC, described as “regrettable”. 

Issue 243 – May 4: UTC architect George Osborne says 14 start age ‘hasn’t worked’

George Osborne, former chancellor and driving force behind UTCs, said UTC model hasn’t worked – joining Michael Gove, education secretary at the time of their launch, in criticising the 14 to 19 technical institutions.

Issue 242 – April 27: Mucklow tackles AEB devolution as director roles change at ESFA

Peter Mucklow, former sixth form college commissioner and director for young people at the ESFA, was handed the mammoth task of overseeing devolution of the adult education budget as part of a management reshuffle at the agency.

Issue 241 – April 20: Apprenticeship starts still in free-fall

Chancellor Philip Hammond told parliament that the government had expected apprenticeship starts to fall, but not as much as they had done – as the latest statistics showed a 31 per cent year-on-year drop. 

Issue 240 – April 13: Learndirect did not get ‘anywhere near’ winning legal battle against Ofsted, judge says

Seven months after Learndirect’s failed legal fight against Ofsted, the Manchester Administrative Court finally published the detailed judgement – revealing that the provider didn’t get “anywhere near” quashing its ‘inadequate’ rating.

Issue 239 – March 23: Ofsted appears to back colleges in Progress 8 battle

Leeds City College was rated ‘outstanding’ for its 14 to 16 provision by Ofsted, despite having one of the worst Progress 8 measures in the country – adding weight to arguments that the measure is unfair for colleges and other providers that recruit at 14. 

Issue 238 – March 16: AELP dramatically ditches ETF ownership, effective immediately

The AELP has ditched its ownership of the Education and Training Foundation, claiming that it no longer operates as an independent body and is instead an extension of the DfE focusing on the incoming T-levels.

Issue 237 – March 9: Milton not budging on 20% off-the-job training rule

An FE Week survey found that the 20 per cent off-the-job training rule was the biggest barrier to apprenticeship recruitment, but skills minister Anne Milton insisted it was a “protected characteristic” and it wouldn’t be changing.

Issue 236 – March 2: Strike action escalates on a second day of college walkouts

More than 1,500 members of the University and College Union at colleges across the country took to the picket lines – despite the snow – in the second day of strike action over a “disappointing” pay offer of one per cent.

Issue 235 – February 23: Huge expansion of higher education in colleges expected to follow post-18 funding review

Prime minister Theresa May chose Derby College to launch the government’s post-18 funding review, which Association of Colleges boss David Hughes said he hoped would result in an expansion of HE provision at colleges.

Issue 234 – February 9: Sector welcomes U-turn on qualifications in apprenticeships

Sector leaders – including Paul Eeles, chair of the Federation of Awarding Bodies – welcomed a U-turn by the Institute for Apprenticeships that meant mandatory qualifications could be included in standards.

Issue 233 – February 2: Invest in Ofsted to guarantee apprenticeship quality

As the number of apprenticeship providers on the government’s register topped 2,000 for the first time, FE Week editor Nick Linford argued that Ofsted needed to be given the cash to inspect these new providers.

Issue 232 – January 26: FE commissioner Richard Atkins: ‘Funding for FE is unfair’

FE commissioner Richard Atkins told an education select committee hearing that FE funding was ‘unfair’ – adding his voice to others, including Amanda Spielman, calling for more cash for the sector.

Issue 231 – January 19: Learndirect boss reveals ‘surprise’ at £45m allocation following AEB tender withdrawal

The £45m allocation given to Learndirect in last year’s adult education budget tender fiasco came as a surprise, its boss Andy Palmer told a hearing of the Public Accounts Committee about the nation’s largest FE provider.

Issue 230 – January 12: Government search site is flooded with hundreds of ‘locations’ for the same providers

FE Week found some providers had hundreds of locations listed on the Find Apprenticeship Training website – with one using tutors’ home addresses to show it had a national presence.

IfA ‘considering’ releasing apprenticeship overspend presentation

The Institute for Apprenticeships is “considering” releasing a presentation given to employers that warned of an imminent apprenticeship overspend.

The admission came in a letter, sent today, from its boss Sir Gerry Berragan, in response to a request from shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden.

“We are considering the request and will respond as soon as possible in the new year,” it said.

The presentation, given by the IfA’s chief operating officer Robert Nitsch at an employer engagement event at Exeter College on November 30, included a forecast of a £500 million overspend on the apprenticeship budget in 2018/19 – rising to £1.5 billion by 2020/21.

The figures were exclusively reported by FE Week earlier this month and prompted demands for an open debate on how the levy operates, and for the IfA to share the full presentation.

It had previously refused to do so on the basis that it was produced specifically for that event and not intended to be shared more widely.

Mr Marsden wrote to Sir Gerry on December 7, asking for the presentation to be made public.

“With an apprenticeship programme still adapting to the introduction of the apprenticeship levy, and fluctuating starts across levels and standards, I believe maximum transparency as to where the apprenticeship budget is being spent is essential for the health of the sector,” he wrote.

The IfA’s response comes just days after the education secretary dodged a question in parliament from education select committee chair Robert Halfon about the projected overspend.

Damian Hinds was asked to “confirm that there is a £500m overspend on the apprentice levy budget” during education questions in parliament on Monday.

“I can confirm to my right honourable friend that of course it’s very important that we continue to monitor the way the apprenticeship levy works,” he said in response.

The non-reply prompted Mr Halfon to call on the government to be “open and transparent about this alleged overspend” which he described as “incredibly concerning”.

However, Keith Smith, the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s director of apprenticeships, told FE Week last week that he was “not expecting any pressures” on the budget this year.

“I think what they were trying to set out was one scenario or a potential, particular illustration of what the budget might do and might happen, depending on some assumptions about demand, take up and those sorts of things,” Mr Smith said.

However, he added that from the agency’s “current point of view we’re working within the context that the apprenticeship levy does and can continue to cover the costs of the programme”.

Seven things we learned from the government’s response to select committee apprenticeships report

The government has today published its response to the education select committee’s report, The apprenticeships ladder of opportunity: quality not quantity”, published in October.

Here are seven of the key findings from the response:

Discounted transport for apprentices won’t arrive anytime soon

Last year the Conservative party’s general election manifesto promised to introduce “significantly discounted bus and train travel for apprentices”.

But a year and a half later there’s still no sign of it – and the government’s response today revealed it’s likely to be 2020 at the earliest before apprentices can enjoy discounted travel.

“We recognise that more can be done to remove the barriers to young people taking up apprenticeship opportunities, but further discounts will require additional funding,” it said.

Both the Department for Education and the Department for Transport would “work together to support discounted travel for apprentices” but “given the additional cost to the taxpayer, the focus of this work will now turn to preparing proposals for consideration at the forthcoming spending review”.

The response got short shrift from committee chair Robert Halfon (pictured above).

“The government continues to drag its feet on how it will reduce the cost of transport and it must now act on its manifesto commitment and deliver on the promise of significantly discounted bus and train fares,” he said.

Nor will a UCAS-style portal for technical education

The Conservatives also promised a “UCAS-style portal for technical education” in last year’s manifesto – and likewise this is unlikely to be introduced soon.

The government’s response said it carried out “extensive research” with over 2,000 young people, colleges and careers advisers about introducing such a portal.

“While the research indicated that young people would value a central source of information as they make decisions about their next steps, it did not show that they found the current application process challenging.”

“As a result, we are focussing first on ensuring young people have the right information on all their options, including on technical education and apprenticeships,” the government’s response said.

It will “keep under review” the need for a “centralised 16-plus application portal in the future as part of our work to simplify 16-plus courses and qualifications”.

But the government’s expectations on subcontracting WILL be published soon

The education committee report urged the government to set a cap on management fees charged by prime contractors, and to tighten its requirements on providers that subcontract their provision.

In its response, the government said it was “about to undertake further work to develop our expectations around the operation of subcontracting relationships between providers” and it planned to “publish our final expectations by the end of December 2018”.

“Our key priorities will be to develop an approach which increases the amount of funding that reaches front line delivery and increases transparency by ensuring that providers explain in detail the make-up of any fees or charges,” it said.

The response followed disappointment in August when hopes for a cap on management fees were kicked into the long grass.

Anne Milton didn’t mean that large providers are “less risky”

The education committee’s report said that it “cannot agree” with the skills minister that “large providers are less risky” – particularly following the Learndirect debacle – “although dealing with them rather than a number of smaller providers may lighten the ESFA’s workload”.

But, according to the government’s response, that wasn’t what she meant at all.

“The minister, Anne Milton, would like to clarify that she was not implying that ‘larger providers are less risky’ during her oral evidence session to the Committee,” it said.

Instead she “stated that specifically in the context of a procurement, smaller providers can become ‘a bit more risky’” – but that “it is not the case that small providers are considered risky”.

Six-monthly updates from the Institute for Apprenticeships’ apprentice panel will now be published

The report recommended that the role of the Institute for Apprenticeships’ apprentice panel “be formalised” and that its “recommendations to the institute’s board and the board’s response should be published”.

This recommendation was put to the apprentice panel, who “agreed that it would be more beneficial to produce a six-monthly report on their progress that is apprentice-led and owned by them”.

This report will be published “on the Institute’s website, along with the minutes from board meetings they participate in”.

Good apprentice employers could soon have a kitemark

“It is right that those employers who deliver a good experience for their apprentices are recognised for this and can promote it,” the government’s response said in response to a recommendation that it support efforts to develop a good apprentice employer kitemark.

Work to develop such a kitemark “indicating a signal of quality for apprentice employers” is ongoing, the response said.

“Using existing quality measures and working with stakeholders, criteria will be developed and, if met, employers will be able to showcase the kitemark,” it said.

“This will provide quality assurance to apprentices whilst encouraging good practice amongst employers.”

Ministers are set to test ways to ensure compliance with the Baker clause

The Baker clause has so far proved contentious since it came into force at the beginning of the year, and in August FE Week reported that the DfE was gearing up for direct intervention.

Four months later and it’s not clear if it has yet.

“A recent ministerial roundtable considered the barriers to compliance and agreed to test new ways of applying the legislation, including writing directly to parents with details of the local offer and holding careers fairs,” it said.

But in “cases of serious non-compliance” the DfE was “prepared to intervene”, it said.

“This could include an official or minister from the department writing to the school and, ultimately, the legal powers of intervention available to the Secretary of State may be enforced.”

What does the student loan shake-up mean for FE?

How will the changes to how students loans are accounted impact FE funding? Daniel Carr takes a look

Earlier this week the Office for National Statistics announced a change to how student and learner loans appear in the national accounts of government spending. While this may sound largely technocratic, the change could have a significant impact on post-18 education in England.

The change could have a significant impact on post-18 education

From September 2019, the proportion of both HE student and FE learner loans that are not expected to be repaid will appear as an expense in the government’s budget. In addition, the government will only be allowed to count the amount of interest (charged on student loans) that is actually expected to be repaid in its overall budget revenue, rather than the full interest value.

The result of this? An extra £12bn will be added to the budget deficit, causing it to rise to £17bn by 2023/24.

Of course, it is important to note that the real cost to government hasn’t actually changed. What has changed is the timing that it hits the budget, which moves forward 30 years, from the point at which loans are written-off to the day they are issued. This could have big ramifications if the government is determined to stick to its deficit reduction target; balancing the books will either mean new spending cuts or tax rises.

Attention to date has focused on what this all means for higher education. Given £16.3bn in HE student loans were issued in 2017/18 relative to just £217m for FE learner loans, the impact on the budget from the unpaid share of the latter will be a relatively minor headache for the government. But these changes do have significant bearing on the future of FE funding.

Since FE loans were introduced in 2013/14 for those aged over 24 taking level 3 and 4 qualifications, the government has pushed to expand eligibility. Loans were made available to younger learners (from age 19), extended to level 5 and 6 qualifications, and rules on concurrent and repeat study were dropped.

Despite these extensions to loan eligibility, demand has failed to take-off, leaving roughly £1bn in funds allocated to FE loans unspent. Recent data shows applications for those loans actually fell in 2017/18 by 13 per cent. While the 70,000 applications lodged last year demonstrate that the loans are still much more popular than the short-lived attempt to fund apprenticeships via loans, their failure to grow should concern the government given the importance it has attached to boosting intermediate and higher level skills.

This risks making already unpopular FE loans less attractive still

The new accounting rules cause further problems for the FE loan system. Until now the government has been able to spend £150-250m a year on FE without it appearing in the budget, but this will soon change under the new accounting arrangements. Given the government expects roughly 55 per cent of the value of level 3 FE loans to be written off, and these account for more than 90 per cent of all FE loans, the extent to which the deficit is flattered by using loans rather than grants will shrink significantly.

With the government intending to launch a ‘new generation’ of level 4 and 5 qualifications and build a National Retraining Scheme to encourage more adult reskilling, it has some big decisions to make on funding any resulting increases in FE participation. The ONS decision means directly funding learners with grants is now more likely, as is drawing on the apprenticeship levy or a further employer levy to raise the revenue required.

Alternatively, a change to loan repayment terms – such as extending the write-off period beyond 30 years – could be made to drive down the share left unpaid, keeping more of the loan value from hitting the deficit. Though this is a viable option, it risks making already unpopular FE loans less attractive still.

We will see how the Augar Review responds to this change in February next year. How the government reacts will depend on whether its ambition to reinvigorate technical education trumps the impetus to reach its deficit reduction target. Either way, sweeping changes to FE funding seem all the more likely.

Sixteen colleges facing UCU strike action in the new year

Sixteen colleges across England face “significant disruption” in the new year, after members of the University and College Union voted overwhelmingly in favour of industrial action in an ongoing dispute over pay.

Staff at 10 colleges whose ballots closed today will join the six colleges that took action in November in a second wave of strikes at a yet-to-be decided date.

However, they won’t be joined by members at a further 16 colleges who were balloted, as turnout did not meet the minimum 50 per cent threshold.

Matt Waddup, the UCU’s head of policy, said the outcome was a “testament to the strength of feeling” members had “about their treatment”.

“Sixteen colleges will face significant disruption in the new year unless they agree to do more to address the pay and conditions of their staff,” he said.

“Government cuts are hurting the further education sector, but too many colleges use them as an excuse to do little or nothing,” he said.

He hit out at the “anti-trade union laws” preventing all the colleges balloted from taking action which he said “curtail people’s democratic right to strike in a manner that is not used in any other part of society”.

A total of 89 per cent of union members who voted at the 26 colleges were in favour of industrial action.

Ten colleges met the tough 50 per cent threshold required for them to take action.

These are Abingdon and Witney College, Bridgwater and Taunton College, City of Wolverhampton College, Coventry College, East Sussex College, Harlow College, Hugh Baird College, Kendal College, Leicester College and West Thames College.

They join Bath College, Bradford College, Croydon College, Lambeth College, New College Swindon and Petroc, which all took action in November.

Staff at a further 16 colleges were in favour of a walkout but because the turnout – which ranged from 33 per cent to 49.2 per cent – was too low, they will be unable to act on the results. 

College staff are unhappy about proposals put forward by the Association of Colleges, which represents college leadership, over pay for 2018/19.

They were left bitterly disappointed in July when the AoC said it was unable to recommend a salary increase of five per cent, and was instead only able to propose a “substantial pay package” over two years dependent on government funding.

Earlier this month the AoC put forward an offer of one per cent, which the union described as a “wholly inadequate response” to the pay crisis in FE.

Capital City College Group agreed a “landmark” pay rise for its staff of up to five per cent last month – even though this would turn a projected break-even budget into a £2.3 million deficit.

 

ESFA announce changes to 16 to 19 funding rules from August 2019

Study programme learners aged 16 to 19 who’ve passed GCSE English and maths are set to be barred from level one courses from next year, the Education and Skills Funding Agency has revealed.

The proposed rule change, published today, prompted the Association of Colleges to warn that the government was in danger of creating the “wrong incentives” for learners.  

Learners “with prior attainment in English and maths at grade four or above that are undertaking a vocational qualification are not expected to be on an entry level or level one core aim” from 2019/20, the ESFA guidance said.

The new rule, included as an advance notification of a planned change to funding guidance, would still apply “even if they have no previous experience in the vocational area”.

Instead “they should undertake a core aim at level two or above, except in exceptional circumstances”.

Julian Gravatt, the AoC’s deputy chief executive, said it had “some concerns that government will create the wrong incentives for students”.

A 16-year-old who wants to become a bricklayer or carpenter may start with a level one course and “it may not make sense to penalise them for passing their maths and English GCSEs first time around,” he said.

It’s not clear how many learners this new rule is likely to affect, and Mr Gravatt said the AoC would be consulting its members “to work out how significant an issue this is”.

One college leader took to Twitter today to voice his concerns about the new rule.

“Think there are a fair number of young people staring their vocational journey at level one nationally who do have their maths and English,” Jerry White, deputy principal at City College Norwich, tweeted.

“Maths and English GCSE does not prep young people for laying bricks very well in my experience.”

The new rule was included in the ESFA’s review of end of year 16 to 19 study programmes data for 2016 to 2017.

Other changes for 2019/20 include a cap on the number of hours of study per learner it will fund on compressed delivery programmes.

“The number of hours a student may study during a week should not be greater than the maximum number of hours a young person can legally work during a week,” it said.

“ESFA will therefore restrict funding to the first 40 hours per week and both the study programme’s planned hours and planned dates will need to reflect this”.

T-levels could be under threat if no deal Brexit goes ahead

The introduction of T-levels could be under threat if a “no deal” Brexit goes ahead, according to reports this morning – although the Department for Education has denied this.

The Times newspaper listed the new technical qualifications as being “considered vulnerable to ‘reprioritisation’” in the event that the UK leaves the European Union at the end of March without having secured an exit agreement.

“The introduction of T-levels is not under threat,” a spokesperson for the DfE said.

“T Levels are a way of making sure young people gain the skills they need to get a great job. The programme is on track and the first T Levels will be taught in September 2020.”

Yesterday the chancellor Philip Hammond announced an additional £2 billion funding across 25 government departments for their Brexit preparations for all scenarios.

The funding is for 2019/20 priority areas including borders, trade and security, according to the announcement – which made no reference to the DfE or to T-levels.

T-levels have been designed to increase the prestige of technical qualifications, as match for A-levels.

They were originally intended to come in from 2019, but in July last year the skills minister Anne Milton announced they had been put back to 2020.

A subsequent announcement in October revealed that pathways in just three subject areas would go live in the first year, with the remaining subject routes launched by 2022.

In May this year Damian Hinds overruled his permanent secretary’s request to delay T-levels by a year, in the first ministerial direction issued by an education secretary.

“I want us now to put all of our collective weight behind delivering these T-levels to begin in 2020,” Mr Hinds wrote in his letter to Johnathan Slater.

A vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal, originally scheduled for last week, will now go ahead in mid-January.

The UK is set to leave the EU on March 29.

Pressure mounts on Hinds to explain £500m apprenticeship ‘alleged overspend’

The chair of the influential education select committee has urged the government to be “open and transparent” about a projected £500 million overspend on this year’s £2 billion apprenticeships budget, after the education secretary dodged a question about it in parliament yesterday.

Robert Halfon asked Damian Hinds to confirm the figure – first raised by the Institute for Apprenticeships two weeks ago – but his response did not make any response to the overspend.

Robert Halfon

Mr Halfon told FE Week it was “incredibly concerning” if the budget was set to be overspent by the amount highlighted by the IfA and it “could affect the employment of thousands of apprentices”.

“The Department for Education and the Treasury need to be open and transparent about this alleged overspend and what action they are taking to mitigate it,” Mr Halfon said.

He added that he’d tabled a number of Parliamentary Questions in a bid to find out the information.

Mr Halfon asked Mr Hinds to “make sure that the apprentice levy is fit for purpose” and to “confirm that there is a £500m overspend on the apprentice levy budget” during education questions in parliament on Monday.

“I can confirm to my right honourable friend that of course it’s very important that we continue to monitor the way the apprenticeship levy works,” Mr Hinds said in response.

The government has “committed to having a review in which we’ll work with businesses on how that works after 2020” that would “make sure that young people but also older people who are further into their careers can benefit from this programme”, he continued.

The prospect of an apprenticeships budget shortfall was first raised in a presentation by the IfA’s chief operating officer Robert Nitsch, at an employer engagement event at Exeter College on November 30.

That included a slide showing that the apprenticeships budget could be overspent by £500 million in 2018/19, rising to a £1.5 billion overspend in 2021/22.

The figures were exclusively reported by FE Week earlier this month and prompted demands for an open debate on how the levy operates, and for the IfA to share the full presentation.

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden has written to Sir Gerry Berragan, boss of the IfA, asking for the presentation to be made public, after the institute refused to share it. 

Gordon Marsden

“With an apprenticeship programme still adapting to the introduction of the apprenticeship levy, and fluctuating starts across levels and standards, I believe maximum transparency as to where the apprenticeship budget is being spent is essential for the health of the sector,” he wrote.

Mr Hinds’ comments yesterday come after he failed to deny the forecast overspend when asked about it by FE Week earlier this month.

“The sorts of things you’re talking about can only be projections,” he said.

“I didn’t write the presentation that you’re referring to so I can’t really comment on it further, but we will obviously be continuing to manage our budget across all areas while continuing to make sure that we are supporting the growth of the apprenticeship scheme.”

However, Keith Smith, the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s director of apprenticeships, told FE Week last week that he was “not expecting any pressures” on the budget this year.

“I think what they were trying to set out was one scenario or a potential, particular illustration of what the budget might do and might happen, depending on some assumptions about demand, take up and those sorts of things,” Mr Smith said.

However, he added that from the agency’s “current point of view we’re working within the context that the apprenticeship levy does and can continue to cover the costs of the programme”.

 

Why the ESFA wants more apprenticeship providers – despite no starts at over 500 last year

The government’s top apprenticeships civil servant has defended the decision to allow more providers on to the provider register – after FE Week analysis revealed a third already on there aren’t delivering.

When asked by this newspaper why the Education and Skills Funding Agency didn’t focus on removing the inactive providers before making the register bigger, Keith Smith said it was “trying to ensure the system is working for businesses” – for which it needed a “high-quality responsive provider system that can respond to their needs and their demands”.

“Where in the system there are potential parts of the country or parts of different sectors where employers feel there isn’t a provider we want to ensure we do right by employers,” he told FE Week.

Under the new, tougher rules for the reopened register of apprenticeship training providers, all providers will be asked to reapply, with the agency focusing first on those deemed “high risk” – including those that have had no starts.

Furthermore, any providers without any delivery within a 12-month period will now face being removed from the register. Mr Smith said the agency would “make sure that those providers who are not delivering go through the new process as providers delivering will go through the new process”.

But rather than kick those inactive providers off immediately, “we’re trying to do that in a sensible way so that we don’t provide unnecessary disruption into the system”, he said.

The apprenticeships provider register reopened on Thursday after being closed to new applications for more than a year.

FE Week reported on Wednesday that a third of those on the existing register in 2017 had had no starts by the end of July this year.

This was based on our analysis of new figures published by the Department for Education, which for the first time showed the number of starts per provider.

There were 1,787 providers on the register in 2017, of which 580 – or 32 per cent – did not have any starts by the end of 2017/18.

Of those, 506 were main providers, representing 32 per cent of the 1,587 on the register last year.

The proportion of employer providers not delivering was higher, at 37 per cent – or 74 out of 200.

“One thing that we’ve been mindful about is that we have got employers in the system both levy-paying and non-levy paying that are coming into the apprenticeships system for the first time,” Mr Smith said – indicating that some of the inactive providers may start to deliver in the future, in response to demand from these new employers.

Where new providers begin delivery “we have a really good system to scrutinise” them, he said.

“We have a really good-quality oversight regime for new-provider monitoring in the shape of the new monitoring visits by Ofsted.”

Mr Smith acknowledged that many existing providers “aren’t delivering and many of them probably have no intention to deliver, but if they do start delivering then our assurance process and regime will pick those up”.