AELP accuses DfE of ‘sidestepping’ with £515k tender to engage SMEs in apprenticeships

The government has come under fire for planning to spend £500,000 helping small employers get “onboarded onto the Apprenticeship Service”.

A tender was launched last week by the Department for Education seeking a supplier to help “intermediaries”, such as local enterprise partnerships (LEPs) and membership organisations, ensure non-levy payers engaging in apprenticeships are aware of the transition to the digital system.

“Apprenticeships are a key feature of the government’s educational policy”, the procurement, worth up to £515,000, says, “with specific ambitions to improve quality and ensure all employers offering apprenticeships are onboarded onto the Apprenticeship Service – be they levy-paying or otherwise.

“Intermediaries, including LEPs, have a significant role to play in helping government achieve these goals through using their existing employer networks and understanding of local skills needs.”

The DfE has been inviting non-levy payers to test the Apprenticeship Service – where employers can manage apprenticeship funding and pick standards, frameworks and end-point assessment organisations – since the summer.

Previously only companies which pay the apprenticeship levy, so those with a pay bill of over £3 million, could access the service.

The ESFA original aimed to have all small employers on the digital system by April 2019, but had to delay this for a year.

But the tender has been criticised by Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, who said: “Why does the government need to do this when there are local networks of providers who would have no difficulty in finding SMEs across the country willing to offer apprenticeship opportunities? They are just sidestepping the obvious solution.”

AELP research in August found three-quarters of training providers could not meet demand from such businesses for apprenticeship provision, showing that engaging small-to-medium enterprises in apprenticeship delivery is not so much of a problem.

Dawe has called for greater funding to be put towards the apprenticeships budget, due to a shortage of funding for SME apprenticeships that he warned could become worse.

The Department for Education defended the tender: “The aim of this initiative is to make sure all avenues are being pursued in the engagement of small businesses in apprenticeship delivery,” a spokesperson said.

“Of course, we are aware of the local networks of providers, but this is an additional option to connect more employers with apprenticeships.”

The ESFA allocated a £500 million funding pot to providers to deliver apprenticeships to small employers between January 2018 and March 2019.

Contracts were then renewed for another year while the digital system is prepared.

As FE Week has reported, last year’s funding pot had been exhausted by February 2019 and providers were having to turn learners away.

Shortly afterwards, the Federation of Small Businesses went public with “serious concerns” over how the budget was being handled, having found 41 per cent of businesses had reported an increase in costs related to recruiting and training apprentices since the system reforms in 2017.

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education warned the budget could be overspent by £0.5 billion in 2018/19 and £1.5 billion in 2021/22, which FE Week was first to report upon in December 2018.

Applicants to the DfE’s tender, which must be not-for-profit organisations, have until October 11 to bid.

Counter fraud becomes 500th approved apprenticeship standard

Counter fraud investigator has become the 500th apprenticeship standard approved for delivery by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education.

The level 4 standard, with a maximum funding band of £15,000, has been approved just eight months after the institute passed the 400 approved standards mark in January.

Education Secretary Gavin Williamson said it was “fantastic news” to have reached this milestone.

“This is a great achievement and means there are now more high-quality apprenticeship opportunities available than ever before,” he added.

The counter fraud programme was developed by the Cabinet Office, HMRC, and the Department for Health and it is hoped it will be used by both central and local government

It may be of use to the Department for Education, as this news comes a day after Education and Skills Funding Agency chief executive Eileen Milner warned providers her agency will act against providers acting fraudulently in subcontracting deals.

The chief executive of the Civil Service John Manzoni said: “This apprenticeship is an important milestone for the government counter fraud profession.

“It represents the first means of direct entry into the profession and as such will be integral to embedding a baseline standard of highly skilled professionals across the counter fraud community.”

Standards were introduced in March 2016 as replacements for the old apprenticeship frameworks, as part of the government’s sweeping reforms to the system.

The pace at which standards are approved has doubled since the institute instituted its ‘faster and better’ scheme in December 2017.

After employers complained the approvals process was too slow and bureaucratic, the scheme was intended to cut through the red tape and streamline the process.

Of reaching the “impressive landmark” of 500 approved standards, institute chief executive Sir Gerry Berragan said: “We will ensure through our reviews process that all standards remain relevant and in demand by employers.”

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 292

Your weekly guide to who’s new and who’s leaving.


Elizabeth Taylor, chief executive, Employment Related Services Association

Start date: November 2019

Previous job: Interim chief executive, Employment Related Services Association

Interesting fact: She was once the social enterprise champion for Lancashire.


John Kerr, managing director, Develop Training

Start date: July 2019

Previous job: Operations director, Develop Training

Interesting fact: He spent his upbringing playing in brass bands.


Nancy Doyle, vice chair, Employment Related Services Association

Start date: September 2019

Concurrent job: Chief executive, Genius Within CIC

Interesting fact: She has appeared on BBC Two’s Employable Me.


Richard Clifton, chair, Employment Related Services Association

Start date: September 2019

Concurrent job: Chief commercial officer, Shaw Trust

Interesting fact: He is a lifelong Leicester City supporter.

Even a mastermind would fail to keep up with complex, changing and contradictory subcontracting rules

My specialist subject on Mastermind would be the ESFA funding rules for subcontracting.

I can quote documents and paragraphs for every year going back a decade because my business has in part grown by personally delivering commercial training to help colleges and training providers stay on the right side of the increasingly complex and confusing rules.

In 2011 I even wrote a guide to subcontracting policy, commissioned, funded and published by a government quango.

In addition, FE Week has typically been first to report rule changes and expose when they have been broken.

So I feel well placed to comment on the ESFA’s latest letter, a decade too late, threatening yet more subcontracting rules following the £20 million scandal at Brooklands College.

But first the ESFA need to get their own house in order.

The ESFA letter to providers ends with current ‘Subcontracting Requirements and Intervention and Oversight Policies’. 

Eight documents with a total of 426 pages, plus a lengthy webpage, all liable to be updated at any time during the contractual year.

But, even these documents don’t include summary of changes or other ESFA documents doing the rounds, all of which can contradict the rules.

Mastermind question one: Should apprenticeship providers reduce the price when subcontracting to an employer?

In March 2018, ten months into the contractual year, the ESFA published version 6 of the 2017/18 funding rules.

Alongside the rules was an 8 page summary of changes document, which included conflicting “clarifications”.

One clarification said the overall price should not be reduced: “Where an employer is legitimately delivering training or providing an eligible cost the overall price should not be reduced.”

Another clarification said the price should be reduced to exclude profit: “where the employer is the delivery sub-contractor actual costs must be used. An employer should not make a profit on the delivery to their own employees.”…“we will only pay actual costs and this must be recorded”.

When I asked the ESFA for an explanation at the time they emailed me to say: “we mean that the overall price should not be discounted to completely remove the employer element”.

Mastermind question two: When should apprenticeship providers apply the subcontracting rules to an employer if the employer delivers some of the relevant training themselves?

When seeking clarity from the ESFA in March 2017, they said the following: “All providers should be clear that any delivery of training is classed as sub-contracting, regardless of who is delivering it, the volume or the financial amount.”

So far so clear, and I think nearly all providers would today say the answer to the question is “always”.

But they would be wrong.

It seems this rule was quietly changed last month, with no update to the funding rules, in an obscure document, updated for the third time, associated with the off-the-job training policy.

Buried away on page 31 of version three of the ESFA’s “Apprenticeship off-the-job training: policy background and examples” document, published on the 13 September 2019, is paragraph 109.

It states: “If the employer is delivering relevant training associated with the apprenticeship framework or standard, without which the apprenticeship cannot be achieved, then they are potentially a subcontractor. The acid test is whether apprenticeship funding is being used”… “if the employer is not accessing apprenticeship funding then they are not considered to be a subcontractor.”

So there you have it, a significant change to the subcontracting rules that are not even published in the funding rules.

If we are to expect providers to play this game the answers needs to be consistent and clear.

This may all sound complex, and it is, but it sits at the core of the problem for the ESFA.

They have to get a grip of both their communications and rules – which have spiralled out of all control over the last few years.

If they cannot do it, then the job should go to an agency that can.

Mastermind question three: If the technical machinations of the funding rules are not understood by anyone then what hope is there to enforce them?

Answers on a postcard please…

Flagship rail college hopes new name and broader offering will put it back on track

The National College for High Speed Rail is ploughing ahead with a new name and broader course offer, following a multi-million pound government bailout.

After consulting earlier this year, the government’s flagship college is changing its name to the National College for Advanced Transport and Infrastructure and intends to offer a wider range of courses at its Birmingham and Doncaster campuses.

Chief executive of the college Clair Mowbray said: “As an employer-led college, it’s key we ensure the skills we equip our learners with meet the demands and the skills shortages of the broader advanced transport and infrastructure sector.”

She quoted figures from the Strategic Transport Apprenticeship Taskforce which estimate 50,000 more people are needed to work in the rail sector; 41,000 to fill roles on the road network; and 180,000 to deliver the Heathrow Expansion project.

“There is huge demand across the sectors and the name change reflects our dedication to delivering and developing our curriculum to meet industry demands,” Mowbray continued.

This name change coincides with delays and costing problems with the HS2 project, which is meant to deliver a high-speed rail link from London to the north and is closely aligned with the college.

Mowbray developed the college while working at the company responsible for the project, HS2 Ltd, which has lent her college £2,906,000 in 2018 and £2,804,000 in 2017.

But completion of the first phase of HS2, between London and Birmingham, will probably be pushed back until 2040, transport secretary Grant Shapps told parliament last month, and the budget for the project could increase by around £20 billion.

NCHSR’s rebrand comes after FE Week reported in May the National College for High Speed Rail needed a £4.55 million bailout from the Department for Education to sign off its 2017-18 accounts, that the provider would not need to pay back.

However, what will need to be paid back – by 2030 – is a working capital loan of £8.3 million in 2017-18 that was necessary “to help with startup costs that have been incurred in establishing the college,” according to a spokesperson.

This is not the only national college to run into difficulty since the scheme was launched with £80 million of taxpayers’ money in 2014.

National College Creative Industries is consulting on dissolving and instead starting a new company, NCCI Ltd, which would franchise classroom provision and its building out to South Essex College and apprenticeship provision to Access Creative College. NCCI’s move came after it made it through 2017-18 as a “going concern” thanks to a £600,000 bailout from the Department for Education.

Despite a target to recruit 1,000 learners a year, it only recruited 167 between May 2018 and May 2019.

Following the bailout, then-skills minister Anne Milton announced NCCI would be going through a structure and prospects appraisal to identify partners.

The DfE launched an evaluation of the national college policy in November, to avoid making mistakes in the rollout of the Institutes of Technology, of which eight more were announced this week by education secretary Gavin Williamson (see page 14).

Chair quits at college stung by £20m scandal and replaced by DfE consultant

A college rocked by a £20 million apprenticeship scandal is now being run by a Department for Education consultant after the chair stood down, FE Week can reveal.

Terry Lazenby (pictured right) resigned from Brooklands College this week.

It is a relatively small college that FE Week understands is now trading whilst insolvent, after the government demanded it returns a huge amount of funding.

Terry was passionate and committed to the student experience

Lazenby’s replacement on an interim basis is Andrew Baird (pictured left), one of the DfE’s National Leaders of Governance, who is on their payroll and takes home £300 a day for his services.

Baird, who is also currently the chair of governors at Orbital South Colleges, was parachuted into Hadlow College earlier this year after financial irregularities were exposed.

He stopped being chair of Hadlow when it went into administration in May – making it the first to go through the new college insolvency regime.

Baird will be paid for up to 15 days work between now and the end of the year at Brooklands College, according to the DfE.

The department confirmed they offered Baird to Brooklands as interim chair, and the decision to appoint him was taken by the college’s governing body. They declined to comment on how much influence they had in the resignation of Lazenby, who was chair of the audit committee when the apprenticeship funds were received.

A spokesperson said: “We welcome the college’s appointment of Andrew Baird as chair, who brings a wide range of experience within FE and beyond.” 

A Brooklands College spokesperson said it was “pleased to announce” Baird as the new chair of governors with immediate effect on Wednesday.

“Governors look forward to the opportunity to work with Andrew in taking forward the strategic intentions of the corporation,” she added.

Brooklands College’s future currently hangs in the balance following an Education and Skills Funding Agency investigation into its subcontracting relationship with a training firm called SCL Security Ltd.

Amongst many findings, the agency discovered that apprenticeship funding was being used to pay the wages for the 16 to 18-year-olds, which is strictly against the funding rules.

The ESFA has now demanded it pays up to £20 million back to the government.

ESFA boss Eileen Milner also sent a sector-wide letter today, which promised a crackdown on “complacency and mismanagement” of subcontracting deals, as well as “deliberate and systematic fraud”.

Prior to taking over as chair, Lazenby had been vice chair since 2014, a member of three committees including audit and attended 32 out of 33 board and committee meetings in the past three years, according to the published college accounts.

Audit committee meeting minutes show that Lazenby was fully aware of the scale of subcontracting, noting in a September 2017 meeting it was “a significantly higher proportion of income at Brooklands than many FE colleges”.

The audit committee for Brooklands currently only has three members, following the recent resignation of its chair Jerry Loy, as revealed in minutes from a board meeting for June 2019.

Gail Walker, who worked her way up to principal and chief executive of Brooklands after joining in 2011, resigned in March.

She was replaced on an interim basis by deputy principal Christine Ricketts and vice principal Shereen Sameresinghe, who are splitting the role.

The college’s spokesperson said: “In recognising the previous chair’s achievements the interim principal and interim chief executive expressed their gratitude for Terry’s commitment to the college.

“Terry Lazenby MBE, a former chief engineer at BP, was an accessible and visible member of the governing Board to both staff and students.

“Terry was passionate and committed to the student experience and actively engaged in student life to inspire the next generation of engineers.”

Lazenby said all staff at the college “have the best interests of our students at the heart of everything they do”. He did not respond to a request for comment on the ESFA’s investigation.

The DfE said Baird is the only National Leader of Governance, paid by the department, who is currently acting as interim chair of a college.

Williamson defends his old sixth form as it drops digital T-level

The education secretary has said his former college made the “right decision” in pulling out of offering a T-level in digital, as he pledged to convene business leaders in an attempt to address shortages of work placement opportunities.

It was announced this week that Scarborough Sixth Form College, where Gavin Williamson studied, will no longer deliver the digital pathway in 2020. The principal said the decision was made because of a lack of work placement opportunities in the area and a shortage of good-quality teachers.

Senior leaders in FE have long expressed concern that young people, especially in rural areas, will be unable to pass the T-level owing to a lack of local and lengthy placement opportunities. However, in 2017, the government said it would not budge on the mandatory work placements.

This doesn’t close the opportunity to offer it in a year after that

Speaking to FE Week at the Conservative Party conference, Williamson said it was “fantastic” his former college was going ahead with the education and childcare pathway, but said dropping the digital offer was the right call.

“They have to look as to how they deliver the very best quality and the very best choice, and they’ve had to make that decision and it is the right decision because it is about preserving that quality.

“This doesn’t close the opportunity to offer it in a year after that, but it’s getting the whole package right, because every youngster that tales a T-level, we want to get it right first time.”

Williamson said there was a “clear recognition” in government that T-levels must be “exceptionally high quality” and that colleges must be “able to offer the full spectrum of what needs to be in the T-level”.

He acknowledged that skills “aren’t as evenly spread as we would like them to be”, and said government must become a “convening force” between colleges and employers.

“We want to take the opportunity to work really closely, very closely with not just colleges but also employers as to actually how best we unlock some of the opportunities to do the vocational side of it.

“It’s one of the reasons that we’re convening together some of the country’s largest employers to have a conversation about how we work closer with employers to make sure that the opportunities are coming available for colleges right across the country.”

When pressed for further information on the work with employers, the DfE said this referred to employer panels and dialogue with industry.

FE Week also asked the DfE for its advice to families in Scarborough who want to study the digital pathway, but received no response.

The DfE did say this week that the Grimsby Institute of Further & Higher Education, which was already set to offer the education and childcare pathway from next year, will now also deliver the digital pathway.

“We always expected there to be a certain amount of fluctuation of providers, and the pathways they offer, as we progress towards September 2020,” a spokesperson said.

“However, we continue to have an excellent group of high-quality providers offering a variety of pathways across the country.”

T-levels were originally meant to be rolled out from September 2019 but skills minister Anne Milton announced a delay of a year in July 2017.

Williamson’s predecessor, Damian Hinds, then rejected a request from the DfE’s permanent secretary, Jonathan Slater, for another year-long delay rejected in the first ever ministerial direction issued by an education secretary last May.

This week’s changes are not the first to affect the T-levels wave one provider list: Big Creative Training and the London Design and Engineering UTC were removed in February.

It follows a pledge by Williamson in his Conference speech on Monday that England will “aim to overtake Germany in the opportunities we offer to those studying technical routes by 2029”.

Asked how it would work towards the target, the DfE said the introduction of new T-levels would boost access to great technical education across the country.

 

Gavin Williamson’s vision is a catalyst for international perspective

Of all the words spoken at this week’s Conservative Party Conference, I don’t think any were more powerful or persuasive than those of the UK Education Secretary, Gavin Williamson.

Referencing the fact that we have just recently met the 1997 Labour government’s target of 50% of young people going to university, the Secretary of State’s speech spoke directly to what he called ‘the other 50%’: so many young people who, for too long, have not been prioritised by governments of all colours.

We can be in no doubt that new leadership in the Department for Education means a new approach to how apprenticeships and technical qualifications will be championed. Anyone who has met Williamson since he came into the role, as members of Team UK did before they flew out to Russia for this summer’s Skills Olympics, won’t doubt his ambition ‘to super-charge further education over the next decade’.

This is a Secretary of State who understands the value of our sector and is committed to working with us to realise the vast potential that we all know exists within it.

It’s in this spirit that I was struck by what the Secretary of State stated as his vision for 2029, 10 years into the future: ‘to overtake Germany in the opportunities we offer to those studying technical routes by 2029’. This is a bold, eye-catching goal.

For decades in this country we have held the German system up as the exemplar for what an ideal model of vocational education should look like, especially with respect to apprenticeships, and while we should be mindful of the differences between our economies and how their skill systems operate, international benchmarking is something we have been increasingly advocating.

There is unquestionably lots to admire about how Germany trains its young people, and lots we can learn from, but there is also no reason why, with the right levels of investment, the right leadership within DfE and the right provision of opportunities for our young people, we cannot surpass their achievements.

There is no reason that we can’t surpass Germany’s achievements

Indeed in the context of WorldSkills competitions we placed higher than Germany in the benchmark medal tables in 2015 and 2017, losing out to them this year by only one medal point. So I feel confident that, as part of the 10-year plan and the ‘2029 vision’ Williamson has set out, we can deliver on this if we take a strategic and holistic approach to learning from international best practice – in Germany and elsewhere – to invest in raising standards, boosting workforce development and supporting institutions.

The welcome commitments around new Institutes of Technology in England and the Skills and Productivity Board are key parts of this, but I would like to table another idea too. We should use the WorldSkills platform in the UK as part of this ten-year plan to galvanise change: not just inspiring millions of young people to take up apprenticeships and technical careers, and developing thousands of young people’s skills to higher levels every year, but also engaging our partners from around the world to learn from global skills innovation, including boosting standards of teaching, training and assessment.

Further, with WorldSkills Shanghai less than two years away (and building on the recent huge success of WorldSkills in Russia), we will be creating opportunities for our partners to learn from the best of the rest of the world in China – because seeing really is believing. We will shortly be publishing what we learned in Kazan from a ‘seeing is believing’ delegation from the construction sector, run in partnership with the National Open College Network.

International benchmarking is something we have been increasingly advocating

This builds on our recent Productivity Lab research with the RSA and FETL looking at the best of international skills systems to draw out the lessons we can apply here in the UK. We will be publishing more research and insights from global partners on best practice and what we can learn from mainstreaming skills excellence in other major economies.

We will also be creating opportunities for skills leaders in these countries to share their insights with us, starting at WorldSkills UK LIVE next month, where we are hosting a seminar for our partners to understand how Russia is embedding WorldSkills standards into their skill systems to drive up performance. Ultimately, we want to use the WorldSkills platform to help support the government to make its ambition a reality across the UK.

Williamson’s words this week should act as a catalyst for the sector to think big. We are just three months away from the start of a new decade and what we make of that new decade will be shaped by the decisions we make now. For the Education Secretary, that means setting the country on a course to beat one of our major strategic rivals come the decade’s end – and for us at WorldSkills UK it means stretching our global ambition to its fullest potential.

Boss of AoC critical of vice-chancellors spending university cash on ‘wine and beer’

The Augar report could be “dead” after university vice-chancellors whinged they couldn’t “possibly survive” on slashed tuition fees “because we’ll all have to reduce our salaries or spend on wine and beer”.

That is according to the chief executive of the Association of Colleges, David Hughes, who told a Conservative Party Conference fringe event yesterday that he is “not very optimistic” the post-18 education review “will be taken as seriously as it might”.

He cited a number of reasons for this, including the fact that the review, the recommendations from which were originally meant to then turn into policy, was “the last prime minister’s report, not the present”.

“The politics of life are that the present prime minister will take it less seriously because of that,” he said.

“It was also a report that had a lot of infighting between Treasury and Number 10, between Philip Hammond and Theresa May.”

Hughes then turned to university bosses: “You add to that then that the possible the nail in the coffin of the report as a whole, the vice-chancellors immediately just went for it and said we can’t possibly survive on £7,500 fees because ‘we’ll all have to reduce our salaries or reduce our spend on wine and beer’.

“They got to Johnson, not Boris but Jo, when he was fleetingly, for about five weeks as higher education minister again, and basically just sunk the whole report by saying we can’t implement the £7,500 fees as ‘it’s just not going to work’.”

He added: “Interestingly, if you go to Scotland the average fee is about £6,500 and the universities there seem to do ok, so I don’t know how that works.

“It is real shame actually, because there was a lot of really good analysis in the report and I would recommend you read, certainly the chapter on skills and FE.”

Excessive university vice-chancellor pay has made headlines in recent years with many calls for the government to restrain salary levels.

The higher education regulator, the Office for Students, published its first ever survey on senior staff pay in February, which revealed how six universities in England paid their vice-chancellors £500,000 or more in salary, bonuses and benefits last year, while nearly half of all vice-chancellors received more than £300,000.

In June, The Press and Journal revealed how the Scottish government had launched an investigation into a £282,000 payment to the former principal of Aberdeen University, Ian Diamond, who is the now the chair of the Association of Colleges’ College of the Future commission.

From left: BAE Systems’ chief technology officer Nigel Whitehead, head of policy and engagement at the Centre for Progressive Policy Zoë Billingham, FE Week editor Nick Linford, deputy head of public affairs at the Federation of Small Businesses Ruby Peacock, and Association of Colleges chief executive David Hughes

Yesterday’s fringe event at the Conservative Party Conference, hosted by the Centre for Progressive Policy, was entitled Implementing Augar – building an adult education system fit for the future of work.

Hughes said it was worth reflecting on the “genesis” of the report, which was launched with an “amazing speech” by then prime minister Theresa May at Derby College – a venue choice which the AoC boss said was a “real tide turn” for FE.

“I was in the audience, sitting just behind the vice-chancellor of Derby University who I know quite well, and I heard him muttering away at how terrible this was that it was in a college and not in his university, which is about two miles away,” Hughes told the audience.

“It was the start, I think, of a kind of a real tide turn when universities started to realise they weren’t the chosen children of the education system anymore and that colleges have started to rise up.”

He added: “It could be that it [the Augar report] is dead but the issues it was trying to address and the reason that Theresa May launched the review in the first place are so important that it won’t go away.”