A government commissioned review is set to heavily criticise the Education and Skills Funding Agency and their intervention regime for failing to spot when colleges get into finance trouble, FE Week understands.

Dame Mary Ney, who had a 40-year career in local government, was commissioned to undertake the review in August after the FE Commissioner’s team found Hadlow College, now in administration, had an ESFA financial health score of ‘good’.

It is expected that Ney will be particularly critical of the calculations the ESFA uses to determine the financial health scoring and grading.

We need to know more than just what the single score is

She will argue that had the agency’s formula been more robust, it could have intervened in college failures, such as that of Hadlow, much sooner.

The Ofsted grade one college has been subject to government investigations after financial irregularities were uncovered. These included submitting partial information to the ESFA in order to secure a ‘good’ financial health rating. However, according to the FE Commissioner, had the ESFA looked at their published accounts they would have rated them as ‘inadequate’.

The agency’s scoring system allows colleges to self-grade themselves by inputting three measures: one based on cash, another on debt and then margin.

This set of metrics then formulates an overall financial health grade of ‘outstanding’, ‘good’, ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’.

Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive for the Association of Colleges, said this “broadly balanced” system has been around since 1994 but is in need of change.

“A college that is reporting a big loss or got low points on their current assets, or high debt, that is all a flag. But the big issue is you have got to be certain the figures are correct, which was clearly a bit of a Hadlow issue,” he told FE Week.

“What I think is a problem is that we are not a sector full of financial analysts. Ttere is a slight danger that a college thinks their rating is fine, so nothing more needs to be done.

“We need to know more than just what the single score is ­– you need to understand what contributes to it. It is useful as one of the things in the picture, but it is not enough.”

The ESFA appears to be aware of its trouble in overseeing college finances, and has already started to make changes ahead of Ney’s report.

It was announced in September that college financial returns, which historically have been submitted at least twice a year, will from this month be consolidated into a single annual return.

The ESFA claimed this would help college governors­– and the agency – “spot signs of declining financial health and ensure preventative action can be taken at an earlier stage”.

But principals were critical of the move, with Bedford Colleges Group boss Ian Pryce commenting at the time: “You don’t wait until you hear the football results and learn your team lost 10-0 as a basis for preventing problems and poor performance. You spot things early by developing strong human relationships.”

We are not a sector full of financial analysts

On December 23 the ESFA published a new integrated financial model for colleges (IFMC), which replaced the agency’s modelling for financial plans, financial record, and cash flow forecast.

Gravatt said the new spreadsheet, which all 248 colleges must have completed by February 28, will collect more cash data and thus give the ESFA a wider overview of a college’s financial health.

“This is a spreadsheet that those colleges applying for restructuring funding – about 10 per cent of the sector – had to fill in,” he explained. “But it ­is now being extended to 100 per cent of colleges,  asking them to predict their funding for up until July 2022.”

He added that while the financial health scoring and grading hasn’t changed, the ESFA has “promised that they are going to look at changing the system”.

Ney’s report will be published ahead of a National Audit Office’s value for money review on the management of colleges’ financial sustainability, which launched in August.

FE Week understands the government’s audit watchdog will release their verdict in the summer.

The DfE declined to comment on the upcoming Ney report.

The mayor of London has attempted to reassure private providers they won’t miss out on extra English and maths funding for adult learners.

Sadiq Khan announced last month that the Greater London Authority would increase funding by £77 for every English and maths qualification at level 1 and 2 – at a cost of £2.7 million. The money will come from the adult education budget for 2020/21.

But FE Week subsequently spotted in the draft funding rules that this increase would only be given to “grant funded” providers – typically colleges and not private training providers.

The move would mean that private providers, which win AEB funding through a tender process with the GLA, would be paid less to deliver the same qualification as colleges.

Board papers for a meeting in November stated: “Further work is needed to determine whether these changes [to English and Maths funding] can be made to procured provision or whether they would undermine the integrity of the procurement process, which would open the GLA up to the risk of facing substantial financial sanctions from auditors.”

However, the GLA has told FE Week, following legal advice, they “expect” to be able to amend the funding rules so private providers can also claim the extra £77.

A spokesperson added that the authority expects private providers, like colleges, will be able to access greater support also promised by Khan to train staff to support learners with special educational needs and disabilities.

The decision as to whether to pay private providers the same as colleges will be taken at a board meeting in February.

The GLA will increase college allocations to include the £2.7 million based on the volume of delivery for these qualifications in 2018/19, funded from “unallocated money in 2020/21 budget”.

Mark Dawe, the chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said he expects the GLA to “reflect on the different treatment of grant funded and procured providers before the rules are finalised”.

But, he added, AELP’s concern with the proposals “is that even if independent training providers are entitled to use the uplift, the fact that the funding may come out of their existing contract means that the volume of their delivered AEB provision will go down.

“Additional funding should therefore be made available.”

Funding rates for English and maths qualifications more than doubled in 2012, but have not increased since 2013.

Announcing the funding uplift, Khan said in December: “We’re determined to use all the power and resources at our disposal to help create the workforce of the future – and that means making sure all Londoners have the opportunity to gain skills and make the most of their potential.

“A good level of English and maths is critical to improving someone’s life chances – but for too long funding levels haven’t matched what’s needed to help Londoners improve their basic skills. By increasing funding, providers across the capital can boost participation and achievement.”

More than a quarter of working-aged adults in England have numeracy and/or literacy skills below the level expected of an 11-year old, according to the GLA.

London area director for the Association of Colleges, Mary Vine-Morris, said it is “incredibly helpful” that the mayor “is willing to use the flexibilities afforded him through devolution to begin to address some of the long term problems colleges face”.

The GLA and six mayoral combined authorities were devolved AEB funding for their area from the central government in August.

Khan’s budget is £306 million annually.

Gavin Williamson has vowed to send Ofsted inspectors into every ‘outstanding’ training provider in England within five years, as he confirmed an earlier pledge to lift their inspection exemption.

The education secretary announced last September that the exemption, introduced by Michael Gove in 2012, would finally be abandoned. It followed repeated warnings from Ofsted that it was masking poor performance in colleges and providers that are currently protected from scrutiny.

Williamson has now confirmed he wants Ofsted to begin regularly inspecting grade one providers within five years of September 2020 – the normal timescale for inspections of those rated ‘good’.

A consultation on the move, which is subject to parliamentary approval, is being launched today.

If the exemption is lifted, grade one providers that have recently been given the once over can expect a short inspection, while those visited prior to September 2015 will be treated at length.

FE Week analysis has found 155 FE and skills providers are currently rated as grade one – although almost half of them (47 per cent) have not had a full inspection in over five years.

The five year timeframe may mean providers that have not been checked up on for as long as 13 years – for example, independent provider SAKS (Education) Limited – could have gone almost two decades without inspection.

But the Department for Education said Ofsted will prioritise visiting those providers that have gone longest without inspections.

Williamson said the exemption has meant “there is often not an up-to-date picture” of a provider’s standards.

And although the government “continues to trust our best schools and colleges to get on with the job of education”, making sure all providers are regularly reviewed “means parents will benefit from the expert insight Ofsted provides”.

FE Week understands lifting the outstanding exemption will cost Ofsted between £5 million and £10 million.

The Department for Education this week said it was not in a position to reveal how much additional money would be sent to the watchdog. That was a matter for the upcoming spending review.

The move has been welcomed by the Association of School and College Leaders, with its deputy director of policy Duncan Baldwin saying that while the exemption policy was “well-intentioned”, it is “time to reverse it” – especially because a new inspection framework was introduced in September.

The current exemption policy already permits Ofsted to revisit up to 10 per cent of grade one providers each year, so it has not stopped some colleges from losing their grade one: Swindon College, which was rated ‘outstanding’ in 2013, fell to grade three after an inspection in December 2018 found that leaders “had failed to maintain standards” after a large number of teachers and managers left the college.

Bury College dropped to grade three in 2017, ten years after a grade one in 2007, because of ineffective self-assessment, inconsistent teaching and low achievement rates.

Kendal College suffered a shorter drop from its grade one in 2010, to a grade two in 2017.

The police have dropped their criminal investigation against Aspire Achieve Advance (3aaa) – although the Insolvency Service continues its enquiries into the former apprenticeship giant.

Derbyshire Constabulary said it had run into “evidential difficulties”. Following a meeting with the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) on November 29, 2019, it decided to not pursue the case.

Neither the police nor the ESFA would provider further detail, but a spokesperson for the Department for Education said it would “not hesitate to take swift and decisive action against those who attempt to break, or manipulate the rules, regardless of whether the relevant authorities take forward criminal proceedings”.

“Since the investigation into 3aaa, the ESFA has toughened up on oversight of providers,” he added, “and we have established tighter monitoring controls.”

A spokesperson for Derbyshire Constabulary said a “formal criminal investigation” into 3aaa began in March 2019, following a “number of fraud allegations made by the DfE”.

The government terminated its multi-million pound skills funding contracts with the provider in October 2018, following a five month investigation. The case was then passed to the police through Action Fraud. This was the DfE’s second investigation into the provider in two years.

The provider went bust and the High Court placed 3aaa into compulsory liquidation in late October 2018. Anthony Hannon was then made the official receiver handling the insolvency.

His investigation into the collapse is still ongoing.

Although Derbyshire Constabulary has dropped its case against the defunct provider, the insolvency service told FE Week that if Hannon does find evidence of criminality he can refer the findings to another prosecuting authority, such as the Serious Fraud Office.

The Insolvency Service has three years from the date of the company winding-up order to launch enforcement action “if it was to determine doing so was in the public interest in the light of any investigation findings”.

Sanctions imposed by the official receiver, if he uncovers unfit director conduct, include director disqualification of between two and 15 years.

3aaa had 4,200 learners and 500 staff on its books when it went bust.

The firm was holding £16.5 million in ESFA contracts, and received more than £31 million in government funding the year before its collapse.

Whistleblower evidence obtained by FE Week, showed how the provider inflated achievement rates by more than 20 percentage points.

Sales documents for 3aaa showed a potential £700,000 ESFA clawback. It is understood that this related to a range of apprenticeship and traineeship funding overclaims made through individualised learner record submissions.

The ESFA also investigated the alleged misuse of grants from an apprenticeship incentive scheme.

Nor was this the first ESFA investigation into 3aaa: in 2016 the auditing firm KPMG was asked to carry out an investigation and found dozens of funding and success rate “overclaims”.

It is understood this resulted in the provider paying back a substantial six-figure sum.

After launching its second investigation into 3aaa in June 2018, the DfE called in an independent auditor, Alyson Gerner, to investigate the ESFA over its contract management of the former apprenticeships giant.

3aaa was co-founded by former Derby County Football Club owner Peter Marples and Di McEvoy-Robinson in 2008. They both stepped down in September 2018.

Neither Marples nor McEvoy-Robinson had responded to requests for comment at the time of our going to press.

Training providers are “having to turn their backs” on up to 40,000 small businesses due to the shortfall in apprenticeship levy funds.

According to the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), two-fifths of 135 apprenticeship providers surveyed are having to reject small-to-medium sized enterprises (SMEs) looking to recruit apprentices.

Recognising the problems, the government yesterday announced small employers would be let on to the digital apprenticeship service to access funding. Until now, this had been open only to levy-payers.

However, owing to the affordability issues, SMEs will be capped at just three starts each.

One unnamed provider in AELP’s survey reported: “We are having to turn our backs on small and micro businesses who have supported apprenticeships for many years, because we do not have funding available.”

29 per cent of providers have “significantly reduced” recruitment

More than half of the non-levy providers surveyed said their funding allocation was not sufficient to cover both the cost of existing apprentices and of new starts from an SME.

One calculates it will have used up its allocation by February, leaving two months in which it will have no funding.

Five providers said they were going to close their business as a result of the funding shortfall.

According to the AELP, the proportion of training providers with a non-levy contract which have actually stopped recruitment of apprentices for smaller employers has reached 31 per cent.

Another 29 per cent have “significantly reduced” recruitment.

Over half of providers are now focusing more on delivering apprenticeships for levy-paying employers, as respondents with a non-levy contract said they were unable to meet demand from an average of 59 SMEs.

AELP calculates that if this was extrapolated to cover the nearly 700 providers which have had a non-levy contract since April 2017, anything up to 40,000 SMEs could be adversely affected by the shortfall.

The association has reiterated their call for the restoration of the £1.5 billion apprenticeship budget available to SMEs before the levy was introduced.

Chief executive Mark Dawe (pictured) called it “totally unacceptable” for both small businesses and young people that so many of them can’t start apprenticeships “because of failures in how the levy funding system works”.

SMEs do not pay the apprenticeship levy and rely on funding being left over from it for their programmes after levy-paying employers have first taken back their entitlement.

In August 2019, the results from a previous AELP survey of providers revealed that three-quarters could not meet SME demand due to levy shortages.

This came after FE Week broke the news last February that providers were turning away apprentices from small businesses.

But these shortages, and their impact, have not escaped the attention of the government: in 2018, the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education reported the apprenticeships budget could be overspent by £1.5 billion by 2021/22.

And the National Audit Office warned last March that there was a “clear risk” the apprenticeship programme was not financially sustainable after the average cost of training hit double the government’s predictions.

Even the Department for Education’s permanent secretary has admitted to the Public Accounts Committee that “hard choices” had to be made to avoid the apprenticeships budget going into the red.

The government has invested millions in a ‘Fire It Up’ advertising campaign to drum up support for apprenticeships, but according to one provider in the AELP report: “Employers fail to understand why the government ran an apprenticeship advertising campaign when a business’s preferred training provider has insufficient funding.”

The campaign was launched with a blaze of publicity in 2019 and backed with £2.5 million, with then-education secretary Damian Hinds saying its aim was to “shift deeply held views and drive more people towards an apprenticeship”.

A Department for Education spokesperson said they have increased investment in apprenticeships to over £2.5 billion, double what was spent in 2010-11 in cash terms.

“To support smaller employers to take advantage of the benefits apprentices can bring to their business, from this week, we are making funding available for up to 15,000 additional apprenticeship starts and giving smaller employers access to training through our digital apprenticeship service.”

A leaked government assessment report reveals how leaders at Hull College Group employed “close family members” and created a culture where staff would not speak out for “fear of being exited at short notice”.

FE Week reported last month that the chief executive, Michelle Swithenbank, and vice principal for HR, Julie Milad, had been suspended and then quit.

But the chair of governors, Dafydd Williams, emailed staff on the last day of term claiming the lawyers from Eversheds, commissioned to undertake an independent investigation, had found “no impropriety” on the part of Swithenbank.

Managers feel uncomfortable about speaking out for fear of being exited

The government has declined to officially comment on the outcome of the investigation.

Despite this, an FE Commissioner ‘intervention assessment report’, seen by this newspaper, is highly critical of employment practices.

The report, dated November 2019, says: “A governance manager was appointed at the end of August 2019 following an external recruitment process. The successful post holder is the daughter of the vice principal human resources [Julie Milad], who is a member of the senior leadership team.

“A number of staff and managers in the college perceive there is a conflict of interest in these two roles being performed by close family members.”

Governors had “insufficient involvement in establishing governance arrangements” and the FE Commissioner concludes: “Clerking arrangements have not been sufficiently independent from the executive and have fallen below acceptable standards.”

The report also found “many staff felt reluctant to voice their concerns to senior leaders because of a lack of trust”.

And after the sudden departure of a senior employee in the summer of 2019 “who lodged grievances against the college and the principal”…“the spirit of openness that had begun was no longer evident and too many managers now comment about a culture that does not tolerate ‘non-compliance’”.

FE Week reported last month how staff felt bullied and were quietly paid to leave after agreeing to sign non-disclosure agreements.

The FE Commissioner, Richard Atkins (pictured above), along with his deputy, Andrew Tyley and two advisors, heard similar stories during their interviews with staff on 30 and 31 October.

“It would appear that the extensive and ongoing use of settlement agreements and confidentiality clauses at the college has eroded the trust and confidence of a number of staff and managers in the employment practices of the college (twenty of these agreements have been implemented between March and August 2019),” the report states.

“Several key staff have left the college and significant concerns have been raised from a cross section of staff and managers who feel uncomfortable about raising concerns or speaking out for fear of being exited from the organisation at short notice.”

FE Week approached the college and government for comment, but they declined the opportunity, other than to say the report is due for publication next month.

Emma Hardy, the local MP and recently appointed shadow secretary for FE by Labour, said: “I am very concerned about the reputational damage to the college along with the way the leadership treated staff in recent months.

“I have asked the chair of the college to share with me the investigation report written by the lawyers at Eversheds.”

The purpose of the FE Commissioner assessment, it says, “is to report on the progress the college has made since it was first placed in formal intervention [in 2016]”.

Since then “the fresh start/recovery plan commenced in March 2018 with a substantial package of restructuring funds totalling £51.7 million” and much of the report is to “assess the capacity and capability of leadership and governance at the college”.

The broader findings from the assessment reveal governors “not exercising effective oversight”, and “minutes have not been published on the college website for over a year”.

Minutes remain unpublished and the college did not respond over several days to requests from FE Week for copies of board minutes.

And despite the record bailout, there remain serious concerns over declining income levels, particularly from the 16 to 18 year-old courses.

The FE Commissioner’s report said that “16 to 18 student recruitment in 2018/19 fell significantly below the allocated number and this has resulted in a £3.436 million (27 per cent) reduction in lagged programme funding in 2019/20”.

They have fallen again this year which, the report adds, “is deeply disappointing given the apparent strong start to enrolments reported at the start of term”.

The assessment document says this is “particularly disappointing when taking into account the college’s substantial expenditure on marketing of over £1 million.”

FE Week reported last October concerns over the use of the marketing budget by Graham Raddings, who at the time was the budget holder.

Raddings quit last year, shortly after marrying then chief executive, Swithenbank.

The report concludes that “overall leadership at the college at this point in time does not demonstrate the necessary capacity and capability to lead the college forward positively” and “good financial health is not yet secure”.

Suspended principal and vice principal quit but college chair claims lawyers found ‘no impropriety’

As first reported by FE Week, the chair of governors, Dafydd Williams, commissioned an “independent” investigation into allegation of nepotism and inappropriate use of funds in September 2019.

Williams, head of communications and corporate affairs at Associated British Ports and former leader of City of York Council, joined the board as chair in January 2019.

At the time the education minister, Lord Agnew, told this newspaper that “any financial wrongdoing, if it has occurred, is treated extremely seriously and we will be carefully monitoring events as the information becomes available”.

The investigation got off to a shakey start, after FE Week revealed the college lawyer was doing the work and Williams subsequently switched law firms.

The leaked government assessment confirmed the “chief executive [Michelle Swithebank] was suspended by the board in October 2019 pending the outcome of an independent investigation undertaken by Eversheds”.

And “following consideration of the interim findings from the Eversheds reports at the November board meeting, the vice principal human resources [Julie Milad] was also suspended”.

On the last day of term, Friday 20 December, the chair emailed all staff to say: “As you know, Eversheds has been conducting a thorough review of our operational arrangements, and I must stress it has found that there has been no impropriety on the part of Michelle. Nevertheless, Michelle has informed us that she wishes to move on.”

Williams added: “Our VP HR and Professional Services Julie Milad has also informed us that she wishes to move on…due to family responsibilities.”

 

 

Small employers can now use the digital apprenticeship service – but they will be initially capped at just three starts each owing to ongoing affordability issues.

Updated Education and Skills Funding Agency rules, published today, revealed that the long-awaited transition to the system has begun for non-levy payers.

The move will more than double the number of providers with direct access to funding for non-levy payers, including most universities.

A dual running system will be in place until Autumn 2020, which means employers who do not pay the apprenticeship levy will be able to access training either through a provider with an existing government contract or via the apprenticeship service.

Non-levy payers are able to reserve funding for an apprenticeship in advance of recruitment or an offer of an apprenticeship being made to an existing employee, through a new mechanism called “reserve my funding”.

“This reservation ensures that employers can plan, and that funds will be available to pay for the training from the point the apprenticeship starts,” the agency’s guidance states.

“The employer must then turn this ‘reservation’ into a ‘commitment’ once the training provider and an apprentice are confirmed. At this point funding can be released to the training provider in the usual way.”

But to allow the ESFA to manage this transition, and to ensure the programme overall remains affordable, it will initially only allow employers to make reservations for up to three apprenticeship starts.

Employers can also reserve funding for apprenticeship standards only, not frameworks.

Association of Employment and Learning Providers’ chief policy officer, Simon Ashworth, welcomed the move.

“Given the current funding challenges within the levy system, this is a sensible approach,” he said.

“The good news is that providers without a contract will finally be able to access the market which means that more SMEs, especially in niche sectors and rural areas, should be able to start offering apprenticeships again.

“The chancellor in his budget now needs to back the ESFA’s efforts to move us towards a proper demand-led system for apprenticeships.”

In December 2018 projections from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education predicted the levy could be overspent by up to £1.5 billion in 2021/22.

The National Audit Office then expressed concern about the financial sustainability of the apprenticeship system, before the DfE’s top civil servant warned of “hard choices” that needed to be made. 

FE providers can now bid to deliver T-levels in the third year of their rollout, the Department for Education (DfE) announced today.

Expressions of interest have been invited from “high performing” providers who want to deliver the new technical qualifications in 2022/23.

Eight new T-levels, in sectors such as legal, accounting and manufacturing, will be available, in addition to the ten T-levels that will already on offer from 2020 and 2021. 

The T-level Action Plan 2019, published by the DfE in October, said the selection criteria had been developed “to expand the number of providers delivering T-levels so the momentum behind the programme continues to build and to ensure good quality providers are delivering in 2022”.

This marked a change from previous years when the ESFA stated a desire to select a “relatively small number” of providers so it could “continue providing the right level of support in the early stages of rollout”.

For 2022, colleges, independent training providers, university technical colleges or schools, which are currently delivering to at least ten “qualifying students” per T-level subject area level at route level, can apply.

Qualifying students include those that are 16-18, on level 3 technical or vocational qualifications, with at least 360 guided learning hours, from within the sector subject areas for the relevant T-level.

All providers must be rated ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted and must have at least “satisfactory” financial health.

Providers who do not yet have an Ofsted rating but would like to express an interest in delivering T-levels need to be able to demonstrate that they have an “equivalent standard of quality”.

DfE guidance states that officials “reserve the right to exclude any provider where a notice to improve is in place, where a provider is at risk of financial difficulty or where there are any other known issues that could prevent or affect quality delivery”.

Education secretary Gavin Williamson said this is a “brilliant opportunity for further education providers to be at the forefront” of delivering T-levels, which will “radically shake up technical education as we know it”. 

“From the very start, we’ve worked hand in hand with further education providers and leading employers to ensure these courses will give young people the skills and experience to land them great jobs and provide employers with the workforce they need to make sure this country continues to thrive on the global stage,” he added.

The T-levels to be taught from 2022 include financial, maintenance, installation and repair, design and development, management and administration and human resources.

The two-year courses will be equivalent to three A-levels and include classroom learning as well as a mandatory industry placement of at least 315 hours – approximately 45 days.

More than 100 further education providers are already preparing to deliver T-levels.

The first three new qualifications, in the digital sector, construction as well as education and childcare, will be introduced in September 2020.

A further seven T-levels will be available from September 2021.

A remaining seven, including courses in agriculture, environment and animal care, catering and hospitality, creative and media, and hair and beauty, will be rolled out from 2023 to bring the total to 25.

The closing date for applications for 2022/23 is midnight on 28 February 2020.

The government has insisted it remains committed to Erasmus+, despite MPs voting against requiring officials to negotiate continuing full membership of the programme last night.

The Liberal Democrats had tabled the amendment to the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill to make keeping the UK in the EU’s education and youth programme after Brexit an objective, but it lost by 344 votes to 254.

However, a Department for Education spokesperson said today it “is committed to continuing the academic relationship between the UK and the EU, including through the next Erasmus+ programme if it is in our interests to do so”.

“The vote last night does not change that,” he added.

“As we enter negotiations with the EU, we want to ensure that UK and European students can continue to benefit from each other’s world-leading education systems.”

Erasmus+ is an EU scheme that currently offers opportunities for UK citizens to study, work, volunteer, teach and train abroad in Europe and offers access to funding for adult education.

There was no mention of the programme in the Conservative manifesto ahead of last month’s general election.

The bid to ensure it was on the Brexit negotiating table failed after 336 Conservative and eight Democratic Unionist Party MPs voted against it.

Education secretary Gavin Williamson and schools minister Nick Gibb were among those who voted it down.

Layla Moran MP, the Lib Dem spokesperson for education, said: “Staying in Erasmus should be a no-brainer.

“Universities warn that no-UK led scheme could ever match the reputation and extensive partnerships that Erasmus has to offer. But rather than voting for our amendment, Conservative MPs are willing to let Ministers negotiate away our membership of Erasmus if they think they could do a better job.

 “It is time the Government got serious about this – are they in favour of staying in Erasmus or not?”

Speaking in favour of the amendment before the vote, she also claimed access to the programme could be secured through negotiations “but we would be an associated third country and that would never be as good as the programme we are part of now”.

According to research by the Association of Colleges (AoC), 100 colleges have taken part in the most recent cycle of the scheme – from 2014 to 2020 – which has awarded them around €77 million to fund over 30,000 placements.

The AoC study, published in October, also showed that 94 per cent of the colleges could not offer their students the chance to complete a placement abroad without Erasmus+ or a post-Brexit replacement programme.

Emma Meredith, AoC’s International Director, described Erasmus+ as a “brilliant programme for opening up the world for young people and helping show people from across Europe that the UK is open to them”.

“UK colleges will still be able to apply for Erasmus+ funding in 2020 during the ‘transition period’.

“There is a definite risk that UK participation could stop in 2021, or that Erasmus+ could be replaced by another mobility programme,” she told FE Week.

“However, despite the vote this week in Parliament, the UK/EU political declaration says that the two sides will negotiate continuing UK participation in programmes like Erasmus.

“At AoC, we’re optimistic that securing the Erasmus+ programme for college students will be high on the negotiating priority list and that officials are aware of the value of Erasmus+ to the UK college sector.”

Commenting on yesterday’s vote in the House of Commons, University and College Union general secretary Jo Grady, added: “Wilfully abandoning Erasmus would be a worryingly closed-minded move.

“The many benefits from having the opportunity to study abroad – from boosting employment prospects, to learning other languages and from other cultures – are well documented. I have seen those benefits first-hand having set up Erasmus agreements and taught students on Erasmus projects.”