The government is set to launch its consultation on a radical overhaul of subcontracting rules this week – and it is expected to include a proposal to limit out-of-area deals.
Eileen Milner, the chief executive of the Education and Skills Funding Agency, sent a sector-wide letter in October warning of rule changes and that she will take strong action against any provider that abuses the system.
She said there were 11 live investigations into subcontracting at the time, with issues underpinning them ranging in seriousness from “complacency and mismanagement”, through to matters of “deliberate and systematic fraud”.
As per Milner’s letter, areas expected to be under consideration in the consultation include “placing limits on the permitted geographical distance between a directly funded institution and the location where subcontracted provision is delivered”.
This year, the GLA provides around £14 million of AEB grant funding to providers located further than what is considered to be a “reasonable travel-to-learn distances for London learners”.
Officials say the majority of this funding is subcontracted to training providers based in London who are then charged a “substantial” management fee.
Mayor Sadiq Khan has now announced plans to stop funding for providers based outside the capital’s fringe – typically more than 30 miles away from central London.
Aside from out-of-area subcontracting, the ESFA’s consultation is expected to cover how much funding can be subcontracted by a single provider, actions to prevent non-compliance, failure and fraud, and potentially precluding the use of some subcontractors.
It is not expected that the ESFA will suggest imposing a cap on management fees under subcontracting arrangements, as called for by sector bodies such as the Association of Employment and Learning Providers.
Milner said at the time of the October letter that where “poor subcontracting practice is evident to us we will act decisively”.
The review will be concluded this academic year and the ESFA plans to start implementing the changes at the start of 2020-21.
There have been a number of high-profile subcontracting scandals in recent years, including the Luis Michael Training case where its owners, which included two former professional footballers, created “ghost learners” and were jailed for over 25 years combined.
The most recent subcontracting scandal, exposed by FE Week, involved Brooklands College and resulted in the ESFA demanding a £20 million clawback.
Milner has said the ESFA will, in future, be “more forensic in our examination of the data and information available to us to hold individuals and organisations to account”.
“We will recover public money where appropriate,” she added in her letter from October.
The ESFA isn’t the only body taking a closer look at subcontracting: Ofsted announced in November that it was launching research into the practice.
Providers are being invited to a series of roadshows to find out more about non-levy paying businesses transitioning to the apprenticeship service and the withdrawal of frameworks.
The Education and Skills Funding Agency is running events across the country in February and March for employers on the register of apprenticeship training providers.
According to this week’s ESFA update, the six roadshows “will focus on the transition of smaller employers that do not pay the apprenticeships levy to the apprenticeship service”.
The ESFA announced earlier this month that small employers would be invited to use the digital apprenticeship service, which had previously been reserved for levy-paying employers only.
Small employers will be capped at reserving apprenticeship funding for just three apprentices to start off with, to allow the agency to manage the transition and help keep the apprenticeship programme affordable.
The move has been seen as an attempt by the government to help small-to-medium enterprises access apprenticeships, after it was found that two-fifths of providers are having to reject up to 40,000 of those firms looking to recruit apprentices.
The need for affordability comes after the Institute of Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) warned that the apprenticeship budget would be overspent, and the National Audit Office sounded the alarm over the financial sustainability of the programme.
Employers on the digital service will also be restricted to reserving funding for apprenticeships standards, instead of frameworks.
The process of withdrawing standards has been running since March 2016, but has been rocked by criticism.
Sector leaders have called for a replacement standard for the Level 2 business administration framework, but proposals have been rejected by IfATE due to concerns it would overlap with a Level 3 business administrator standard.
The institute and ministers were also worried that the standard would not meet the 20 per cent off-the-job training requirement.
But the government’s case was not helped by the Department for Education launching a recruitment drive for Level 2 business administration apprentices on frameworks in May.
The ESFA update says the roadshows “will provide you with opportunities to network with other providers, and to feedback around key themes, so we all have a chance to share good practice and learn from experiences of others”.
Main providers were previously invited to a set of roadshows which ran last September and also covered the transition of small employers to the apprenticeship service.
This latest series “builds on your feedback from our last events,” the ESFA said, adding: “The insight and information we collected has informed our planning to help make sure we bring you – our providers – on this change journey with us and we want to share this with you.”
More details about the agenda will be sent to providers next month.
One of England’s largest college groups spent close to £4 million on ‘Project Apple’ to shut two training arms which contributed to an £11 million deficit last year.
The shortfall at NCG isn’t the group’s only financial concern: it is also expecting the Education and Skills Funding Agency to recoup funding that goes back “a number of years” following an investigation that found “significant data anomalies” relating to achievement rates.
Its chair Peter Lauener, a former chief executive of the ESFA, was tight-lipped on the potential clawback, but insisted the closure exercise, code named Project Apple, “will contribute to a material improvement in the group’s operating performance and cash position in 2019/20 and beyond”.
We could not see a credible way of rebuilding a successful operation
NCG, which runs seven colleges across the country, shut its two training providers Rathbone and Intraining in 2019. Lauener (pictured) said the decision was made because their quality was “poor”, and they were making losses of around £250,000 per month.
“We could not see a credible way of rebuilding a successful operation”, he added. The group began a managed wind-down at the start of last year. Around 300 jobs were lost by the end of October.
The group hired former North Hertfordshire College principal and now consultant Matt Hamnett following a competitive tender to lead on Project Apple.
In March, NCG estimated that the total cost of the closure project, including redundancy payments, consultancy fees and dilapidations, would come to £1.7 million.
Minutes from a meeting that month show that a governor had questioned the robustness of the prediction. He was “assured” by the managing director of Intraining and Rathbone that the numbers were based on “detailed planning and as a result were felt to be reliable”.
But minutes from a meeting in October 2019 show costs “have been £2.5 million higher than budgeted”.
This was “largely due to higher than budgeted costs in dilapidations, consultancy fees, redundancy costs and ongoing training”.
Lauener told FE Week the cost of closure hit £3.8 million in total – including the costs of withdrawing from training centres around the country, staff, legal and other one-off costs.
He noted that this is more than the first projection – but claimed it was “materially less than the estimate prepared by the closure project team once work had been fully scoped”.
The chair would not say how much Matt Hamnett and Associate’s consultancy fees were, but did say that Project Apple was “an incredibly complex programme of work” which they did “with great diligence – providing leadership, commercial, communications, people, property and MIS support”.
Hamnett said: “Our clients are best placed to comment on the work we do with them.”
Project Apple has had a significant impact on the group’s finances.
Its deficit has risen from £7.1 million in 2017/18 to £10.9 million in 2018/19, according to unpublished new accounts seen by FE Week.
They fail to mention Project Apple, but do state that financial performance has “been extremely challenging”. They also cited the freeze on funding rates within the sector, despite inflationary cost pressures (see box out).
Lauener would not go into more detail about the deficit when asked by FE Week.
He did add, however, that the group’s 2018/19 EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization) – which they consider to be the most telling measure of NCG’s financial performance – was £0.8 million.
“That figure would have been much stronger without Intraining and Rathbone operating losses and closure costs, and that is why we are confident that our finances will be much better from our new basis,” Lauener said.
NCG’s 2017/18 EBITDA came close to £3.5 million.
As revealed by FE Week in March 2019, NCG’s two training providers were subject to an ESFA audit before their closure was announced.
Board minutes from a meeting in May make reference to a PwC investigation on behalf of the agency, the “preliminary results” of which suggested “significant data anomalies”.
We have learnt important lessons from the work we have done to close the businesses
Minutes for June 2019 state that action was subsequently taken against Intraining and Rathbone staff, including suspensions: “The chair noted that following the passing of a special resolution any members of staff who were suspended from their role (whilst holding a director role within Rathbone or Intraining) would no longer be able to attend board meetings or participate in the running of the company.”
NCG would not reveal how many staff were suspended.
July 2019 minutes stated that there “is risk in relation to any potential clawback from the ESFA”, however, the issues “originally highlighted were not materially financial as they mostly relate to achievement rates.
“When the data is being cleansed, a robust and documented process will take place to assure ESFA that the process is credible, and the issues have been investigated effectively.”
Minutes for October said ESFA clawback “could go back a number of years”.
Lauener would not disclose whether the agency had since demanded the group repay any funding, but said: “Through the process, we did identify some issues which required formal investigation. We conducted that work in close consultation with the ESFA and took action as appropriate.
“We have learnt important lessons from the work we have done to close the businesses – and will apply these in our future work to fulfil our vision to support all our colleges in their communities and to get the best out of the synergy of seven colleges working in partnership and learning from each other.”
A spokesperson for the ESFA said: “We do not routinely comment on investigations, ongoing or otherwise.”
Former CEO received a £57k lump sum
NCG’s former chief executive was paid £57,000 when he quit in October 2018 after five years at the helm.
Joe Docherty’s “payment in lieu of notice” is listed in the college group’s latest set of accounts, which also show £1,800 was paid “towards legal fees”.
NCG would not reveal any more details about this case when approached by FE Week.
Joe Docherty
Docherty’s salary in his last full academic year as the group’s boss, in 2017/18, was £232,000. He received £109,000 for working between August and October 2018, but £57,000 of this was his “contractual entitlement” after leaving after the start of a new academic year.
Liz Bromley became NCG’s permanent chief executive in August 2019.
NCG’s £11 million deficit for 2018/19 sounds concerning, but their accounts hint to a stable financial position even though performance has “been extremely challenging”.
“In recent years, the main impact on income from the group’s core activities has been as a result of the freeze on funding rates within the sector despite inflationary cost pressures,” the accounts said.
“This has been exacerbated by falling numbers of apprenticeships starts across the sector following the introduction of the apprenticeship levy.”
Learner numbers have decreased slightly across the group, but only by 4 per cent, from 32,698 in 2017/18 to 31,354 in 2018/19.
NCG’s turnover has dropped from £158.2 million to £148.5 million, which the accounts say is “largely due to the initiation of the training provider wind-down”.
They add, however, that NCG ended 2019 in a “stable cash position with cash equivalent balances of £13,413,000 with a £5 million revolving credit facility also available”.
This year’s accounts state that the group has “cash forecasts that demonstrate cash reserves and facilities are in place and are sufficient to meet the immediate cash requirements of the business”.
NCG also has a “strong” asset backed balance sheet, which prior to pension liability stand at £175,241,000.
The accounts state that confirmation has been received from the ESFA that they agree with NCG’s assessment of financial health equal to ‘requires improvement’ for the expected outturn of 2018/19.
“They are also agreeing that the budget for 2019/20 is graded ‘good’. This is based on balance sheet strength, maintenance of low gearing and improved operational performance following the close down of the loss-making training provider businesses.”
Cash flow from operating activities amounted to a net outflow of £2,916,000 (2018: net inflow of £4,306,000). The outflow in 2018/19 was “linked to the closure of the training provider businesses”.
The FE sector needs to recognise that government has “made a step forward, even if it may not be a giant leap” when it comes to funding, the re-elected chair of the education committee has said.
Robert Halfon also believes the apprenticeship levy is in need of reform, but he does not agree with the view of Ofsted boss Amanda Spielman who wants to restrict employer spending decisions.
The MP for Harlow and former skills minister, who was re-elected unopposed this week, insists priorities for the cross-party committee will be set by the entire membership once other MPs are elected.
“I wake up thinking about education and skills, I go to bed thinking about it”
And he told FE Week he has pledged to continue to set government “hares running”.
Halfon insists that it was his committee that put FE and school funding on the agenda “big time” in the build up to last year’s general election.
The £14 billion extra for schools, the £3 billion national skills fund and £1.8 billion for college capital projects committed by the Conservative party are “significant” and an “important step towards stabilising funding”.
In July 2019 the education committee backed the Sixth Form Colleges Association’s Raise the Rate campaign. They said the government needs to “urgently” increase the base rate for students aged 16 and 17 to “at least £4,760”.
A month later the chancellor announced a £400 million boost for FE which included increasing that base rate by 4.7 per cent, from £4,000 to £4,188.
Whilst it wasn’t the substantial growth his committee had called for, Halfon said: “When the government does something right, even if it’s not everything, I think you’ve got to recognise that they’ve made a step forward, even if it may not be a giant leap.
“I’ll always advocate for more,” he added, “especially on FE, because that has always been underfunded.”
Halfon’s new committee will look very different. Former members Michelle Donelan and Emma Hardy have been appointed to the government and opposition frontbench education teams respectively. Trudy Harrison is now the prime minister’s parliamentary private secretary.
“Clearly, education committee is a ladder of opportunity,” Halfon smiled as he deployed his famous catchphrase.
Parliament looks very different now, too. So how can Halfon, a Conservative, reassure those who doubt his ability to hold his own government to account now that it has a large majority?
“First of all, I’d say all they need to do is look at my record in the last parliament,” he says.
“And secondly… my passion is education. I wake up thinking about it, I go to bed thinking about education and skills. And I want to make things better. That’s why I’m doing the job.”
Investigating the plight of demographics that get “left behind” by the current education system is a priority for Halfon, as is probing the activities of education quangos.
“Some of them are pretty big cash cows, untouched by austerity,” he said. “We’re talking about [shortages of] funding – and yet some of these quangos can spend money seemingly unsupervised, wherever they want.”
The last education committee savaged the Careers and Enterprise Company over its spending on research and events, and Halfon has said the body can be “ludicrously wasteful”.
Another area that Halfon is keen to continue scrutinising is apprenticeships.
His committee held an inquiry into apprenticeships and skills training in 2018, but the chair now wants a specific investigation into the levy which he helped launch during his time as skills minister.
The levy has continued to make headlines over the past year with projections that the apprenticeships budget will soon be overspent, and Department for Education officials admitting that “hard choices” will be needed to prevent it from going bust.
Last week, Ofsted said in its annual report that high levels of management and health apprenticeships need to be addressed “urgently” because they are a “mismatch” with the government’s industrial strategy.
“I’ll always advocate for more, especially for FE”
Chief inspector Amanda Spielman then admitted that she has been “encouraging government” to restrict spending choices made by levy-paying employers.
Does Halfon agree with this approach? “No, not necessarily,” he says.
“I do definitely think we need to look at the levy. I don’t have all the answers because I would love our committee to hopefully do an inquiry on reform of the levy.”
He anticipates that there “will be reforms” by this government and says his preference is for the levy to be extended by the number of companies that pay it.
Currently, only firms with an annual wage bill of more than £3 million fork out 0.5 per cent of their salary costs to pay into the levy. Halfon says this amount could be reduced to £2 million.
He added that the apprenticeship levy “is a very important thing and I absolutely believe in it”, and he rejects calls for it to be expanded to pay for different types of training.
Having said that, he does believe in creating “social justice or skills credits”.
“So, if you employ people with disadvantaged backgrounds to do skills, you would get a skills credit on your tax bill – that’s how I think the government should invest in the system.”
He said this could be “particularly useful in terms of adult and lifelong learning” – an area that his committee announced an inquiry into before the general election and one which he “hopes very much” will be picked up again in this Parliament.
Blaming colleges for simply recruiting students to course subjects they want to study is weird and not the solution to the problem of matching skills to the economy, says Adrian Perry
After years of cuts, FE is getting mentioned in government education briefings and House of Commons debates. This is good news, but it brings back some old nostrums that we would do well without. FE Week reported on the keenness of bureaucrats to tell colleges that they must run courses that meet the economy’s needs, and the head of Ofsted wasn’t slow to join in.
Sounds really sensible, doesn’t it? It was recently pointed out that there is a mismatch between the numbers doing particular courses, and the numbers of likely jobs in the economy when they leave. Fifteen per cent of youngsters want to work in entertainment and sport, a sector that provides just three per cent of jobs. By contrast, accommodation and catering need almost seven times as many workers as there are students expressing an interest. So let’s just fund courses, it’s argued, that lead to jobs. But before we run off with this policy, let’s look at the reservations:
We emphatically don’t need direction from those who are not on the frontline
• The delivery of the policy depends on persuading someone who wants to be, say, a sports journalist, or a beauty therapist, to do something entirely different – “No hairdressing places? OK, I’ll do electrical installation”. Success here is unlikely. And blaming providers for the situation – as some have done – is weird. They provide what customers want: if they didn’t, they’d soon go bankrupt.
• Young people face working careers that stretch ever longer as life expectancy increases. Who knows what skills they will need? We need to prepare them for the next forty years, which argues for maintaining a good general education, and for generous retraining opportunities. Even vocational courses need a generalist flavour. Volkswagen once found that, 10 years in, technical change meant that those who had taken its apprenticeships no longer used most of what they had learned. Nor do we want nurses or doctors wedded to 20-year-old practice.
• The proposal seems pretty Stalinist. Markets are supposed to work not via administrative fiats, but via price signals. The way to get more catering staff, care workers or hospitality sector employees is for employers to offer higher wages and more interesting jobs. I remember visiting a college of building during enrolment week, just as the stories about plumbers earning fortunes hit the press. There were queues literally round the block. Give them the wages and they will come.
• We’re endlessly told there’s too much media studies. Media provides a bigger chunk of GNP than the fishermen and the farmers for whom Brexiters weep – and not everyone studying media plans to work in that industry. Media studies is an important part of modern general education – especially in a world of fake news, where information is filtered by newspapers owned by rich tax exiles, where the internet berates “MSM” whilst being even less accurate itself. Understanding better the world we live in, and vote in, is vital.
• Note how this proposal is restricted to students at training providers and FE colleges. There is no intention to extend it to universities. If Jessica and Ollie want to study History of Art (like Kate and William), or Classical Literature (like Boris Johnson), well, that’s OK. The needs of the labour force are not mentioned. That cohort will continue to enjoy freedom of choice, despite the argument being pretty much the same.
• Lastly, there is a point about choice and liberty. If someone wants to train as an actor, dancer or journalist, in the full knowledge that the rewards are low and jobs rare, let them. A lifetime of regret, if-only and what-if, is never happy.
Of course we don’t want students leaving college to find that there is no call for their skills. But the place to start is the demand-side, not the supply-side. This implies a bigger role for careers education – a well-funded and expert service for adults as well as teenagers. The other need is for a well-funded and organised continuing education offer. Jobs will change, and so will people; employers will train to upskill their staff, but people often want to – or have to – change jobs. Continuing education, from evening classes to university adult admissions, needs to be reinstated and expanded. What we emphatically don’t need is direction from those who are not on the frontline, and do not have to balance a college budget or talk to students.
Interesting fact: She is a big fan of Newcastle United and a frequent winner of FE Week Spot the Difference.
Sarah Houghton, Assistant principal for land-based education, The Cornwall College Group
Start date: May 2020
Previous job: Assistant principal for land-based curriculum, Reaseheath College
Interesting fact: She has a horse called Duke, who “is the love of my life” and has been with her for 12 years.
Anita Lall, Vice principal for curriculum and quality, Craven College
Start date: February 2020
Previous job: Assistant principal for quality, Bradford College
Interesting fact: She once had to drive across the country to deliver a donor bone marrow for a transplant patient in an icebox on the front seat of her car.
Everyone should support efforts to host the WorldSkills international competition, says college leader and former psychologist to Team UK, Jo Maher, because the benefits to UK plc are far-reaching and promote economic growth
My role as psychologist and team leader for WorldSkills Team UK meant that I was lucky enough to attend five international skills competitions all over the world. It is widely known that I think WorldSkills is a transformational experience for competitors, and that world-class standards need to be the benchmark for our skills system.
However, I have never spoken about the competition itself as a major event, nor the wider economic and cultural benefits that hosting a WorldSkills competition event can bring to the host nation. In line with FE Week’s ‘Back the Bid’ campaign, I hope to offer some insights and reflections on the wider economic returns an event of this scale can bring to the UK, and how home advantage can benefit competitors.
Why wouldn’t we back a bid?
Many of you will have attended WorldSkills UK Live (formerly the Skills Show) at the NEC in Birmingham, or have been to another large event at the venue that you can picture. In terms of scale, it is not an exaggeration to say that on the international stage for WorldSkills, you can multiply the size of the event by four to get a feel for why I refer to it as a major event.
Every WorldSkills competition is supported by a full conference-style exhibition. At WorldSkills Kazan this was an Expo, and the event included 137 strategic partners and suppliers – among them, Samsung, Coca-Cola, Siemens and Volvo.
The Department for International Trade (DIT) in the UK drives inward and outward investment, and we know that even with technological changes it is people that ‘do’ business, with face-to-face still being the preferred way to make things happen. Bringing together delegates from over 60 countries at WorldSkills, as well as global companies and suppliers, with structured visits from UK plc, creates a platform for business. Host venues normally ensure official delegates and politicians from each country are able to host breakout meetings in the venues. The setting creates the opportunity for businesses to engage with each other – but also to promote their business to over 100,000 people at the same time.
One School, One Country is a program that each host nation runs at WorldSkills in the week before the event, connecting each of the 60-plus countries with schools from across the host country.
The international competitors and support staff engage in cultural exchange and careers programs with the school. Work happens in the months prior to the competition to create meaningful engagement, and the visits are a celebration of the relationship. The aim is to create a legacy around skills competition and to raise career aspirations.
A cultural programme for competitors and support staff takes place in the build-up to the competition, as well as on the day after (while the marking takes place).
The cultural programme promotes tourism and heritage and has benefits to the host companies involved through on-sale activity. In addition, there are thousands of supporters who travel from abroad to watch the competition, and who engage in tourism- and hospitality-related activities while in the country.
Blue chip companies, such as Toyota, enter teams from their sites across the globe. In many cases, their competitors then become their internal trainers to raise standards for their company and to develop skills. The work of FETL and the RSA and WorldSkills UK demonstrates how skills competitions can be used as a platform for global skills innovation. WorldSkills creates communities of knowledge which use world-class standards as a base point.
In competition, world-class serves as the benchmark for a medallion of excellence, but gold medal standard is the pinnacle. Therefore, it is no surprise that some of the world’s best companies want their employees to operate at these standards.
The benefits to UK plc for hosting WorldSkills international competition are far-reaching and promote economic growth. Add in the transformational impact on competitors’ lives and why wouldn’t we back a bid?
A major energy firm was among six training providers to be rated ‘good’ by Ofsted in a positive week for the sector.
SSE Services PLC, the national utility company which providers energy to nine million households, kept its ‘good’ rating following a short inspection.
The employer provider has just over 150 apprentices who “benefit from a comprehensive training programme that enables them to become skilled craft workers across a wide range of roles within the utility industry,” according to the education watchdog.
Its report added that leaders and managers have “developed an apprenticeship curriculum that enables the company to address its need to recruit and train skilled staff to meet its core strategic business objectives in a highly competitive marketplace”.
Elsewhere, independent learning provider LookFantastic Training Limited, which had 269 apprentices at the time of the inspection, retained its grade two in a full inspection.
It offers a mix of hairdressing, engineering, information technology and business administration apprenticeships.
Ofsted reported that apprentices gain “substantial new skills, knowledge and behaviours” and those with special educational needs and disabilities “do as well as their peers”.
Trainers were also praised for working well with employers to plan and deliver effective links as well as combining regular assessment with constructive verbal feedback.
Two other independent learning providers maintained their ‘good’ grade following short inspections this week.
Achievement Training Limited‘s 250 apprentices are employed in public- and private-sector organisations located across the south west of England.
Inspectors found they benefit from a curriculum that is built on “close and productive relationships” with these employers in the region.
The effectiveness of the personal and professional support staff provide was considered a key strength of the provision.
Pilot IMS provides apprenticeship training nationally to 44 apprentices, and adult learning predominantly in the Midlands region to 35 learners.
The education watchdog said apprentices “grasp quickly new concepts and skills” due to trainers’ expert knowledge while adult learners also made “good progress” because of the support they receive from their trainers in and outside of the classroom.
In addition, it was reported that leaders worked “closely with employers to design a challenging curriculum for learners and apprentices to build their knowledge, skills and the behaviours needed for further learning and employment”.
Two adult and community learning providers, Gateshead Council and Kent Community Learning and Skills, also retained grade twos.
Ofsted said leaders, managers and staff at Gateshead Council “share the vision of the wider council to ensure that local communities thrive” while learners and apprentices also benefit from the support and care that they receive from their tutors and support workers.
At Kent Community Learning and Skills the inspectorate reported that tutors and assessors uses their subject and vocational expertise “well” and learners and apprentices were “well prepared” for their next steps.
The other adult and community learning provider graded this week, Stoke-on-Trent Unitary Authority, was found to be making ‘significant progress’ in one area and ‘reasonable progress’ ratings in the remaining three assessed themes in a monitoring visit after being declared ‘inadequate’.
Independent learning provider Templegate Training Academy CIC has also made ‘reasonable progress’ in a follow-up monitoring visit after receiving two ‘insufficient progress’ grades in its first.
Staffordshire University similarly was graded ‘reasonable progress’ across the board in a monitoring visit following a grade three rating.
However, Ashorne Hill Management College, the final independent learning provider to have an Ofsted report published this week, was found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in two out of three assessed themes after an early monitoring visit.
Leaders and managers, who have a “long history” in delivering leadership and management programmes, have “not made sure that all apprentices receive their entitlement to study away from their job”.
They were also criticised for not tracking the progress apprentices make “well enough”.
The remaining FE providers to be rated this week both received grade threes.
Employer provider Took Us A Long Time Limited ‘requires improvement’, according to Ofsted, following its first full inspection. It was previously suspended from recruiting apprentices after it was found making ‘insufficient progress’ in an early monitoring report published in May.
United Colleges Group, a general FE college, also received a grade three in its first inspection since being established by a merger in August 2017. The grade has put the group’s planned T-levels delivery in jeopardy (full story here).
The government is reviewing whether a large college group approved to start delivering T-levels from 2021 should be kicked off the programme after receiving a grade three from Ofsted.
United Colleges Group, which is lined up to offer the digital and construction courses, was told it ‘requires improvement’ in a report released this week.
When asked by FE Week what will happen to United College Group’s ability to offer T-levels, a Department for Education spokesperson said they will work “closely” with the group to look at the issues raised by the report, and “will make a decision in due course”.
They informed providers when they were selected that the DfE “reserved the right to review a provider’s continued participation”.
A DfE spokesperson said they will consider each case on its merits then decide whether the provider can continue to participate; and will discuss any changes with the provider before a decision is made to “ensure we are taking a fair and consistent approach, taking into account the needs of learners”.
The time invested by institutions and the work done to prepare students may also impact on the decision, as will the extent of any issues outlined in the Ofsted report.
If United Colleges Group is dropped from T-levels, it will be another blow to London’s access to the new qualifications, dealt barely two weeks after Richmond-upon-Thames College withdrew from provision.
FE Week analysis revealed no providers in the capital will be offering the construction course this year and, after Richmond’s departure, none south of the river will offer it from 2021.
Only United Colleges Group, Barking and Dagenham College and Newham Sixth Form College – all based north of the Thames – are scheduled to deliver.
A United Colleges spokesperson said they will be discussing their planned T-level provision with the DfE, but have made “huge progress” since being formed two years ago and welcomed the fact Ofsted recognised this.
“We are already seeing improvement and we’re confident that the steps we have taken will deal with the issues raised in the report.”
Inspectors at the group decided that since being formed from a merger of City and Westminster College and College of North West London, the group had failed to maintain those colleges’ grade two.
After that 2017 merger a significant number of senior staff have left, there has been disruption to courses and the management of those courses “is not yet effective enough”.
Teaching is also “not good enough for younger learners” and teachers do not consistently challenge them to extend their knowledge or apply it to new situations.
“Learners are confused about what they are learning and find it challenging to build on their knowledge and skills,” because teachers do not effectively assess gaps in learners’ knowledge and skills to understand what in the course needs reinforcing.
Too many learners and apprentices do not attend their taught sessions “frequently enough,” and not enough of their teachers challenge their poor punctuality.
The watchdog did report United Colleges Group’s governors took effective action to set up a new leadership team following the merger, and both they and the senior leaders evaluate the curriculum well.
Safeguarding was found to be effective as leaders and managers have implemented appropriate checks to ensure staff are safe to work with learners and staff are appropriately trained in both safeguarding and the ‘Prevent’ duty.
