Three in four providers cannot meet SME apprentice demand thanks to levy drought

Three quarters of training providers cannot meet the demands by small and medium sized employers for training apprentices, because the apprenticeship levy is running out of cash.

That’s according to a new Association of Employment and Learning Providers survey, which also revealed a quarter of providers have had to turn away a prospective new SME apprentice employer.

One unnamed surveyed provider said they had “never known a worse time than this” after 25 years of delivering apprenticeships and the “disastrous” situation could bankrupt them in as little as six months, while another said it was “all madness”.

Unless urgent action is taken, there is a real danger of apprenticeships becoming unaffordable for smaller businesses

A third of providers said they would need an extra 25 per cent of funding to meet current demand by SMEs for apprentices, and some have even stopped recruiting apprentices altogether for new and existing SME employer customers.

But in the meantime, around a third also said they will focus more on delivering apprenticeship training for levy-paying employers in future.

This could disadvantage 16 to 18 school leavers, of which the SME sector has traditionally been the main recruiter, at a time when starts by that age group has dropped by 23 per cent since before the levy was introduced, according to the AELP.

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

FE Week was the first to report in February that providers were turning away apprentices from small businesses because there was little money left for non-levy provision.

The severity of the apprenticeship funding shortage has not escaped the attention of the Department for Education, with permanent secretary Jonathan Slater telling the education select committee in March the levy pot could be “significantly overspent” by 2020-21 if current spending trends continue.

Nor has the shortage of starts escaped the attention of new prime minister Boris Johnson, who said there is “a desperate shortage in this country of people with the right skills” and his government would “properly fund” apprenticeships.

AELP chief executive Mark Dawe said “the damage is already being done” by the lack of funding for apprenticeships.

“The clear message from apprenticeship providers is the shortage will quickly become much worse unless the government delivers quickly on Boris Johnson’s funding promise.”

A Department for Education spokesperson highlighted how apprenticeship funding in England has, in 2019-20, risen to double what was spent in 2010-2011 in cash terms.

But, they said, to help smaller employers manage their own apprenticeships more effectively, they are being brought onto the Apprenticeship Service and large businesses can now transfer up to 25 per cent of their levy funds to smaller employers.

“We will continue to work with employers to enable them to take advantage of the benefits apprentices can bring to their business, and are looking carefully at the future priorities for the apprenticeship programme,” the spokesperson added.

FE Week was first to report that the budget could soon go bust, after finding out the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education estimated the budget could be overspent by £0.5 billion this year, rising to £1.5 billion during 2021/22.

Mark Dawe, AELP chief executive

Then in February, the AELP revealed it had estimated around £500 million had been allocated by the ESFA for delivering apprenticeships for SMEs for between January 2018 and March 2019 – which would be a massive decrease from the £1 billion available for this provision in the previous 12-month period.

The Federation of Small Businesses’ policy and advocacy chair Martin McTague said properly-funded apprenticeships are “vital in tackling the chronic skills shortages affecting many small businesses”, which was why many SMEs champion them.

But, he warned “unless urgent action is taken, there is a real danger of apprenticeships becoming unaffordable for smaller businesses”.

“AELP’s research puts in clear focus the looming black hole, which unaddressed will exacerbate skills shortages and deny opportunities to young people and those furthest from the jobs market.”

Meanwhile the National Audit Office has warned employers are “developing and choosing more expensive standards at higher levels than was expected”.

As a means of rebalancing spending by levy payers and non-levy payers, the AELP has suggested stopping public funding for level 6 and 7 apprenticeships, often among the most expensive programmes.

The AELP surveyed 235 providers, 148 of which had ESFA funding contracts in 2018-19.

Hinds sought parity of esteem but his policy adviser says it’s ‘impossible’

Trying to achieve parity of esteem between technical and academic education is “totally pointless and impossible”, a former special adviser to the education secretary has said.

Damian Hinds made striving for parity between the two routes one his top priorities while heading up the Department for Education from January 2018 to July 2019.

He said in a speech in December this was the department’s “ultimate goal” and tried to achieve it mainly by pushing through T-levels – dubbed the biggest reform of technical qualifications for a decade.

We don’t need parity of esteem. Germany doesn’t

But Jon Yates (pictured), who advised Hinds during his 18 month tenure, has branded this ambition as “madness”.

In a Twitter thread today, entitled “why is the UK crap at technical education?”, he said attempting to attain parity of esteem is “totally pointless and impossible.

“Lots of countries have great technical education. None of them have parity of esteem. Including Germany.

“I asked Germans what the big problem with their education system was. ‘Today, everyone wants to go to university. There is no parity of esteem.’ Same in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Singapore. Everywhere.

“The academic route will always lead to certain high status – from judge, teacher, civil servant, doctor. When we create a technical route to a middle class job, we pretend it’s an academic route! Try telling your doctor friends that they took a vocational route. (They did).”

He continued: “Academic courses will always have the halo of higher esteem. That’s life. So let’s forget about it.

“Who cares? We don’t need parity of esteem. Germany doesn’t. Focus on quality, not esteem. By quality I mean: will the course get you a skilled job? If it will, enough esteem will follow. Today, too often, it doesn’t.”

Yates, who ran a training provider before becoming a political adviser, left the DfE when Hinds went to the backbenches after being sacked as education secretary by new prime minister Boris Johnson last month.

He said everyone “focuses far too much on schools and not enough on colleges”, and a “top priority by far should be to fix the UK’s constant underperformance at technical education”.

He asked why the UK has been “crap” at technical education for over 70 years, and explained it is fundamentally because people with influence, such as politicians and journalists, “don’t think about it”.

He said there are three reasons as to why this is the case: Because hardly any influential people did it, because the public don’t talk about it, and because the public “secretly think that technical education is for stupid, not very capable student”.

“This disinterest means that when the government decides (again) to ‘fix’ technical education – no one pays any attention,” Yates added.

“People would say that Damian Hinds wasn’t doing much radical reform when he was making the biggest reform of technical qualifications for a decade.

“This lack of interest means that after a year of so – when reform gets hard – the government simply gives in. And nothing changes. Bad news for the 50 per cent not doing A-levels. But there will no marches, petitions. Nothing.”

You can read Jon Yates’ Twitter thread in full here:

 

“Everyone focuses far too much on schools and not enough on colleges. (And by everyone, I mean everyone – especially the public, i.e., you dear reader.)

Which is a problem as the top priority by far should be to fix the UK’s constant underperformance at technical education.

Despite all the noise, our education system is ok at academic teaching (we have a long problematic tail of poor performance – more on that another day – but the average is good).

But we have been crap at technical education though for 70+ years. Why? Fundamentally, because people with influence (politicians, journalists, business leaders) don’t think about it.

Why don’t influential people think about technical education? Three reasons. 1: Because hardly any influential people did it.

They therefore think most other people did A levels and went to uni.

Care to guess what % of young people do A levels?

Less than 50% of young people do A levels.

Reason 2: Because the public don’t talk about it.

Why? Because everyone’s children goes to school but only some do technical education. At DfE we received thousands of letters about school funding, hardly any about college funding.

Which is (on one level) crazy as we fund schools about the same amount as other rich countries (more on funding in future). But we fund colleges well below other rich countries. No-one external to the Department ever made this point to me.

Out of work I got lobbied often by friends about school funding. But never about college funding.

This disinterest means that when the government decides (again) to ‘fix’ technical education – no one pays any attention. People would say that Damian Hinds wasn’t doing much radical reform when he was making the biggest reform of technical qualifications for a decade.

This lack of interest means that  after a year of so – when reform gets hard – the government simply gives in. And nothing changes. Bad news for the 50% not doing A levels. But there will no marches, petitions. Nothing.

Reason 3 – linked to the above – is that the public secretly think that technical education is for stupid, not very capable student. Worse they think it is for disadvantaged, stupid, not very capable students (as though all disadvantaged students are stupid and incapable)

Therefore they think it needs to be easy. The result? A load of ‘technical’ qualifications that don’t actually train you to do a skilled job. Which makes them pointless. And when you suggest changing this, in comes the  government’s mandatory equality assessment process.

Minister: “I would like I get rid of this poor quality product and replace it with a better one.”

Equality assessment: “Hang on a moment, don’t do that – lots of people with protected characteristics use that product.”

Minister: “Exactly!!!”

In other words when you try and create technical qualifications that actually make you employable (which is the whole point of a technical qualification) people complain! (I’m looking at you Michael Rosen) “But some people won’t be able to do these!” Madness.

The other madness is trying to achieve ‘parity of esteem’. Totally pointless and impossible. Lots of countries have great technical education. None of them have parity of esteem. Including Germany…

… I asked Germans what the big problem with their education system was: “Today, everyone wants to go to university. There is no parity of esteem.” Same in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Singapore. Everywhere.

The academic route will always lead to certain high status – from judge, teacher, civil servant, doctor. When we create a technical route to a middle class job, we pretend it’s an academic route! Try telling your doctor friends that they took a vocational route. (They did)

Academic courses will always have the halo of higher esteem. That’s life. So let’s forget about it.”

FE sector leader to run as a Brexit Party candidate

The chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies has become the Brexit Party candidate for the Hastings and Rye MP seat.

Tom Bewick, a former Labour councillor, will contest work and pensions secretary Amber Rudd for the constituency at the next general election.

He told FE Week his professional duties as leader of FAB will not be impacted by his campaign, and promised his political opinions will be kept separate from his work at the body that represents hundreds of awarding organisations across England.

We support Tom Bewick in pursuing his long-standing political beliefs by standing for Parliament

The FAB board said it “accepts that employees have a right to seek public office and stand in elections”, after finding out about Bewick’s decision via an online article published yesterday.

“This is provided that the work that our staff undertake for political parties is kept separate from their professional duties and carried out in their own time,” the board’s statement added.

“We support Tom Bewick in pursuing his long-standing political beliefs by standing for Parliament.

“FAB is a non-political organisation and we are assured that Tom will continue to be a strong advocate for the issues that are put forward by the members of the Federation; and we do not believe that his political viewpoints will have any impact on his proven professionalism in this area; or on his day-to-day role and responsibilities as chief executive of FAB.”

Bewick, who became FAB chief executive in March 2018, said thousands of ordinary people stand for elections every year and he will “be able to cover those two responsibilities”.

“I think I have demonstrated throughout my career when I’ve held down multiple roles and a professional job, and a political career, I don’t think it’s ever been raised I’m not focused on the day job,” he told FE Week.

“People have all sorts of hobbies and do other things with their spare time, alas my spare time has been taken up with campaigning, but in terms of my day to day professional role, that will continue.

“I will be a strong advocate for the awarding and assessment industry and importantly, I have a 25 year record and career in education and skills, so I will continue as an expert in that field.”

Bewick chaired the Brighton and Hove city council’s education committee for the Labour Party before resigning from the party in May because he was “absolutely appalled by the antisemitism in the party”.

He was also unhappy with Labour’s position on Brexit, especially as Hastings voted to leave the European Union in 2016.

Explaining the reason behind his move to the Brexit Party, Bewick said: “I have had longstanding views about the importance of the UK leaving the European Union. I do believe Britain’s best days lie ahead as an independent, self-governing nation.

“And obviously we live in a period where, three years on from the referendum result, it hasn’t been delivered by parliament and that obvious frustration has come out in the sense that the Brexit Party has come into being. It’s a coalition of patriots across the political spectrum, from left and right.”

Bewick will continue to hold his position at FAB during his campaign, but if he is elected to parliament he will have to resign.

“My contract does not preclude me from standing for public office or being in an elected position,” he said.

“As with all organisations, you have to keep your professional role different from your political role, but I think you can see from my track record that I do that quite scrupulously and the board appreciates that and knows that.”

Bewick is co-founder of Franklin Apprenticeships in the US, and founded the Transatlantic Apprenticeship Exchange Forum in 2015 to promote opportunities for UK training providers in the US.

He led the International Skills Standards Organisation Ltd for four years, from 2011 to 2015, and prior to that was chief executive of Enterprise UK, a former government quango, from 2010 to 2011.

Other government roles include adviser to the minister for adult skills in the early 2000s.

 

Ofsted watch: Two providers drop from ‘good’ to ‘inadequate’

A council and a specialist college have received the worst possible rating from Ofsted, in a week where three early monitoring reports at new providers recorded ‘insufficient progress’ scores.

North Lincolnshire Council and Cambian Lufton College in Somerset saw their ratings drop by two grades from ‘good’.

The inspectorate found a set of poor teaching and learning outcomes at North Lincolnshire Council, and claimed that its community learning programme includes ‘‘too many courses that learners attend purely for recreational purposes”.

The report highlighted falling completion rates, high levels of truancy and community learning courses which were not adding to leaners’ existing skills and knowledge.

Managers’ data analysis of where the service needs to be improved was said to be poor, and governors were said to have insufficient power to challenge management decisions.

Safeguarding at the council was said to be effective.

Cambian Lufton College in Somerset was also downgraded to ‘inadequate’ over “significant” safeguarding concerns, as FE Week reported on Wednesday.

Two new private providers – Shl Training Solutions Ltd and Rita’s Training Services Ltd – were both criticised for allegedly failing to meet the basic requirements of an apprenticeship, in their first monitoring visits since they won direct contracts with the ESFA.

Ofsted claimed that this was the case at both providers because they allocated insufficient time for off-the-job training.

Other elements of provision at Rita’s Training Services Ltd, which was deemed to have made ‘insufficient progress’ in two of the three criteria in its report, were broadly praised by the inspections body.

Ofsted engaged in further criticism of Shl Training Solutions Ltd, which was deemed to have made ‘insufficient progress’ across all areas. The body said apprentices at that provider who “have been in the same employment for many years repeat much of what they know and can do already”.

Safeguarding practices were also criticised. The provider was said to have a “comprehensive range” of safeguarding policies but implementation was often insufficiently tracked.

Hertfordshire Catering Ltd, an employer provider, was also found making ‘insufficient progress’ in two areas of its early monitoring report.

Ofsted drew attention to the fact that no learners completed their courses on time, and said that the basic requirements of an apprenticeship were not being fulfilled.

Apprentices were found not to be developing new skills and it was claimed that many learners have a “higher level of competency in cookery and hospitality than they require to complete their apprenticeship”.

Ofsted said the provider did not properly assess learners’ basic skills at the start of their programme, apprentices did not know enough about their programme and directors were given insufficient information to challenge management decisions.

Private provider Omega Training Services Ltd was deemed to be ‘requires improvement’ for the second time in a row in two years.

Almost half of learners were not completing their courses on time and staff were deemed to be poorly trained. Ofsted said the provider displayed a good understanding of where it needs to improve.

There was better news for Lincolnshire County Council, which retained a ‘good’ rating for the third time in a row, and for private provider dip (Batley) Ltd, which was deemed to be making ‘significant progress’ in two areas of its early monitoring report.

Ofsted praised Lincolnshire Council for providing disadvantaged young people with “excellent opportunities to attend learning venues close to their homes”, with learners making good progress in an environment which set the bar high for all learners regardless of their starting point.

It said that commissioning procedures were “robust” although good practice was not always shared between teams and too few learners were achieving good outcomes in English and maths.

Provision at dip (Batley) Ltd was praised, after Ofsted found the provider’s leaders have a “very clear and well-established curriculum strategy”.

“They provide courses for unemployed people in the local area to support them to develop the skills they need to gain employment,” inspectors added.

Elsewhere, six providers were deemed to be making ‘reasonable progress’ across all areas of their early monitoring reports; Careshield Ltd, Gecko Programmes Ltd, SPS Training Solutions, Aspire to Learn Limited, The Football League (Community) Limited and Lul Noninee Bcv Ltd.

 

Independent Specialist College Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Cambian Lufton College 25/06/2019 31/07/2019 4 2

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Omega Training Services Ltd  09/07/2019 29/07/2019 3 3
Careshield Ltd  10/07/2019 29/07/2019 M N/A
dip (Batley) Ltd 26/06/2019 29/07/2019 M N/A
Gecko Programmes Ltd  16/07/2019 01/08/2019 M N/A
SPS Training Solutions  19/06/2019 30/07/2019 M N/A
Aspire to Learn Limited 17/07/2019 02/08/2019 M N/A
Rita’S Training Services 10/07/2019 02/08/2019 M N/A
Shl Training Solutions Ltd 24/06/2019 02/08/2019 M N/A
The Football League (Community) Limited 09/07/2019 02/08/2019 M N/A

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
North Lincolnshire Council  18/06/2019 31/07/2019 4 2
Lincolnshire County Council 11/06/2019 02/08/2019 2 2

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Lul Noninee Bcv Ltd  19/06/2019 01/08/2019 M N/A
Hertfortdshire Catering Limited  26/06/2019 01/08/2019 M N/A

Stalled manifesto plan back on track for apprentice travel subsidy?

Officials are finally preparing a cross-departmental “proposal” for cutting travel costs for apprentices.

It is being worked on by the Department for Education and Department for Transport, more than two years after the Conservatives pledged to discount public transport for apprentices in their election manifesto.

The government has stalled on implementing the commitment to date, although officials have announced they will provide half price rail fares to 16 and 17 year-olds from September 2019.

In December, the Commons education select committee said ministers must stop “dragging their feet” on apprentice transport costs.

In answer to a parliamentary question from Stephanie Peacock, the MP for Barnsley East, new children’s minister Kemi Badenoch, who will also provide support for the skills brief with education secretary Gavin Williamson, said on Friday: “The Department for Education and the Department for Transport are currently preparing a joint proposal for discounted public transport, including bus and train travel, for apprentices.

“They are keen to work with stakeholders to address how we can best ensure that young people are not deterred from taking up apprenticeship opportunities due to travel costs and will continue to work together to support other forms of discounted travel for apprentices.”

She added: “In January 2019, the government announced the 16-17 Railcard, which will offer half price rail fares to 16 and 17 year-olds from September 2019.

“This will benefit apprentices and those in further education. Further details about the 16-17 Railcard will be announced later this year.”

The DfE and DfT said in November 2017 they were then exploring options for discounted apprentice travel. FE Week has asked them what has taken so long to develop this, and when its new “proposal” for cutting travels costs for apprentices will be implemented.

In January 2018 the Skills Commission, made up of an influential group of education leaders, business and MPs, said the government was harming young and disadvantaged apprentices with its failure to ease their travel costs, in a major inquiry into the impact of the apprenticeship reforms.

Juliana Mohamad Noor, National Union of Students’ vice president for further education, has now urged the government to get a move on with its commitment.

“We know that this is a huge issue for apprentices and students and so this is a welcome commitment, however, at the moment it remains just a commitment,” she told FE Week.

“This has been promised again and again but now is the time for the government to put it into action.

“The problems that apprentices face are in no way limited to travel costs, however, and this should be the beginning of the government taking note and action on working conditions, pay and living costs.”

Williamson has his work cut out if he’s to get Britain’s skills system up to scratch

The new education secretary has his work cut out. Additional funding for skills and apprenticeships must also be met with reform. The skills funding system is the place to start, says Lawrence Barton  

Assigning direct responsibility for skills and apprenticeships to the education secretary was certainly unexpected. If it does lead to a genuine prioritising of the brief in Government then the move should be welcomed. The fear, however, is that Williamson’s portfolio, even with the support of Kemi Badenoch, becomes so unwieldy that skills ends up being neglected.

And be under no illusion – the challenges the education secretary faces are significant. The pledge to invest more in further education is encouraging, but money alone is not enough if we are to see the genuine transformation of skills and apprenticeships the UK workforce needs.

The fear is that Williamson’s portfolio becomes so unwieldy that skills ends up being neglected

Funding needs to be met with real reform and the skills funding system is a good place to start. The adult education budget (AEB) funding allocation system is antiquated, overly complex and prevents money getting to where it’s needed.

The funding allocation figures recently published by the ESFA illustrate this point. Despite being deemed by Ofsted as being in a state of required improvement, Newcastle College Group (NCG), Birmingham Metropolitan College, and Barnet and Southgate College have ranked among the largest recipients of automatically allocated AEB funding. Collectively, they received over £5 million. Moulton College, rated by Ofsted as ‘inadequate’ in consecutive years received over £1 million.

The list is littered with colleges judged by Ofsted as having significant shortcomings, and yet still find themselves in the privileged position of receiving automatic funding each year. Independent training providers (ITPs) meanwhile, irrespective of the quality of their training provision, are excluded.

The funding list demonstrates one aspect of the inequity between colleges and training providers, but the imbalance extends elsewhere. As Ian Ross wrote here recently, irrespective of any automatic allocations, colleges and local authorities can still bid against training providers for additional funding through open procurement.

As well as stifling competition, the heavy emphasis towards colleges creates a bottleneck in funding. Each year money fails to get to where it’s needed. As FE Week’s analysis has shown, procured college funding frequently results in persistent underspends, which often occur despite approaches by independent providers to sub-contract training during the academic year. Instead, poor monitoring of enrolments and drawdowns mean colleges often only recognise their underspend when it’s too late. The nature of the current system means there is little incentive to improve their monitoring.

In the past, effective relationship managers at the then Local Skills Council (LSC) could provide some respite through their understanding of local allocation and demand and so would be better placed to keep the cogs of the system turning. Significant staff cuts at its reincarnation – first as the SFA and now as the ESFA – mean this is no longer the case. 

Add to this the reduction in growth request opportunities training providers are able to submit to the ESFA and you’re left with a system that is uncompetitive, breeds complacency among poor performing colleges, restricts the ability of successful training providers to grow and stifles learner outcomes.

The situation is made more frustrating because effective solutions are achievable. Rather than precluding those FE colleges in receipt of automatic funding from tendering for procurement funding as some have suggested (and thus stifling competition further). Instead, the government should allow independent training providers in good financial health, with turnover above a certain threshold, and with a consistent Ofsted rating of ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ to qualify for automatic funding. Smaller providers meeting financial and quality criteria, meanwhile, should have the opportunity to form regional consortia with other providers to receive automatic funding.

Running in parallel – and like the requirements imposed on independent training providers currently – those colleges who consistently fail to achieve satisfactory Ofsted ratings of ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ over two consecutive inspections should have their automatic AEB allocations reduced.

Only by simplifying the funding system, introducing effective competition and bolstering the provider liaison resources of the ESFA can we drive up standards for the betterment of both providers and learners.

NCG announces new chief executive

England’s largest college group has appointed Liz Bromley as its new chief executive.

NCG will welcome the former deputy vice chancellor at the University of Central Lancashire to the top post on 19 August.

She will take over from the college group’s deputy chief executive Chris Payne, who has been serving as acting chief executive since October 2018 when Joe Docherty stepped down with immediate effect following a turbulent year.

Liz will bring huge drive and creativity as well as a successful track record in education leadership

NCG had begun its hunt for a new permanent chief executive immediately after Docherty resigned but paused the process in early 2019 after its initial hunt proved fruitless and it turned its focus to “improving standards”.

Bromley said she is “truly delighted” to be joining this “ambitious group of colleges”.

“Further Education has never been needed more or been better placed to answer the needs of our emerging workforce, and to offer opportunities to everyone who wants to learn,” she added.

“NCG represents everything that matters most in the education sector – offering relevant learning at all levels in our local communities, but also working across boundaries to ensure best practice in teaching and leadership development right across the sector.”

Bromley’s appointment comes at a time of change and trouble for NCG. It is currently consulting on major staff redundancies at its two private providers – Intraining and Rathbone Training.

Intraining in particular has been hit with quality concerns, which have included falling achievement rates, a poor Ofsted report, and a mystery audit that found dodgy data.

Elsewhere, staff at its colleges in London have gone on strike in a row over pay – with union officials even calling on the FE Commissioner to consider de-merging them – and a free school that the group sponsored, the Discovery School, was forced to close down by the government last year.

NCG is currently subject to intervention from the FE Commissioner owing to its Ofsted grade three, and has been waiting for a “diagnostic visit” over the summer.

Still, Bromley is eager to get started: “I am looking forward to working with my new colleagues and privileged to be leading NCG as we open up opportunities for learners right across the UK,” she said.

Having worked in other senior roles across the education sector – including at the University of Salford and Goldsmiths, University of London – Bromley has also been a board member of the National Centre for Entrepreneurship in Education, the CBI North West and a governor and trustee of the Sir John Brunner Foundation.

“We are very excited about Liz joining the team here at NCG and can see the immediate value she will be able to add to our journey to make the group a great place to learn, teach and work,” said Payne.

Peter Lauener, NCG chair, added: “Liz will bring huge drive and creativity as well as a successful track record in education leadership.

“On top of that she brings an absolute commitment to developing the highest standards of education and training in all our colleges so that they can provide a beacon of opportunity for all our learners in the diverse communities we serve.”

NCG comprises Newcastle College, Newcastle Sixth Form College, Lewisham College, Southwark College, Carlisle College, Kidderminster College, West Lancashire College, Rathbone Training and InTraining.

Labour’s advisory board considering tax credit employer incentives

A Labour Party commission has set out what it calls a “radical new direction” for lifelong learning, including the potential role for tax credits in leveraging employer engagement in training.

The political party’s independent Lifelong Learning Commission, which is co-chaired by former education secretary Estelle Morris and general secretary of the Communication Workers Union Dave Ward, has today published an interim report.

It describes “deep-seated” challenges facing lifelong learning, from a funding fall of nearly half in real terms since 2009-10 for adult education and apprenticeships, to the “catastrophic loss” of people aged 19 or over in further education, where numbers have fallen from 4.7 million in 2004 to 2.2 million in 2016.

This interim report identifies some of the major issues with the current education system

The commission says the current adult learning sector is characterised by a “disjointed framework in which provision is driven by funding, and entitlements are narrow and prescriptive”.

It has not yet produced fixed policy proposals, but following a series of plenary sessions since its creation in March, the commission said a number of “key themes” have begun to emerge about the “potential building blocks for a fairer and more accessible system of lifelong learning”.

Among the areas that will now be explored further is the creation of a “single integrated system” that involves all FE and HE providers “working in conjunction with credit accumulation” and creating a “credit transfer system”.

It will look at how tax credits and other financial incentives could be used to leverage employers’ engagement in training – an idea that was floated Robert Halfon last month when he launched the Commons education select committee’s own lifelong learning inquiry.

There is also a commitment to explore a set of “clear entitlements to learning – some universal and some tailored according to need – supported by appropriate funding and infrastructure”, as well as a “shift in the relationship between learners and providers from short-term transactional enrolment to a lifelong, mutually beneficial relationship”.

The commission also believes a new, independent, national information, advice and guidance service, which helps people to understand their learning entitlements and options for progression, is needed.

To take forward these ideas, four “workstreams” – people, providers, employers and funding and policy – have been established where individual stakeholder groups will “provide a forensic, detailed focus and collation of insights”.

This will include an “initial assessment of the costs and benefits of our proposals, taking into account cross departmental responsibilities and the wider benefits of learning”.

Labour’s lifelong learning commission has been set up to develop the party’s policy of free education “from cradle to grave” in its proposed National Education Service.

The policy has come under a lot of fire for its lack of detail to date but the commission’s final report, which will be published later this year, is promised to include comprehensive proposals complete with real funding models.

Gordon Marsden

“This interim report identifies some of the major issues with the current education system and seeks to set out a radical vision for lifelong learning in the twenty-first century,” said Ward and Morris.

“We hope that this, along with the commission’s final report later in the year, will inform Labour’s National Education Service and that our society will become one where opportunities for high quality learning throughout life are available in every community.”

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden told FE Week the Labour party is “very pleased” with what the commission has achieved since March to “stake out the radical transformational strategy, and already in an interim report that makes very clear that ambition and direction of travel, to indicate areas which its workstreams have been covering”.

The commission is asking for feedback on its ideas. Views can be sent to labourlifelonglearning@gmail.com by 22 August.

Second round of apprenticeship standard reviews launched

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has today launched a route review of standards in the creative and design industries.

It will look at 15 different apprenticeships across the sector, including bespoke tailor and cutter, watchmaker, bespoke saddle maker and broadcast production assistant (see full list below).

The review follows an announcement by the IfATE of a review into the hair and beauty route on Monday, which will look at just one standard – the level 2 hair professional.

The institute said both reviews are necessary in order to ensure high standards in the sectors and retain a good match between the skill set offered by the apprenticeship, the needs of the apprentice and the needs of employers.

Both reviews are beginning with an eight week public consultation, which will allow stakeholders including employers, providers and apprentices to offer their feedback on the standards.

Anna Osborne, the deputy director of approvals at the institute said of the creative and design sector review: “I would like to thank all of the creative and design employers and stakeholders who helped develop the broad variety of apprenticeships we have in place so far.

“The focus of the review will be to improve the quality of our apprenticeships and ensure they are fully up to date with apprenticeship requirements and the needs of both apprentices and employers. This will ensure they’re well placed to serve the creative and design sector for years to come.”

Iain Smith, co-chair of the institute’s creative and design route panel of sector experts, added that this is a “fantastic opportunity to help shape the future of apprenticeships in sectors where there are notable skills gaps”.

The first such route review was conducted by the IfATE last year into the digital sector, which published its recommendations in May. The outcome saw 12 standards become nine.

Among the wider recommendations was a trial of “gender-neutral” language – after research found “masculine” words in job adverts, such as “ambition”, “challenging” and “leader”, deter women from applying.

In early 2018 the institute came in for criticism for having failed to carry out any formal review of duplicate, narrow or low-skill standards since its launch.

It was urged to do so “at the earliest opportunity” by Lord Sainsbury in his report of the independent panel on technical education, published July 2016.

This week’s review announcements come nearly a month after another batch of results of the IfATE’s second funding band review.

It covers 30 standards and to date, 27 have had new funding bands signed off. The remaining three standards are expected to have their final funding bands revealed later this year.

The creative and design route consultation closes on 24 September, and the one for hair and beauty closes on 22 September.

 

The 15 standards in the creative and design route review:

 

Bespoke Tailor and Cutter

Watchmaker

Spectacle maker

Junior Journalist

Outside Broadcast Engineer

Live Event Rigger

Assistant Technical Director – visual effects

Junior 2D Artist – visual effects

Broadcast Production Assistant

Creative Venue Technician

Junior Content Producer

Bespoke Saddler

Organ builder

Live Event Technician

Publishing Assistant

The standard in the hair and beauty route review:

Level 2 Hair Professional