The beleaguered National College for HS2 blew £73,000 on a failed legal attempt at stopping Ofsted publishing a grade four report, a Freedom of Information request has revealed.

The National College for Advanced Transport and Infrastructure (NCATI) provided the figure to FE Week after the college went to the High Court in the hope of suppressing the watchdog’s findings.

In February, Ofsted struck a deal to pay their own legal fees in return for the college dropping their judicial review.

The education watchdog has now told FE Week it spent just £12,500 on the case.

NCATI said its decision to go to court was taken following “full and careful consideration” and after they received advice from “leading legal counsel of a strong likelihood of success”, which was assessed “rigorously” against the costs and benefits of proceeding.

When Ofsted’s report was published last month, it revealed employers had to fill in gaps in their apprentices’ skills left by NCATI.

It also found that management and staff did not act quickly enough to protect apprentices from harassment.

“Staff did not prioritise the welfare and safeguarding needs of the apprentice over the needs of others in the class,” the report said, while also stating the college’s safeguarding arrangements are “not effective”.

The college was allowed to fund the legal challenge despite currently surviving on government bailouts and being in formal intervention, as the Department for Education has said it is an “independent organisation”.

Universities minister Michelle Donelan wrote to NCATI, in a letter published in February, confirming the college would be placed in supervised college status “in light of the severity of the college’s financial situation”.

This came after FE Commissioner Richard Atkins found that “without a commitment of 12 months of continued emergency funding, NCATI’s board will not be able to sign off on their 2018-19 financial statements as a going concern”.

The costs from the legal challengehad also been “significant”, the commissioner’s report said, and given the college is receiving emergency funding, it was “clearly a very difficult and sensitive issue”.

A £4.55 million bailout was previously agreed to sign off the college’s 2017-18 accounts. NCATI, formerly known as the National College for High Speed Rail, ran into problems with learner recruitment as delays in announcing HS2 contractors meant employers were unable to commit to the apprentice volumes they had originally anticipated.

Despite saying it would be recruiting 2,100 learners by 2022, the college only had 187 students on roll at the time of Ofsted’s inspection in November 2019. Of those, 167 were apprentices.

A successful alternative to the business admin level 2 apprenticeship, for NHS Trusts at least, has been found, according to the government.

A blog post published by the Education & Skills Funding Agency last week lauded the level 2 customer service programme as a viable replacement.

It has been used in Leeds Teaching Hospitals, which said the standard has proven to be “versatile, and we have used it in a range of roles within corporate services and clinical settings”, such as patient-booking services, reception areas, HR and radiology.

They have 50 apprentices currently on the programme, being delivered through Leeds City College.

Jordan Faithwaite, the education, learning and organisational development manager at Leeds Teaching Hospitals, said in each setting the apprentices meet a “range of internal and external staff, patients and families, which provides experiences that enable the apprentices to achieve their required competencies”.

“Previously, the level 2 business administration apprenticeship would have been used in these areas, but the customer service apprenticeship has supported apprentices to undertake their administrative duties while also focusing on the level and delivery of service and customer experience,” she added.

But Rob Brookes, an NHS apprenticeship lead, hit out at the ESFA’s blog and said: “What a disgrace… Are they advocating the use of a standard that’s not relevant to a job role? That really fits with apprenticeship policy doesn’t it?”

He added: “I know it can work and is working for some, but it’s paperingover the cracks a bit and it only really works for patient-facing admin staff.

“I have heard that apprentices can use colleagues as ‘internal customers’, but that’s manipulating the situation to fit the apprenticeship. Not ideal, in my opinion.”

An alternative to the popular level 2 business admin framework is needed as it will be officially switched off from July 31, and the government last month outright refused to replace the programme as a new apprenticeship standard, despite lobbying by more than over 100 employers, including the NHS.

The Institute for Apprenticeships & Technical Education said the proposal did not meet the required length or quality of an apprenticeship standard.

Chief executive Jennifer Coupland then told FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference that signing off on the standard would “undermine” efforts to create a “wellregarded” programme.

Health Education England told FE Week it is aware of a “handful of NHS trusts nationally” that are now using the level 2 customer service apprenticeship standard where they would have previously used the level 2 business admin framework.

However, they warned this “only works for a limited number of jobroles” and therefore might not be suitable for all types of employers.

The ESFA’s blog admitted that there “may be other standards that will work better for your business if you are currently using the business administration framework at level 2”, including, for example, the level 3 business admin standard.

A major sector body has rejected nearly half the proposals in a government consultation which aims to radically overhaul subcontracting rules.

Ten recommendations were put forward by the Education and Skills Funding Agency in its ‘subcontracting post-16 education and training’ consultation, which closed on March 17.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers, which represents hundreds of providers and employers, did not support four of them, including the idea that subcontracting partners ought to be no more than “one hour away from the prime contractor by car”.

Instead, the AELP argues, the focus should be on the whereabouts of the learner or employer, and subcontracted learners “should be in the same region as any direct delivery” – it should not based on “the location of the subcontractor’s head office”.

Another of the agency’s proposals, to limit the ESFA-funded post-16 learning a provider may subcontract through a percentage cap on subcontracting which steadily reduces over time, has also run up against AELP opposition.

The setting and applying of arbitrary percentages is “not helpful,” the association says, as “inappropriate” limits will “damage learners, communities and employers”.

The ESFA also wants to make prime providers inform them when they intend to subcontract entire programmes from 2020/21, and will make providers seek permission from 2021/22.

This is already in place for apprenticeships, but the AELP said the agency must consider those are longer and more complex than the post-16 training programmes being discussed in this consultation.

As many adult education budget and European Social Fund programmes are “considerably shorter”, it would be “impractical and inappropriate” to expect prime providers to deliver just a part of the training or assessment, the association argues.

They warn if more than one provider was involved, it could also harm the relationship between the provider and the learner and employer.

However, the AELP wants the government to take firmer action in certain areas.

As part of a proposal for providers to publish more information about the funding it keeps from subcontractors, the agency says it “expects” the prime to retain no more than 20 per cent, as it is worried about the impact retaining more has on training quality.

Whereas the AELP believes calling that an expectation “does not go far enough to address the issue of profiteering that the ESFA say they are wanting to rule out”, and the 20 per cent should be a specific policy instead.

Main providers also ought to be “open and transparent” with fees and charges, the AELP states, and should publish them on their website and also make payment terms “clearly” defined in the contract between the main and the subcontractor.

Those fees and charges, the association adds, should relate to the delivery of training – separate from other payments to enhance delivery like incentive payments for AELP not convinced with subcontracting overhaul supporting younger apprentices.

Chief executive Mark Dawe criticised the ESFA for “going down the road again of burdening the sector with more unnecessary red tape”, saying if the current rules had been enforced they wouldn’t be revisiting the matter.

AELP has now called for all subcontractors to be inspected directly by Ofsted, regardless of their size.

The association also repeats its proposal for the whole adult education budget, including what has been devolved to mayoral combined authorities, to be put out to tender.

Dawe summed up his association’s contribution by saying instead of “a complex rewriting of the rulebook” the government should be “encouraging the procurement of as much funding as possible to substantially increase the amount of direct provision by good providers with local delivery arms”.

The ESFA’s consultation was launched last month after a series of subcontracting scandals, most recently at Brooklands College, which resulted in the ESFA demanding clawback in the region of £20 million.

The ESFA plans to start implementing rule changes at the start of 2020/21.

A college is set to sell a campus for up to £10 million in the coming days despite local opposition, after being told by a minister to “prioritise” the sale to protect its solvency.

Developers have already been given the green light by the local council to demolish and build 108 homes at Warrington & Vale Royal College’s (WVRC) Hartford campus, which closed in March 2018 with a loss of 75 jobs.

The college has been trying to finalise a deal to sell the site ever since.

While the college has remained tight-lipped on the sale and the reasons behind its delay, one of its governors and local councillor, Sam Naylor, disclosed to FE Week that WVRC is selling to developer Lane End for a sum between £5 million and £10 million by the end of March.

The college declined to comment on whether the deal would be postponed amid the coronavirus crisis.

In February, a report published by FE Commissioner Richard Atkins warned the college’s “very weak” financial position put it at “significant risk of insolvency”.

A letter by then-minister for the FE market, Lord Agnew, published alongside the report, said WVRC could go broke by 2020-21 “unless appropriate steps are taken to secure the liquidity of the college”, adding that the “importance of this sale to ensuring the future viability of the college cannot be overstated”.

But the move has been opposed by local MP Mike Amesbury (pictured), who believes the provider ought to have made a “more concerted effort” to develop “a good FE offer to our community”.

He also laid into the government for cuts to the FE sector which have been “frankly, devastating” and have left colleges like WVRC in “significant financial difficulty”.

“I hear lots of talk about this government wanting to level up opportunities between the north and the south,” Amesbury said. “The college site will now be levelled down to rubble then houses, built against the wishes of local residents, put in its place.”

He “firmly believes the college should not have taken this decision and left young people unable to access further education in their home town”.

He has previously called for principal Nicola Newton to step down over the decision and he also launched a petition calling for the plans to be withdrawn, attracting nearly 3,000 signatures.

WVRC was formed in August 2017 from a merger of Mid Cheshire College and Warrington Collegiate, and Amesbury said that within months a “very valuable piece of real estate was closed and put up for sale”.

The site had £10 million spent on it in 2012 and featured a construction skills centre, sports facilities and a performing arts building with an auditorium, according to the BBC.

WVRC refused to respond to Amesbury’s opposition. Developer Lane End has also not responded to requests for comment.

This is not the first college to sell off land to help balance the books, and not the first such sale to run into opposition from parliamentarians: Rother Valley MP Alexander Stafford arranged to meet personally with Atkins after RNN Group announced it would be closing its Dinnington campus – something Stafford called a “huge blow”.

Then-Stourbridge MP and government minister Margot James organised a debate in parliament in October to discuss BMet’s sale of her constituency’s campus. The site later sold for £1.45 million less than the sum that was spent on a refurbishment in 2015.

Conservative MP Sheryll Murray called for a government inquiry into the closure of Cornwall’s Saltash campus in her area, following a £30 million bailout for the group last year.

Education secretary Gavin Williamson has written to college leaders, independent training and adult education providers today to thank them for their “expertise and ingenuity” in the face of the coronavirus pandemic.

 

Here is the letter in full:

Over the past week this nation has entered a truly unprecedented phase and as a government, we have had to take some exceptional steps to deal with the challenge that we are facing.  As education secretary, taking the decision to close all education institutions and cancel this summer’s exams and assessments was not only enormous, it was incredibly difficult. 

I am aware of the challenges that everyone in the further education sector and all those educating young people and adults over 16 years old are facing. I want to express my deepest gratitude for the absolutely vital service that you are providing to young people, adults, and of course your local communities – for which I know colleges and further education institutions play a central role. It is thanks to your hard work on the frontline of our national effort that learners have stability and support to continue their studies and vulnerable young people continue to be cared for.

In a week of unique circumstances, one thing that hasn’t surprised me is the resilience, resourcefulness and real commitment of you all. Your sector has not only risen to the challenge, its expertise and ingenuity has shone through – using creativity and technology to keep the show on the road for the thousands of learners who rely on you. I have heard some fantastic stories of staff and leaders moving swiftly to online learning, sharing teaching resources and supporting local schools to ensure vulnerable children and children of key workers are cared for. 

I know that this will be a difficult and testing time for you all – both personally and professionally. We are in a crisis that seems to touch every aspect of our lives and I know you will be anxious about the wellbeing of your teams and learners that you support. We have published initial guidance on how best to keep staff and students safe, along with some more practical guidance on the implications of Covid-19 on the running and funding of your institutions.  Working closely with the minister for apprenticeships and skills Gillian Keegan, we will continue to review this and stay alive to the challenges you are facing and how we can best respond.  

On behalf of the Prime Minister and the entire government, thank you once again for all your work.