SFA lost 1,000 staff in just six years

The Skills Funding Agency shed over 1,000 staff when responsible for apprenticeship providers and college financial oversight, before being brought into the Department for Education (DfE), new analysis by FE Week shows.

But the 60 per cent reduction in staffing resource was not matched by similar cuts to the number of providers, contracts managed, nor overall funding being allocated (see table).

On a per employee basis, the amount of funding to oversee grew from £2.5 million in 2011 to more than £6 million by 2017. This figure is likely to have risen further in recent years, with further growth to the apprenticeship budget along with many more providers given access to the funds.

The level of staffing resources at the agency could form an important feature in the delayed Dame Ney report.

Ney was commissioned by ministers in August last year “to carry out an independent review of how the government monitors colleges’ finances and financial management”.

At the time, the DfE said the terms of reference “in light of the financial difficulties at Hadlow and West Kent & Ashford Colleges” was to “review the way government monitored and exercised its oversight of those colleges’ finances and financial management, and their effectiveness in practice, including the work of the ESFA and the FE Commissioner’s team; and to recommend changes that would reduce the risk of such problems recurring, taking account of colleges’ independence and the need to minimise regulatory burden”.

When shown the SFA staffing analysis, the DfE was unwilling to provide a statement, but did say it is very difficult to compare these two (SFA and ESFA) systems as there has been considerable change in the organisation in the last ten years.

They pointed to a move to do more things digitally, which, they said, has made staff ratios versus monetary value more difficult to analyse.

College with ‘failed’ Grenfell-style cladding starts moving students out

A college has begun moving classes and residents out of their tower block as they prepare for a multi-million pound renovation to replace Grenfell-style cladding that failed a fire safety test.

Work to remove non-compliant panelling at Highbury College is planned to get underway in the spring and is anticipated to take up to 12 months.

It remains unclear whether the Department for Education has signed-off on the college’s application for financial support to fund the project. A DfE spokesperson said the outcome would be revealed in “due course”.

There are 18 students currently housed in the 10-storey block in Portsmouth, eleven of whom are aged under 18. They will have to move before it closes on 31 January.

Students have been offered alternative living arrangements for the rest of the academic year, including local host family accommodation.

Some college lessons are also taught in the tower. These will be moved to the main campus building.

An investigation by FE Week in October revealed that Highbury had requested up to £5 million from the government to replace Aluminium Composite Material cladding, the type used on the Grenfell Tower, which according to ECD Architects “failed” a safety test.

Concerns were heightened in November when around 100 people were evacuated and two people reportedly suffered minor injuries at a Bolton University halls of residence that caught fire.

Highbury’s halls were constructed in the 1970s and re-clad in 2001. They had not been inspected by Ofsted under the watchdog’s social care common inspection framework until November 2019.

Its first Ofsted report was published on Friday. It found that the halls “require improvement to be good” under the judgement which scrutinised “how well young people are helped and protected”.

The report noted the cladding replacement project and said that “specific plans are in place and additional measures have been applied to address the concerns in the meantime”.

These included additional staffing at night and “ensuring that every student is aware of what to do in the event of the need to evacuate the building”.

Regular checks of the building and fire systems as well as fire drills “ensure that awareness is maintained” and “importantly, managers have sought advice and checks from the local Fire Rescue Service to ensure that the measures in place are likely to be effective”.

The top five floors of Highbury’s 10-storey tower contain 75 bedrooms, according to the college’s website, and “students aged under 18 years of age are accommodated within the on-site Tower Hall of Residence” at a cost of £120 per week.

A statement from the college said the renovation project includes “upgrading the external cladding system and the replacement of all external doors and windows with new energy efficient models designed to reduce utility costs and background noise”.

“In order to provide a peaceful and consistent living, learning and working environment for students and staff, the tower teaching and accommodation facilities will be relocated prior to the renovation works commencing,” it continued.

“This will also ensure students are not put under additional pressure during the summer exam periods.

“To minimise the disruption to students and staff, lessons currently located in the tower will be moved to the main campus building. The phased relocation of lessons is expected to take eight to 10 weeks.”

The statement added that in the short to medium term, there is “expected to be minimal disruption” to the facilities and services located on the ground floor, which includes the college’s Honeypot Nursery and its Reprographic Print Centre and will remain open as usual.

Portsmouth City Council gave planning consent for the new cladding and windows in September.

AoC board set for shake-up to bring in outside experts

A major reorganisation of the board at the Association of Colleges (AoC) will see many of the principals replaced by experts from outside the sector.

The membership body is also proposing to create a new members’ council, as well as giving a “new focus” for their president.

Chief executive of the membership organisation, David Hughes, said the aim is to “ensure that we have good governance arrangements with the member voice at their heart”. 

A consultation on the plans was launched towards the end of 2019.

One of the AoC’s main proposals is to create a “smaller and more focused board, with a mix of members and non-members”.

There are currently 13 serving college leaders on the association’s board. The AoC wants to reduce this to just four whilst appointing three external members who have experience in operational areas such as public affairs, membership services and campaigning.

The chief executive, the AoC’s finance director and chair would continue to sit on the board. It would meet quarterly and “set the strategic direction” of the organisation.

Separately, a members’ council would be created and report to the board twice a year.

It would become the “overarching” governance forum for the AoC, according to the consultation, providing a “structured route for engagement with members linked to regional networks and events”.

It would also “identify and establish” policy, special interest, and project-specific groups, whilst also overseeing “campaigning activities”.

The council would consist of a “core group of college experts”.

All college leaders would be eligible to be elected to the council, and one principal and one chair from each region would be elected through member elections – taking membership to 18.

The council would meet bi-annually and be the “over-arching forum for ministers and officials to engage with sector”.

AoC proposes that the president, currently Steve Frampton, would chair the members’ council.

“That does raise the question of the election process and term of office for the president,” the consultation said.

“Currently, the president is elected annually for a one-year term. Only principals in post at the time of nomination, or the first-year president are eligible to stand.

“We could maintain this eligibility requirement process or propose a new process. Similarly, we could also maintain the annual election process or propose a two or three-year term.”

It added that linkages between the members’ council and AoC board are “critical”.

Commenting on the governance changes, Hughes said: “The AoC board spent time last year reviewing the governance arrangements for AoC and consulted members about ideas for potential changes in the autumn last year. The consultation led to really good feedback and discussions with members, as it was designed to.

“The AoC board discussed the responses and the discussions at its December meeting and agreed to go back out to members with the second stage of the process, building on the feedback and engaging members further”, said Hughes. “The aim is to ensure that we have good governance arrangements with the member voice at their heart.”

He added that there is “no rush for change” and that the association is “simply taking time to fully engage with members so that we can reach an agreement on next steps”.

Final proposals are set to be presented in March and any changes to governance would be subject to agreement by members.

The consultation states that new arrangements are expected to take effect from August 2020.

Chair follows principal and quits at college with shock £6m deficit

A former deputy FE commissioner has been drafted into a college that is currently investigating an unexpected £6 million deficit after its chair resigned.

John Hogg today replaced John McCabe, who was appointed as chair of Gateshead College just six months ago.

The high-profile college, which uncovered the shock shortfall after its finance director went on sick leave in September, put 26 jobs at risk earlier this month.

The former highest-paid principal in the country, Judith Doyle, retired from Gateshead with immediate effect on 31 December.

McCabe commissioned an external forensic investigation to identity the cause of its current financial position. It is expected to conclude next week – during which FE Week understands Ofsted will also be visiting. The college was given a grade one in 2015.

McCabe said: “Following discussions with the FE Commissioner about what the college needed right now, I tendered my resignation.

“I am disappointed that I will not have the opportunity to lead the college to recovery but I want to do what is in the best interests of the college, and I wish the governing body and all members of staff the very best as they continue the important work that is underway.”

McCabe added he was confident a three-year recovery plan will “restore the college’s long-term financial sustainability”.

New chair Hogg previously worked as a principal for Middlesbrough College, Wolverhampton City College and City College Coventry.

It is not known whether Hogg, a former deputy FE commissioner, has taken over on an interim or permanent basis, or whether he will be paid for the role.

He said McCabe’s “speedy and measured response to the unplanned deficit, in particular the investigation he commissioned, will prove to be fundamental to the college’s recovery plan”.

“I am looking forward to working with colleagues in the college to ensure we make the progress needed to return us to a healthy position and continue to deliver the high-quality education and training the college provides for students and employers,” Hogg added.

A spokesperson on behalf of the board added: “On behalf of the board and all our colleagues we would like to sincerely thank [McCabe] for his support and recognise the work he has done in this very short space of time.

“We had hoped to have John longer, but this situation is not the one the board had anticipated at the time of his appointment.”

Deputy principal Chris Toon took over as acting principal at Gateshead College in January.

He announced a redundancy consultation was underway earlier this month.

The college previously told FE Week a “highly experienced interim financial director” was appointed before Christmas and it was considering “options for short-term funding loans”.

It was also previously confirmed that a new three-year financial plan, which is hoped to return the college to a surplus by 2020-2021, is to be delivered with the support of the ESFA and FE Commissioner.

Gateshead College recorded a surplus of £748,000 in 2017-18, according to its latest accounts.

A new approach to financial regulation and oversight in the sector

Shortly after the scandal at Hadlow College Group was exposed, the government commissioned an independent review of college financial oversight. Dame Mary Ney’s report is due for publication imminently and FE Week has already reported that the Education and Skills Funding Agency is to be heavily criticised. Chris Todd, a chartered accountant and college principal, considers the problems and how to fix them

Having worked in further education for around 15 years, I’ve noticed that not much has really changed when it comes to financial regulation and oversight in the sector. It really is no different now to what is was 15 years ago. Colleges are still getting into financial trouble; there continue to be cases where the management override of controls is evident; and our regulator (the ESFA) remains fixated on financial data returns.

I’m a big fan of Game of Thrones and a particular quotation by Daenerys Targaryen springs to mind: “We need to break the wheel.”  Clearly, what we are doing isn’t working. It never has and it never will, until we start to think differently.

ESFA needs high-calibre, qualified staff who can rival the best of us

As someone who has quite an unusual range of experience in further education finance I feel well placed to comment on these issues. I’ve been an external and internal auditor at KPMG; I’ve worked at the Learning and Skills Council in provider financial management; and I’ve been a finance director in three educational institutions (two of them FE colleges). 

Not wanting to steal Dame Mary’s thunder, although I’m not sure her report will reach the same conclusions that I have, I thought it would be useful to share my three-point plan for improving financial regulation and oversight in the FE sector.

 

  1. Use information that already exists to monitor the finances of colleges

The current approach employed by the ESFA to capture financial data is, in my opinion, not working.  Even with the introduction of the new Integrated Financial Model for colleges (IFMC) return, the focus remains on data harvesting, as opposed to interpretation and human-based interaction.  I may be wrong, but I’m not convinced the agency will make best use of this return when set against the significant workload that it creates.  

Here’s an idea: all colleges produce management accounts on a frequent and timely basis across the year – why not use these to review college financial performance and to exercise oversight?

Yes, the quality of management accounts will vary between colleges. However, poor-quality accounts are often an early warning sign that financial issues lie ahead. This in itself could be an early trigger for intervention. Additionally, reviewing the management accounts on a regular basis, could highlight areas where colleges are exhibiting early signs of distress (ie, unexpected cash-flow decline).

It strikes me as a fairly obvious solution and would provide more frequent and timely information to support the early identification of issues. It would also reduce the significant amount of time our finance colleagues spend each year completing these data returns, which provide little benefit or use to our own organisations. 

 

  1. Employ the right people

I read with interest Dominic Cummings’ recent blog post encouraging “weirdos and misfits with odd skills” to apply for jobs within No 10. Whether you agree with this or not, my experience of the ESFA, and Civil Service more generally, is that they lack diversity in thinking. Many of the people I have come across in the Civil Service have worked there for the majority of their career, with limited exposure to the commercial world. 

If the ESFA is going to move to a model that is less reliant on data harvesting and rules-based transactional funding, to a model focused on intelligence, interpretation and relationship management, it will need to make sure it employs the right people.

Challenging a finance director or principal of an FE college on financial performance requires a specific range of skills. Too often, discussions around financial performance take place with non-financial staff, who do not have the experience or expertise to challenge effectively.

Fewer high-quality staff, paid at a level commensurate with the skills set and experience required, would add much greater value. Additionally, if their employment results in fewer colleges becoming financially distressed, then the public purse would benefit greatly. We may even be able to generate a favourable return on investment!

 

  1. Focus on people and relationship management

There are lots of great people working in the ESFA, and in the North-East in particular, we enjoy a positive relationship based on mutual respect and trust. Unfortunately, however, the ESFA has become a shadow of its former self, with a huge decline in staffing numbers evident since 2011. To me, this is not sustainable and we need a fit-for-purpose funding agency that is properly funded going forward.

This is not to say that things were perfect back in the days of the Learning and Skills Council, but what did exist back then was an approach to financial regulation and oversight based on relationship management. We need this again but better, with high-calibre, qualified staff who can rival the best of us working in colleges across the country. Only this, will deliver the high-quality financial regulation and oversight colleges need.

To conclude, financial regulation and oversight will never remove financial failure altogether. There is always scope for human error and the management override of controls, but we must reach a position where the avoidable failures are identified at a much earlier stage. In my view, this is entirely possible if we take a fresh approach.

Measuring impact fairly in the devolved areas

The mayoral combined authorities are developing impact and performance measures to assess whether the adult education budget is having a positive impact in their area. Setting the right targets and outcome measures, in a fair, simple and cost-effective way, is critical, warns Harminder Matharu

The end of January marks the end of the first six months of devolved delivery of the adult education budget (AEB) and the returns from colleges and providers may indicate whether the new arrangements are resulting in less underspend than has been the case nationally over the past few years. Of course, it’s not just about how much funding has been spent; having fought so hard to get it devolved, the mayoral combined authorities (MCAs) and the Greater London Authority (GLA) will want to assure themselves and stakeholders that local delivery has made a tangible difference to their local communities.

The combined authorities should ensure fairness across all provider groups

The whole point of devolution is that each of the combined authorities will eventually define for themselves their AEB priorities. Increasingly there is talk of assessing the impact on these, rather than looking solely at outputs and outcomes, although the latter will obviously help measure impact. Work is already under way, with the GLA commissioning the Learning and Work Institute to support the development of their impact-assessment proposal with a view to running a pilot.

The Liverpool City Region is piloting outcome-based delivery through their sector-based work academies, while the West Midlands combined authority is testing wider than traditional approaches.

All are also very conscious of finding the best way to measure the impact of AEB on social value, where the learning may not be centred around qualification and outputs.

AELP welcomes this work, and if stakeholders are supportive, we would like to see it used as a template for developments in other areas.

We hope that the devolved areas as a collective group will also keep a wider national picture in mind because providers deliver across multiple areas. Measuring impact is a complex challenge when faced with variances in local labour markets, and AELP has suggested to the nine devolved areas a set of principles to consider.

These start with setting the right targets and outcome measures from the outset, as this is critical for ensuring that adult education reaches the right individuals. The combined authorities should consider and compare approaches in neighbouring areas, along with any national approaches, to identify common aspects to align where there is value in doing so. 

Outcome measures should take into account the learner’s starting point to accurately assess distance travelled, impact on social mobility and real added value. This should be backed up by the measurement of planned progression outcomes to allow for longer term impact assessments. We should recognise that cohorts of learners may require differentiated outcomes supported by clear criteria and rationale for assessing impact.  This involves acknowledging the varying socio-economic factors affecting them.

It will undoubtedly help if there are clear definitions for all performance measures related to assessing the impact of delivery. At the same time, we should minimise the administrative burden and financial costs of data collection. 

Finally, the combined authorities should ensure fairness across all provider groups through a system that allows providers to invest and plan delivery which maintains value for money throughout.

As well as deciding what progression outcomes should be measured, it’s important also to agree on when to measure progression, because a learner may not benefit from it in the short term. Existing data collection systems should be reviewed before new systems are created, which means engaging with other stakeholders and partners that already collect measurement and destination data. For example, we recommend a look at the DWP’s new Data Lab and exploring whether this allows tracking of individuals over a longer period.

Despite the size of the challenge, we must work to keep the processes as simple as possible with cost considerations at the forefront of the emerging proposals.

 

Back A Bid: Campaign to host WorldSkills 2027 in the UK

FE Week is coordinating a campaign for the UK to host WorldSkills in 2027.

The chief executive of WordSkills UK used this paper earlier in January to suggest that their organisation was starting to look at whether we could host a future competition.

We believe this would be an amazing opportunity for our sector and the UK to play host to the global skills community. 

A bid is an opportunity for our sector to truly think big and demonstrate a bold ambition. We can exploit the process of bidding, and hopefully hosting, as a catalyst for change. Adopting an ambition to implement international benchmarking across the sector and thus creating a stronger economic future for more young people.

Winning the bid would also see the UK host ministers and, business and education leaders from across the globe as part of an international skills summit. A platform from which we can demonstrate we are developing the skills needed to attract investment and subsequently jobs for our highly-skilled learners.

The next step for government is to announce their support of a feasibility study, which of course will require public money and time. The Secretary of State appears to be supportive, in principle, but he will need some encouragement. That’s where the sector and your stakeholders come in!

Show your support for the UK to host WorldSkills 2027 on social media using #BackABid and by leaving a comment at the end of this post. FE Week will collate these responses and present them to the education secretary, Gavin Williamson at the end of February.

Provider challenging ‘flawed’ AEB tender in the high court

Lawyers are set to go to battle at the high court later this month, in the first ever challenge to a failed adult education budget application, FE Week can reveal.

East Birmingham Community Forum (EBCF) claims it was wrongly denied a fair run at securing a slice of £28 million of funding put out by the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) last year.

In documents obtained by FE Week ahead of the January 31 court date, the independent learning provider alleges the procurement was “flawed” and that WMCA admitted in writing that they had made scoring errors.

They also claim the WMCA did not abide by legislative procurement rules.

The information provided by the defendant is unclear and inadequate

A spokesperson for WMCA told FE Week they refute the claims but would be “making no further comment at this time”.

EBCF declined to comment.

If the EBCF challenge is successful, two areas of the area’s AEB provision bid could have to be retendered.

EBCF, which operates across two centres in Birmingham, applied to run a programme aimed at teaching unemployed people new skills, and an “innovative delivery” project by the March 2019 deadline of the WMCA’s tender.

But in May it was told it had failed at the first of two stages for the AEB procurement.

The first stage was split into questions about eligibility, and a general technical evaluation which asked questions about the provider’s achievement rates, learner satisfaction scores, quality assurance, capability and track record and its ability to meet local needs.

For achievement rates, EBCF had to provide its latest data for adult education, which it duly did: 96 per cent for entry-level and level one and 100 per cent for level two in 2017/18.

It sent this off with the rest of the application – only to be told later it had scored just 55 per cent when it needed 60 to progress.

A list of possible scores replicated in the court paperwork gives the only available scores being even numbers between zero and ten; but WMCA scored EBCF three for one question and seven for another question.

Following this, EBCF asked for further evaluation of its application and received a feedback report which said “no achievement rate data was received”. 

When challenged by the provider, WMCA allegedly “acknowledged the feedback report was wrong” and explained it had contained the “unmoderated” feedback of one evaluator.

EBCF claims the authority made “manifest errors” in the scoring of tenders, and believes the report is not the unmoderated comments of one evaluator, but are in fact comments made after the event.

This is because comments made in the feedback for the information EBCF provided about its achievement rates and quality assurance appear to reference emails the provider sent after submitting its application.

In June, EBCF met with WMCA’s head of skills delivery Clare Hatton to discuss its scoring and concerns, where the provider said its entire general technical evaluation should be reviewed. 

A few days later, WMCA sent a letter instead. This stated that it would review only the question on achievement rates, and Hatton had performed a personal review of that question and found it deserved a score of four, not three.

“It is unclear if this review was a formal re-scoring of the claimant’s responses to question one,” the provider has said.

“On any view, the information provided by the defendant is unclear and inadequate,” adding the feedback report and Hatton’s comments have created “a thoroughly confused picture”.

Following the letter, EBCF had their solicitors write to WMCA asking for the make-up of the evaluation panel which reviewed their application, the guidance provided to them, and any evaluation report with recommendations for the authority.

They also asked for an award notice, explaining the reasons why EBCF had not been picked and why the successful tenderer had.

EBCF claims not to have received this notice, which they say means the standstill period on the tender had not come to an end so WMCA cannot enter into contracts for the lots EBCF bid for.

This is due to the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, which says the contracting authority has to send an award notice to every operator which took part in a tender.

Proceedings were initiated on June 12 when WMCA did not provide any of the information asked of them.

According to the EBCF, the lack of an award notice means that if WMCA has entered into contracts for the services the provider bid for, they are in breach of regulations and those contracts “should be declared ineffective”.

WMCA announced that nine providers were successful in their bid for the skills for the unemployed tender and 10 were for the innovative delivery tender.

If their case is successful, EBCF is also asking for their application to be “properly evaluated”, information on how the tenders were evaluated, damages and costs.

Ofsted watch: ‘Outstanding’ week for sixth form college

A sixth form college was lauded as ‘outstanding’ in a mixed week for FE, which saw one private provider plummet to ‘inadequate’ while another dropped two grades to ‘requires improvement’.

Godalming College was given the top rating by Ofsted in its first inspection since converting to a 16 to 19 academy in January 2018.

The Surrey-based college has around 1,900 students, who “thrive in the atmosphere of industrious learning,” with a large majority studying A-level courses.

Inspectors found they “make strong and sustained progress with their learning and achieve excellent examination grades”.

Staff were praised for supporting students who fall behind or need extra help “very effectively” and for revisiting topics, providing “clear” feedback and distributing “useful” careers advice.

In contrast, independent learning provider Icon Vocational Training Limited dropped from a grade one to a grade three.

It works with about 118 employers within the leisure and sport industry and currently has 309 apprentices.

While Ofsted said many apprentices benefit from frequent feedback and gain promotion due to their participation in the programme, some do not develop significant new knowledge for their vocational areas rapidly enough because “leaders and managers do not plan and sequence the curriculum to take into account the previous experiences of apprentices”.

Engagement with smaller employers was deemed “not as successful” as it is with the large employers.

Recent improvement actions to address these issues are “only just beginning to have a positive impact,” according to inspectors.

Another private provider to receive a grade three this week was Seymour Davies Limited.

It has 68 apprentices across care, business administration and carpentry as well as 108 adults working in the care sector who are enrolled on short-duration qualifications in care.

The inspectorate said carpentry apprentices, taught by a subcontractor, become “highly skilled very quickly”.

However, it was reported that too few taught by the prime provider “receive high-quality off-the-job training or prompt feedback on the quality of their work” and “most have not completed their qualifications in the time planned”.

Tutors have “significant industrial experience” which helps apprentices to link theoretical concepts to the real-life situations that they face at work, but careers guidance was also criticised.

Chesterfield College, a general FE college, received a second grade three in two years.

At the time of the inspection, it had 2,000 learners aged 16 to 18, 900 adult learners and 1,500 apprentices across three main sites in Chesterfield and three satellite apprenticeship centres in Derby, Manchester and Nottingham.

Ofsted found learners “do not always receive high-quality training” and those with high needs “do not receive personalised training”.

The report said “leaders have not improved the quality of education for young people rapidly enough”.

Elsewhere, the education watchdog found North Lincolnshire Council, an adult and community learning provider, was making ‘reasonable progress’ in its first re-inspection monitoring visit following a full inspection in June 2019 – which found it to be ‘inadequate’.

In addition, Derwen College, an ‘outstanding’ independent specialist college, received a monitoring visit after safeguarding “concerns” were brought to Ofsted’s attention.

It provides education and support for learners with special educational needs and disabilities.

The college was found to be making ‘reasonable progress’ in ensuring that effective arrangements are in place to safeguard learners, frequently reviewing them and making improvements as a result.

As reported earlier in the week, Progress to Excellence Ltd was declared ‘inadequate’ and is immediately exiting the training market, leaving more than 2,500 apprentices and adult learners in the lurch.

Meanwhile, Ofsted reported that apprentices “thoroughly enjoy their learning” and are “highly motivated to do well” at private provider Bright Direction Training Limited.

Similar praise was offered to fellow provider Louise Setton, where apprentices “benefit from a high level of support and technical training”.

Both firm’s received grade twos in their first full inspections.

Hull Business Training Centre Limited was also rated ‘good’ – maintaining the grade it has retained since 2005.

The remaining independent learning providers inspected by Ofsted this week received positive reports following monitoring visits.

Primary Goal Ltd was found to be making ‘significant progress’ in one area and ‘reasonable progress’ in the other two assessed themes.

Both Cambridge Professional Academy Limited and Parenta Training Limited received ‘reasonable progress’ across the board.

Employer provider Kingswood Learning and Leisure Group also made ‘reasonable progress’ in a second monitoring visit, after receiving three ‘insufficient progress’ grades in September.

But British Airways PLC was given one ‘insufficient progress’ rating out of three in its first monitoring visit (read the full story here).

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Bright Direction Training Limited 12/12/2019 21/01/2020 2 M
Cambridge Professional Academy Limited 12/12/2019 20/01/2020 M N/A
Hull Business Training Centre Limited 12/12/2019 21/01/2020 2 2
Icon Vocational Training Limited 13/12/2019 24/01/2020 3 1
Louise Setton 12/12/2019 21/01/2020 2 M
Parenta Training Limited 17/12/2019 21/01/2020 M M 
Primary Goal Ltd 12/12/2019 20/01/2020 M N/A
Progress to Excellence Ltd 16/12/2019 22/01/2020 4 2
Seymour Davies Ltd 29/11/2019 20/01/2020 3 M

 

Sixth Form Colleges (inc 16-19 academies) Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Godalming College 06/12/2019 21/01/2020 1 N/A

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
North Lincolnshire Council 10/01/2020 24/01/2020 M 4

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
British Airways PLC 18/12/2019 19/01/2020 M N/A
Kingswood Learning and Leisure Group 11/12/2019 22/01/2020 M M

 

Specialist colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Derwen College 08/01/2020 22/01/2020 M 1

 

General FE colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Chesterfield College 28/11/2019 24/01/2020 3 3