Highbury College principal to retire next summer

A principal at the centre of an expenses scandal announced her retirement today after 18 years at the helm.

Stella Mbubaegbu will leave her position at Highbury College in the summer next year. 

This follows accusations of the lavish spending of college funds, revealed by FE Week in September.

In a statement released on Highbury College’s website Stella Mbubaegbu CBE said: “In the summer of 2019, I informed my Board of Governors of my intention to retire from my post in a year’s time (end of July 2020).

“I deeply care about and am extremely proud of Highbury College. It has been an immense joy and privilege to serve the College, its diverse communities and the wider FE sector over the past two decades. 

“I am proud of my contributions to Highbury, steering the College through the turbulent times that FE has seen over the past 8 years with funding cuts and policy changes, positioning Highbury on the global education map, the transformation of the College estate, the uncompromising approach to educational and social inclusion and our Ofsted outstanding for 7 years.

“The Board will be initiating the search for my successor in the coming weeks, with my full support, and I will focus on continuing to lead this amazing College and its amazing staff and students with passion and commitment.”

She was awarded a CBE in the 2008 New Year Honours for services to further education.

Ministers ordered the FE Commissioner to investigate the principal’s “deeply concerning” corporate credit card use in September after £150,000 was spent in just four years.

More than 500 receipts obtained by FE Week showed college funds were spent on first class flights, five-star hotels, travel in luxury cars and a £350 bill – including a £45 lobster and nearly £100 on cocktails – at a Michelin star restaurant.

These expenses were exposed following a year-long freedom of information battle with the college, which is based in Portsmouth.

At the time Department for Education minister Lord Theodore Agnew, who oversees the FE Commissioner, said he and education secretary Gavin Williamson were “deeply concerned by these revelations” and he had “already asked the FE Commissioner to urgently look into this matter.”

“School and college leaders must treat taxpayers’ money with the utmost care and in a way that benefits their students. Where this does not happen we take the strongest possible action,” Lord Agnew added.

Mrs Mbubaegbu’s expenditure took place over a period of redundancies at the college, which axed its sixth form two months ago, amid deteriorating finances. The last time staff got a pay rise was in January 2013.

Its Ofsted grade also dropped from ‘outstanding’ to ‘requires improvement.’

Minutes published from a board meeting in May show international and first class travel have been restricted and lunch and alcoholic drink claims have been banned.

A £2,000 limit was also been placed on the principal’s corporate card although the college would not say whether this was a monthly or annual limit.

Yesterday FE Week revealed cladding at a college’s halls of residence for students under the age of 18, the type used on the Grenfell Tower, failed a safety test several months ago. 

The college also previously called in lawyers to recover a long-running £1.4 million debt held up in Nigeria, following a technical education project in the country.

One in five providers concerned about procurement process for devolved AEB

A fifth of providers believe adult education budget tenders run by devolved authorities need to be improved, with one saying bidding was a “nightmare”, according to new Association of Employment and Learning Providers research.

Ahead of their autumn conference in Manchester today, the AELP surveyed 93 providers on devolved AEB procurement after the budget was handed over to six mayoral combined authorities and the Greater London Authority in August.

The survey found transparency in the bidding process was one area where changes should be made: one provider said it had been a “nightmare for bid writers” and respondents revealed they would not have bothered bidding if they had known only a few contracts were being awarded.

Twenty nine of the survey respondents won devolved AEB contracts for 2019/20, compared with 69 in 2018/19; and the value of those contracts was generally lower than last year as well, providers reported.

Respondents also complained unproven providers with good bid writers won over those with a good track record and a foothold in their local community.

The combined authorities also came in for criticism for their “poor” understanding of skills; and for “focusing on activity with residents over skills and employment partnership, so skills needs are now unmet”.

Asked which sectors or subjects they thought will be lost or significantly reduced to the point it would cause skills shortages in a devolved area, providers’ single greatest concern was for health and social care, followed by retail and commercial – but respondents acknowledged there are wider factors at play in that area.

Respondents wanted consistency across areas as well, saying dealings with some MCAs were “overly-complex”, while others were “too light touch to make credible judgements”.

Regulations also left providers vexed, with reports providers that complied with guidance were unsuccessful due to a technical point which appeared to contradict guidance.

FE Week approached the six mayoral combined authorities with an AEB devolution deal, as well as the Greater London Authority.

The GLA’s deputy mayor for skills Jules Pipe said: “As City Hall takes over responsibility for London’s share of the Adult Education Budget, we are working closely with education and skills providers and investing in new projects to ensure all Londoners have access to the training and education they need.

“Following significant engagement with the sector we awarded 29 contracts totalling £130 million to deliver the AEB programme, and are currently reviewing the key lessons learned from the procurement process.”

A spokesperson for the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority said: “We have been evaluating the process for procuring services to develop a system which is accessible, transparent and delivers contracts that best meets our skills objectives.

“The report’s findings will be read with interest as part of our ongoing work to improve.”

The AELP said respondents gave a “reasonably positive verdict overall to the series of AEB tenders”, and chief executive Mark Dawe said it was hoped the survey will help combined authorities and the national government “finesse their approach during a recognised period of transition”.

Over 80 per cent of responses to the AELP’s survey said it was difficult or very difficult to engage with a lead or prime provider; only seven said it was easy or very easy.

The survey confirmed one reason for this was prime providers had a reduced budget, leaving them nothing left to subcontract out.

Another problem, according to the report, was: “Unsuccessful partners and others seeking subcontracts weren’t given the names of the AEB contract winners, so had to ring around to ask and sometimes couldn’t find who it was.”

But respondents also said contract winners were now seeking new partnerships, which indicated they requested more than they could use.

Dawe said: “We knew they were never going to be plain sailing and it was only the first year of a transitional process.

“If notice is taken of the AELP survey findings and the combined authorities start to procure more of the budget in future years, we could well be on the right track to the AEB delivering the much-needed skills that the English regions require.”

Ofsted watch: Week ends with flurry of new reports

It has been a mixed week for FE providers amid a flurry of new reports published on Friday by Ofsted, including the first 13 under the new Education Inspection Framework (EIF).

Nine providers were found to be ‘good,’ out of a total of 23 reports released today.

Those with grade two included six independent learning providers, one adult and community learning provider, one general further education college and one specialist college.

Two general further education colleges and the only employer provider to be assessed this week were graded “requires improvement.”

However, the only provider to receive a grade four told FE Week today that the company has appealed.

Independent learning provider Mercia Partnership (UK) Ltd was labelled ‘inadequate’ by the inspectorate after previously receiving a ‘good’ grade.

Employer provider Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust was graded as “requires improvement” in its first full inspection.

The healthcare service had 38 apprentices on a level 3 team leading standards-based apprenticeship during the inspection.

While inspectors found they enjoyed the programme and receive good support from staff, the report stated “apprentices do not benefit enough from a well-planned curriculum that links their theory sessions with workplace practice and assessment.”

Coventry College failed to improve its grade from “requires improvement” and received a grade three in every area that was assessed in the most recent inspection.

At the time of the inspection, 3,085 learners were on young people education programmes, 2,375 learners were on adult learning programmes and there were 463 apprentices.

Inspectors praised the new governors for having “a good understanding of the college’s curriculum” and providing “leaders with effective challenge to improve provision.”

The new college was formed when City College Coventry and Henley College Coventry merged in August 2017.

Ofsted stated learners and apprentices are generally positive about the quality of the training on offer but “many feel that it could be improved”.

The report criticised teachers and assessors at the college for “not routinely review learners’ and apprentices’ work well enough” and failing to provide “sufficiently helpful feedback for them to extend their knowledge.”

CEO of Coventry College Gill Banks said: “We are pleased that the report provides a fair outline of the improvements already made at Coventry College.

“The Ofsted process and the report itself have enabled us to focus our collective and continuing efforts in making sure Coventry College succeeds as the largest general further education provider in the heart of our regenerating and booming city.”

The Sheffield College, the other further general education college to receive grade three, “requires improvement” for the third inspection in a row.

In 2018/19, the college had over 15,000 learners and apprentices enrolled on courses.

The overall effectiveness of the quality of education, leadership and management, education programmes for young people, apprenticeships and provision for learners with high needs at the college all were considered to be of grade three standard.

Although the education watchdog praised the confidence, self-belief and career aspirations developed by staff in attendees, it stated “too many apprentices and learners on study programmes do not develop the knowledge and skills expected of them.”

The report also noted that senior leaders have “taken action to address the significant weaknesses in the quality of education” since the previous inspection.

Angela Foulkes, Chief Executive and Principal at The Sheffield College, said: “We are pleased that Ofsted has recognised our students enjoy their studies, feel safe and receive good pastoral support and that we have successfully improved adult education.

“We are committed to being a consistently great college and our staff are working hard on the areas that are not yet good.” 

Independent learning providers CQM Training And Consultancy Limited, Fuel Learning Limited and JM Recruitment Education & Training Ltd were graded ‘good’ in their first full inspections.

Other independent learning providers Norman Mackie & Associates Limited and Woodspeen Training Limited moved up from “requires improvement” to “good.”

Independent learning provider Digital Telecoms Network Academy Limited maintained its grade two as did general further education college North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College.

However, Kirklees Council Adult and Community Learning, the only adult and community learning provider to be graded this week, dropped from being considered “outstanding” to “good.”

Two specialist colleges, Expanse Group Ltd and Moulton College, received monitoring visits from Ofsted this week following grade three and grade four evaluations on previous inspections.

Expanse Group Ltd made ‘reasonable progress’ in the two themes assessed by the education watchdog but Moulton College was found to have made ‘insufficient progress’ in raising the expectations teachers have of what students should know and be able to do – one of three areas evaluated.

Independent learning provider CSJ Training Limited was assessed to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in two out of three themes for its adult learning provision after a monitoring visit.

These were “designing and delivering relevant adult learning provision that has a clearly defined purpose” and ensuring “learners benefit from high quality adult education that prepares them well” for their next steps.

In contrast, the other adult learning provider to receive a monitoring visit this week, Bock Consultancy & Personnel Development Limited, was graded as having made ‘reasonable progress’ across the board.

All six apprenticeship providers which received monitoring visits this week were graded as having made ‘reasonable progress’ in every assessed theme.

These were: Education and Skills Training & Development Limited, Elev8 Training Limited, Eliesha Training Limited, Grey Seal Academy Limited, Lean Engineering and Manufacturing Academy Limited and RM Training (UK) Limited.

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Bock Consultancy & Personnel Development Limited 12/09/2019 20/10/2019 M 3
CQM Training And Consultancy Limited 20/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 M
CSJ Training Limited 02/10/2019 21/10/2019 M N/A
Digital Telecoms Network Academy Limited 20/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 2
Education and Skills Training & Development Limited 10/10/2019 25/10/2019 M N/A
Elev8 Training Limited 01/10/2019 25/10/2019 M N/A
Eliesha Training Limited 03/10/2019 22/10/2019 M N/A
Fuel Learning Limited 27/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 M
Grey Seal Academy Limited 18/09/2019 21/10/2019 M N/A
JM Recruitment Education & Training Ltd 20/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 N/A
Lean Engineering And Manufacturing Academy Limited 13/09/2019 25/10/2019 M N/A
Mercia Partnership (UK) Ltd 20/09/2019 25/10/2019 4 2
Norman Mackie & Associates Limited 19/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 3
RM Training (UK) Limited 02/10/2019 24/10/2019 M N/A
Woodspeen Training Limited 13/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 3

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Kirklees Council Adult and Community Learning 27/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 1

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust 20/09/2019 25/10/2019 3 M

 

GFE colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Coventry College 20/09/2019 25/10/2019 3 3
The Sheffield College 27/09/2019 25/10/2019 3 3
North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College 27/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 2

 

Specialist colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Expanse Group Ltd 03/10/2019 21/10/2019 M 3
Freeman College 19/09/2019 25/10/2019 2 2
Moulton College 02/10/2019 21/10/2019 M 4

 

First Ofsted grade 4 challenged by provider

The first provider to receive grade four under Ofsted’s new inspection regime has appealed.

Independent learning provider Mercia Partnership (UK) Ltd, which delivers a range of apprenticeships and adult learning programmes, was found to be inadequate by Ofsted inspectors.

It received grade four in every assessed area except adult learning programmes, which received grade three.

A spokesperson for Mercia Partnership told FE Week the company has appealed the grade.

The report was one of the first 13 published by Ofsted today under the new Education Inspection Framework (EIF).

Ofsted would not confirm an appeal has been lodged.

A spokesperson for the inspectorate said: “We do not comment on complaints or correspondence with individual providers.”

Mercia Partnership operates from two centres in Lancashire and in East Sussex and has 147 apprentices and 51 learners studying adult learning programmes, funded through the advanced learner loan programme.

As of 2017/18 it provided training in 79 different local authorities, with over half of all provision being in health, public services and care and around one in five apprentices training in information and communication technology.

The majority of the apprenticeship delivery takes place in employers’ businesses and two subcontractors provide apprenticeship programmes in the north west and the south west of England, mainly in childcare.

Adult learning programmes take place in community venues across the country.

The critical report stated that learners and apprentices “do not experience a well-planned programme of study” and concluded the curriculum was “not fit for purpose” and “does not prepare them sufficiently for their future careers.”

The poor careers guidance and advice resulted in many apprentices facing redundancy or extensive periods of time on a lower wage, according to the education watchdog.

It claimed apprentices “receive a poor standard of training” and are “unhappy, unmotivated, and, in some cases, very angry about the quality of their training.”

The inspectorate also found that apprentices wasted their time in skills and knowledge training in topics they already knew before the scheme.

Leaders and managers were criticised for the failure to consult sufficiently with employers and industry organisations to develop appropriate content.

Ofsted found that high staff turnover had “a negative impact” on apprentices’ learning with frequent changes in assessors leaving “significant gaps” in the training programme.

The inspectors also criticised the lack of supervisory body and oversight over staff expertise and subcontractors.

Despite this, it deemed the quality of training at subcontractors as of a higher standard than that delivered by Mercia.

The report said that leaders were “culpable” and have failed to ensure programmes meet the requirements of an apprenticeship.

However, praise was reserved for the safeguarding arrangements at Mercia Partnership which were described as “effective” and “appropriate.”

All staff had received training on safeguarding and the ‘Prevent’ duty while leaders and managers also ensure that staff recruitment processes include appropriate checks on suitability.

Despite this, the report warned more links need to be nurtured with local agencies to gather intelligence and too many apprentices “could not confidently articulate” what steps to take to keep themselves safe from potential risks.

Ofsted concluded Mercia Partnership needed to urgently carry out a systematic review of the curriculum, ensure that all staff have the skills and knowledge to deliver apprenticeship programmes and rapidly improve the quality of education.

It also recommended that assessments must be fit for purpose and that the results are used by staff to plan learning that develops apprentices’ skills and knowledge and the quality of advice is improved so learners and apprentices have the knowledge required to make future choices.

This inspection of Mercia Partnership took place between September 17 and 20.

Prior to this the independent learning provider had been graded ‘good’ in the most recent full inspection in 2015, ‘requires improvement’ in 2014 and ‘satisfactory’ in both 2012 and 2008.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Mercia Partnership has been rated as inadequate by Ofsted. We are considering Ofsted’s report and will write to the provider in due course.”

Ofsted reveal new inspection report – all 13 of them

Ofsted has this morning published the first provider reports under the new Education Inspection Framework (EIF), all 13 of them.

The 13 inspections that took place in September include nine grade 2s, three grade 3s and one grade 4 (see list with links to the reports below).

The report format, seen for the first time today, is considerably shorter than those under the previous Common Inspection Framework (CIF) and no longer includes learner number summary tables.

More to follow…

Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust (3)

Coventry College (3)

CQM Training And Consultancy Limited (2)

Digital Telecoms Network Academy Limited (2)

Freeman College (2)

Fuel Learning Limited (2)

JM Recruitment Education & Training Ltd (2)

Kirklees Council Adult and Community Learning (2)

Mercia Partnership (UK) Ltd (4)

Norman Mackie & Associates Limited (2)

North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College (2)

The Sheffield College (3)

Woodspeen Training Limited (2)

 

 

Were college’s students told cladding on halls of residence ‘failed’ a fire safety test?

The cladding at a college’s halls of residence for students under the age of 18, the type used on the Grenfell Tower, failed a safety test several months ago.

But speaking to FE Week the chair of governors “can’t remember” and a spokesperson “declined to comment” on whether the board or resident students were ever told.

Highbury College, in Portsmouth, has applied to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) for up to £5 million to replace “non-compliant” panelling, which according to the architects “failed” a safety test.

The top five floors of the 10 story tower contain 75 bedrooms, according to the college website (see below), 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.

The college application form also states: “All accommodation for students aged under 18 meets the requirements of the Ofsted Social Care Common Inspection Framework”

However, a spokesperson for Ofsted told FE Week: “Ofsted is not the registration authority for further education residential provision – this falls to the Department for Education (DfE). Colleges providing residential provision for under-18s should inform the ESFA. This college isn’t currently listed in DfE/ESFA data, which we rely on to inspect. We are seeking clarification about the situation from DfE/ESFA.”

The college declined to comment on how many students currently occupy the 75 bedrooms, but confidential board minutes seen by FE Week suggests a significant decline in international students this year.

The group finance director told the college board of governors in March 2019 that income had dipped because fewer international students were coming to the college after the Home Office suspended their Tier 4 Sponsor licence after the college was awarded an Ofsted inspection grade three in June 2018.

It is understood that as many as 40 international students had been studying A levels and the loss of the Home Office licence was attributed in a large part to the cutting of all A level provision this year. A Tier 4 licence allows education institutions to sponsor international students to study in the UK.

The minutes also make it clear that the group finance director told the board he was confident the multi-million-pound re-cladding project would be “100% funded by the ESFA”.

ECD Architects, employed by the college to develop the project, said: “The Tower which is part of Portsmouth Highbury College is a 10-storey block consisting of education facilities and student accommodation. The Tower was constructed in the early 1970’s and was re-clad in 2001 by another Architecture practice, but recently underwent the BRE Cladding Screening Test and failed.”

And “The existing ACM rainscreen cladding is being removed and will be replaced with a new cladding system.”

ACM, or aluminium composite material, is the same cladding material at the heart of the ongoing investigation into the cause of the rapid spread of fire at the Grenfell Tower in June 2017.

Following the Grenfell Tower tragedy and loss of 72 lives, the ministry of housing communities and local government (MHCLG) began a programme of fire safety testing samples of panels at the BRE laboratory facilities in Watford.

FE Week asked the college and the DfE, as well as the MHCLG and BRE laboratory, but was unable to ascertain when the testing on the Highbury College cladding took place.

Portsmouth City Council gave planning consent for the new cladding and windows last month according to their website, but the DfE would not comment on the scale of the funding application nor the likelihood of it being granted.

A DfE spokesperson did tell FE Week: “The college has made an application to the ESFA for funding for their re-cladding project. The Department for Education will announce the outcome of this application in due course.”

When pressed, the college declined to comment specifically on whether or when the board of governors or student residents had been told about the failed safety test or why the group finance director was so sure the ESFA would pay all the costs.

However, a Highbury College spokesperson did say: “The safety and wellbeing of our students and staff is of upmost importance and we continue to fully engage with the government-wide work, including all relevant agencies, to ensure all of our buildings are safe including the ongoing project to replace the cladding.  The project has recently received full planning permission and an appointment of a contractor is expected in December with a start on site soon after.  The works are expected to take 12 months.

“The Fire and Rescue Service has conducted a full fire safety check of the building and they are satisfied that the college has in place robust and appropriate fire safety measures to mitigate the risks from fire. The Fire and Rescue Service have unreservedly declared that the building is safe for continued use.

“We communicate fully with our students and residence and will continue to do so in the future.”

Towards a human-centred digital future for colleges

It’s time to stop thinking of a technological revolution and start planning for the technological transition, says Paul Feldman

Colleges don’t compete for the basics. No principal has to think carefully about students’ access to hot running water or electricity. Once upon a time, those things seemed revolutionary. Today, we can’t imagine life without them. Pretty soon, we’ll think the same way about technology.  

Technology is already all around us, changing the ways in which we live, work and learn, often for the better. But not everyone has ubiquitous access to digital tools and that includes college learners.

When technology is embedded into teaching it can open up learning to a much wider range of people, addressing their personal needs. New accessibility requirements will provide greater support, boosting student engagement, bringing about improved learning outcomes and widening participation.

Meanwhile, across the sector, some students still lack not only sufficient digital skills, but also an awareness of just how crucial those digital skills are to their future. A Jisc survey of 13,389 FE learners, published in September, highlighted some of the issues.

Just 40 per cent said they feel their course prepared them for the digital workplace, and while the Office for Students (OfS) predicts that more than a million digitally skilled people will be needed by 2022, only 49 per cent of students surveyed agreed that digital skills were needed in their chosen career.

As for our existing workforce, a 2018 World Economic Forum report says that, by 2022, the skills required to perform most jobs will have shifted and 54 per cent of all employees will require re-skilling and upskilling.

Our sector is ideally placed to address this, but it needs supportive, strategic direction, funding and frameworks. The Independent Commission on the College of the Future, which Jisc is supporting, offers an opportunity to radically rethink and reframe colleges to deliver for the UK’s future workforce.

Our sector needs supportive, strategic direction

Part of that involves looking at the innovative work already going on in colleges, sharing best practice and embracing new approaches. Some of it is about looking at how our cities, towns and rural areas are changing, considering how people live and learn, asking what roles colleges play, how learners use them, and what their future purpose could be.

Jisc’s role on the commission’s expert panel is to help explain the potential technology offers to support teaching staff and transform student outcomes. Digital is no longer the “added bonus” that helps to elevate a college from the crowd – it is about making the best use of advanced technologies.

Enabling more teachers to free up their time – using artificial intelligence to generate reports for example – is an opportunity, not a dream. Students can benefit from interactive, flexible, personalised learning, and set and track their goals while they learn.

Imagining these scenarios and countless more, we can see a future in which humans use technology to help collaboration, cut down on paperwork and create environments in which teachers and learners can  reach the information they need, when they need it. This is a key part of Jisc’s Education 4.0 vision, and we want to help colleges start their journey to transformation now.

At this point in the work of the commission, we are asking questions, identifying tensions and exploring themes that those working in the sector tell us they want to address. The commissioners are working with college leaders and workforce, learners, employers, community stakeholders and as broad a range of people as possible to identify opportunities and challenges for the colleges of the future.

They are using a series of roundtables, workshops and public events to lead the agenda on the central role that colleges can play across many public policy challenges. They welcome input and will be publishing their initial thinking for feedback this autumn.  

We know that technology will be part of the future for colleges, but it is just a tool. We want to help create proposals in which technology, like electricity, becomes commonplace, supporting the sector’s innovative, digitally-savvy humans.

AELP call for retraining scheme rethink to avoid another “expensive skills white elephant”

The National Retraining Scheme should be relaunched as a ‘traineeship for adults,’ according to the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP).

The national membership organisation recommended the creation of a form of adult traineeship for unemployed and employed participants in a policy submission ahead of a Department for Education presentation at the AELP autumn conference next week (October 29).

It said “a vital rethink is necessary” to avoid another “expensive skills white elephant” – and claimed the Employer Ownership of Skills pilot (EOP) saw “£350m of taxpayers’ money completely wasted” from 2012-2017.

An evaluation report published by the DfE last year found that EOP failed to have any impact at all.

AELP CEO Mark Dawe said: “We believe that the NRS represents good policy intent and is much needed, but the implementation has been piecemeal and it lacks a clear and coherent plan and strategy. 

“The scheme must be more than just a digital information-sharing platform if we are seriously going to tackle the adverse consequences of automation.” 

The £100m scheme aims to help adults retrain into better jobs and be ready for future changes to the economy.

During its testing phase the NRS will be rolled out to eligible adults in six areas in England in 2020.

It will support adults aged 24 and over who are already in work, do not have a qualification at degree level and are paid below a certain wage level.

In contrast, traineeships are currently available to 16 to 24-year-olds and are designed to get participants ready for an apprenticeship or job. The courses include a work placement and can last between six weeks and six months.

Mr Dawe believes a form of an adult traineeship which helps adults with no or lower levels of qualifications is needed. 

“Despite the initial injection of £100m, there remains a lack of investment in core delivery and provider participation funding,” Mr Dawe added.

The AELP labelled the NRS “challenged and “slowly rolled-out,” and claimed the recent shaping of the scheme into an information-sharing platform “simply duplicates existing government-backed job signposting initiatives.”

It called for the implementation of a scheme with “clearly defined set of outcome and progression measures,” and for providers to be “financially incentivised to support participants to both complete and progress.” 

The organisation also warned the encouragement of more demand for adult learning could “lead to further waste if mistakes with apprenticeship and adult education budget funding are repeated.” 

In AELP’s view all adult funding should be accessible to all types of providers to reduce “unjustifiable subcontracting fees.”

Other recommendations included relaxing NRS learner eligibility requirements to better address risk from automation, allowing scheme participants to top up their skills and having these formally recognised, discouraging the government from commissioning new resources where high quality tools already exist and better utilising providers with well-established track records of employer engagement.

The AELP also states more consideration should be given to the “potential legal minefield” of employees being informed that their jobs might disappear with automation, with involvement of providers, to ensure participation is not held back.

The policy proposal states this will also be beneficial for employers who will not “want to lose staff who have acquired new and attractive skills on the NRS.” 

In response to the recommendations Education Minister Michelle Donelan said: “We very much value the AELP’s feedback and will continue to engage them and providers in developing the full National Retraining Scheme.

“We will continue to listen to those adults already using Get Help to Retrain to make sure that the service helps adults to discover new opportunities and develop the skills they need to land a new job.”

The Department for Education will speak at the AELP Autumn Conference 2019 on October 29.

Don’t blame providers for the levy’s unintended consequences

Apprenticeships may have cleared one storm, but new clouds are already gathering on the horizon. Simon Ashworth charts the troubled seas that could sway ESFA apprenticeships director Keith Smith’s appearance at the AELP autumn conference on Tuesday

I can see the headlines now: “Apprentices let down by poorly performing providers”, providing meat and drink for concerned MPs in any subsequent Commons committee inquiry.

True, the introduction of the apprenticeship levy suffered from a serious misfire with the establishment of a new register of apprenticeship training providers (RoATP) which, in its first phase, saw the government allow some entirely inappropriate players to enter the market.

Ofsted’s correctly applied risk-based approach to inspecting the new entrants and the subsequent RoATP ‘refresh’ have done much to rectify matters and we are now seeing reconfirmation that at least three of four apprentices are being supported by good or outstanding training.

Yet a cloud on the horizon threatens to revive questions about the quality of apprenticeships and could see training providers unfairly blamed. The pending publication of apprenticeship success rates for 2018-19 is expected to show an overall decline on previous years’ results which have hovered around the 66 per cent benchmark.

Some good quality providers are informing AELP that their success rates will show a fall by anything up to 10 per cent, varying across programmes and sectors.

The truth is that in the vast majority of cases, the falls will have absolutely nothing to do with a decline in the quality of the training apprentices are receiving. Instead, they relate to how the official data system records changes in employer or apprentice behaviour.

What we are now seeing are unintended consequences of the levy reforms that have made apprenticeships more employer-driven. Failures are being flagged that are anything but.

Failures are being flagged that are anything but

Under the old system, for example, apprentices who changed employers would carry on the apprenticeship with the new employer with no break. Shifting funding so that it now goes through employers instead of following apprentices means that now they are automatically counted as a non-achieving leaver.

Providers report that a significant number of SME employers have stopped paying the co-investment, resulting in the apprenticeship being terminated. Generally, as soon as an employee says that they are leaving a job, they are taken off the apprenticeship scheme.

These cases will count as failures on an individual provider’s published qualification achievement rates (QAR).

Other ‘failures’ counting against providers include apprentices unable to pass their functional skills tests – even if the employer wanted them to go ahead despite an initial assessment suggesting it was unwise – and employers removing apprentices from programmes they are finding too challenging.

It is important to recognise that, along with being harder and more challenging, apprenticeship standards are now longer in duration, which brings natural employee churn more into play.

One large provider recently ran an exercise on apprenticeship non-completion reasons comparing 2016-17 (mostly pre-reform) to 2018-19. They counted employer changes of circumstances and changes which were not the fault of the employer or provider as negative outcomes. The net outcome over the 12-month period was an 8 per cent reduction in the overall completion rate.

When standards were introduced, AELP argued that using the ESFA’s legacy success rate measures on frameworks needed to be rethought.

With standards, providers are contracted to specifically deliver the on-programme training and are paid the completion payment when the apprentices undertake rather than pass the end-point assessment (EPA).

The provider facilitates the end-point process on behalf of the employer, although the ESFA want to give employers yet more control of this process. Whether they actually need to is another question. Whether employers want it is yet another.

Let’s rewind the clock to consider other important changes that should not be forgotten.

Firstly, Ofsted have been clear that data will be less important than before when it comes to inspection under the new Education Inspection Framework. This is important because the inspectorate recognises that success rates on frameworks and standards are not directly comparable.

Instead, Ofsted is judging quality of provision and will focus on the starting point of each apprentice and their development of new skills, knowledge and behaviours. Providers need to know the rationale behind their performance in terms of progression and destination data.

Secondly, the ESFA has recognised the shifting landscape. Its suspension of the timely success measure was the first sign that they acknowledged the impact from the shift from frameworks to standards, with providers no longer having 100 per cent control of the end-to-end process. The employer and EPA have not only added new complexity to the system, but critically employers now decide when the apprentice is ready for assessment.

More recently, the ESFA announced they were removing their minimum standards of success as an automatic trigger for provider intervention as part of their new approach to provider oversight and risk management.

The agency is aware of the success rate issue and is apparently willing to consider possible changes to the QAR system. For its part, AELP is clear that providers should not be the punch bag for a potentially negative story about the quality of apprenticeships.