A college at risk of insolvency after its income halved in seven years has been handed a financial health notice to improve by the Education and Skills Funding Agency.
Cheadle and Marple Sixth Form College is one of two colleges to be handed such a notice today; the other, Warrington and Vale Royal College, was served the notice after having ‘inadequate’ financial health in 2017/18.
Both have now been referred to the FE Commissioner Richard Atkins for intervention.
The notice to Cheadle and Marple says “there is, or in the foreseeable future there is likely to be, a risk to the solvency or financial viability” of the institution, which generated a £3 million deficit in 2017/18.
A £7 million drop in income, which was blamed on a declining student intake and funding reductions, took the college from £15.6 million in 2010/11 to £8.3 million in 2017/18.
In order to make up for this shortfall, the college sold land to the Department for Education in 2017 for £6.3 million, to build two new free schools.
The area review for the college, based in Stockport, recommended it convert to an academy and join a multi-academy trust.
However, the college instead proposed it join a federation supported by Liverpool Hope University, a move that was endorsed by the ESFA.
The college’s latest accounts show there was an operating cash outflow of £3.6 million in 2017/18.
A grade three college, Cheadle and Marple received a share of a £1.8 million strategic improvement funding in March, as part of a scheme to help struggling colleges.
A college spokesperson said about the notice to improve that it was working with the ESFA to explore options for dealing with cash flow issues it expects to face “over the coming months”.
It said the issues had been “largely caused by a number of years of low demographics against a backdrop of funding cuts”.
Warrington and Vale Royal College also received a grade three at its last inspection, but was found to have made ‘reasonable’ or ‘significant progress’ in every area of an ensuing monitoring visit.
It won a contract in the Liverpool City Region AEB tender in May, but its 2017/18 accounts predicted it would fail to meet its bank loan covenants in 2018/19.
Following its creation in a merger between Warrington Collegiate and Mid Cheshire College, staff costs soared at the newly-formed institution by more than £6 million.
Principal Nichola Newton said the college has experienced “continued financial challenge”, and it has been working closely with the agency and the FE Commissioner throughout the last year to monitor the college’s financial health, something that will continue to happen going forward.
Both colleges have been set a series of conditions by the ESFA as a consequence of the notice to improve.
They must work with the agency and the FE Commissioner, who may intervene at either of them; must submit a draft financial recovery plan and monthly management accounts; and allow the agency to attend board meetings.
Employers lost access to £26 million of their apprenticeship levy funds in June, the skills minister has revealed.
The figure, revealed in an answer to a parliamentary question from Catherine McKinnell, the MP for Newcastle upon Tyne North, means that a “staggering” £37 million has been clawed back by government after the first two months that levy funds can expire from employers’ accounts.
As per levy rules, big businesses with a payroll of £3 million or more who pay into the pot have a 24-month limit to spend their funds.
Once that time is up, the funds will expire on a month-by-month basis.
This amounted for 8 per cent of the £135 million employers paid in May 2017.
There are no figures available for how much employers paid into their levy accounts in June 2017.
Skills Minister Anne Milton told McKinnell: “As well as funding apprenticeships in levy-paying employers, levy contributions are also used to fund training for existing apprenticeship learners and new apprenticeships in non-levy paying employers.
“We do not anticipate that all employers who pay the levy will need or want to use all the funds in their accounts, however they are able to do this.”
McKinnell, who chairs the All-party Parliamentary Group on Apprenticeships, reacted on Twitter saying it is “increasingly pressing” that the government looks at innovative ways of using unspent levy funds after a “staggering” £37 million has already been clawed back by government”.
This is becoming increasingly pressing, given that – after just 2 months of unused Levy funds expiring from employers’ accounts – a staggering *£37m* has already been clawed back by Govt @NickLinfordpic.twitter.com/h0xTd9pJVI
New funding bands should be talked about before they are introduced, not reviewed afterwards, says Sue Pittock
When the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) published the outcomes of its latest round of funding band reviews on July 1, it was only a matter of time before employers and training providers voiced their concerns – not only about the reviews, but how they are conducted.
Theo Paphitis, the retail magnate and entrepreneur, spoke about Ryman’s worry that the cuts to the retail team leader and retail manager programmes would be “damaging to the quality apprenticeships we want to offer”. This followed the decision by Halford to scrap its level 2 programme after a similar cut and Scania speaking out about the impacts of the now confirmed cut to the heavy goods vehicle standard.
In a reformed system that pledged to put employers in the driving seat and to work collaboratively, why are so many employers unhappy with how the IfATE is allocating funding bands?
In May, Lucy Rigler, the IfATE’s head of funding, acknowledged that the review of funding bands “had not always been well-received” and committed to reviewing the impact of any reviews on subsequent starts on programmes, and other measures. But what the sector needs is greater collaboration and communication before the confirmation of a new funding band, not a review of the impact of a cut after the event.
As the leader of a training provider, there is no feeling of collaboration in the review process. We have heard from trailblazer chairs that communication throughout the review is limited, with appeals rejected with no feedback as to why.
When funding bands are reduced, providers often cannot afford to sustain the planned delivery model
The process feels hampered by the IfATE’s concern that greater transparency would lead to abuse by providers. Sir Gerry Berragan, the institute’s chief executive, said that his refusal to share the funding formula was driven by concerns that providers would “misuse” the information to increase costs.
This lack of engagement and collaboration ultimately impacts on the employer and the learner, putting the future availability and quality of programmes at risk.
At Remit we decided to start delivering standards as soon as they became available. We are now two years in, with fantastic results in end-point assessment, but this has come at a real cost. Delivering apprenticeship standards well is an expensive business. High-quality resources, technology-enabled content and expert tutors to deliver technical workshops and masterclasses all come at a significant investment, and all this before you consider the costs of end-point assessment.
Where funding bands are reduced, providers often cannot afford to sustain the delivery model they originally planned. Programme content must be reviewed, and efficiencies must be sought. This is not something that employers want to hear; they want to pay for a product that delivers what their business needs. This ultimately affects employers’ engagement with apprenticeships, as well as their appetite to invest time and energy designing and building programmes with their training partners that are vulnerable to changes after launch.
The government is right to want good value for money, but it should pay for what it asks for. Detailed initial assessments of knowledge, skills and behaviour and high-quality enrolment sessions that set expectations for the programme are essential, but not paid for as part of the apprenticeship programme. Upskilling to level 2 functional skills is important, but not adequately funded at £471 per aim where the learner has not achieved this level during all their time in the school’s system.
Remit really cares about what it does. We don’t want to be in a position where we have to impact the quality of our programmes to deliver within a reduced funding band. We certainly don’t want to do this without having had the right opportunity to discuss what we deliver, how we deliver it, and the impact it creates for learners, employers and UK plc with the IfATE in an open and transparent way. We all need to work together and bring to life the spirit of collaboration the IfATE so often talks about.
Participation levels in lifelong learning are tumbling, says Ewart Keep. Action is needed – and now
The return of lifelong learning as a policy issue has recently been building: reviews have been published and recommendations made to tackle the challenges facing the UK workforce. We now need action. Why?
First, automation and digital technologies are forecast to have a major impact on employees, from professionals in law and healthcare to retail workers. Besides those displaced as their jobs are automated, many more will see their roles change and will need new skills to do them. For example, Australian research suggests that workers now spend two hours fewer a week on physical and routine tasks than 15 years ago; retraining and upskilling will be essential to keep up with this change.
Second, more and better lifelong learning is vital to support in-work progression as people seek to move up the pay ladder or to change jobs. Lifelong learning also helps citizens to be better equipped to grapple with the challenges of the modern world. This realisation dawned on many other countries in the past century, but it is only now becoming apparent in England.
Finally, the case for more and better lifelong learning has coincided with a growing, if reluctant, recognition that current adult education and training in England is a policy car crash. Since 2010, the adult education budget has plummeted 45 per cent in real terms and the transfer of funding to the loans system has resulted in adult participation in level 3 courses tumbling from 283,000 in 2010-11 to 190,000 in 2016-17. This reflects falling general participation in learning by 25 to 64-year-olds across the UK, from 20 to 14 per cent between 2010 and 2016, the largest drop in Europe, and contrasts with significant increases in France, where participation rose from 5 to 19 per cent during the same period.
So what happens next? Two inquiries of note point the way: the House of Lords economic affairs committee’s 2018 inquiry report into the economics of post-school education, and more recently the publication of the review into post-18 education and funding conducted by Philip Augar.
Augar recommended a major redistribution of public funding from 18 to 24-year-olds towards a broader loan entitlement to underwrite more adult retraining and upskilling. The fate of this lies in the lap of the next prime minister.
The only other major policy development in England is the national retraining scheme, which is piloting small-scale experiments in new ways of delivering retraining to low-skilled adults in the digital and construction sectors in a partnership between government, the CBI and TUC. It doesn’t become fully operational until 2022 and the scale of long-term funding is yet to be decided.
Envious glances are cast at Singapore’s SkillsFuture programme
Envious glances are cast at Singapore’s SkillsFuture programme, which offers an individual learning account worth S$500 (£300) a person, which can be used with 500 approved providers.
But thinking is moving forward elsewhere in the UK. Scotland still retains a low key version of individual learning accounts, first tried in England in the early 2000s, but rapidly discontinued by Labour when major provider fraud emerged. The Welsh government, aided by the Learning and Work Institute, is in the process of investigating what a “right to adult learning” might look like in Wales.
Back in England, Labour has set up the independent Commission on Lifelong Learning to recommend policies as part of the party’s commitment to create a national education service. I am one of the 16 appointed members.
There is plenty of activity because the need for more and better lifelong learning provision, and how to fund it, is not an issue that will go away. We can only hope that the new prime minister will put lifelong learning near the top of his
to-do pile.
The recently announced higher technical qualifications should be seen as more than a re-badge of existing qualifications, says Kirstie Donnelly
The UK is unarguably a country steeped in traditional academic education routes. For too long the pathway through A-levels and on to a university degree has been considered “the norm”. Last year a record number of young people were accepted on to university courses, but we don’t yet know the impact either on them personally or on UK productivity as a whole.
At the same time, technical and vocational training options have been cast into the shadows, often – wrongly – deemed a poor alternative for post-16 learners and certainly more poorly funded.
It was therefore a welcome change to learn earlier this week of the Department for Education’s intention to rebadge the current level 4 and level 5 qualifications as higher technical qualifications.
While this is just one small adjustment, it is a much-needed step along the path to building parity of esteem between academic and technical education. After all, vocational training is key to unlocking economic prosperity.
Last summer we reported that a staggering 90 per cent of employers were struggling to recruit people with the right skills for their business and two thirds anticipated that skills gaps would stay the same, or worsen, over the coming years.
Rebadging qualifications to help persuade parents, employers and learners of their value is important
Earlier this month the Open University released its Business Barometer that shows skills shortages have become more prevalent in the past year. This is felt more acutely in sectors such as science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) where, according to the provider STEM Learning, the skills gap is costing businesses more than £1.5 billion every year.
The impact on businesses and our wider economy is of course critical, but we cannot overlook the individuals suffering here too. The generations who make up the future of our country deserve the best routes into employment.
Tuition fees have increased steeply since their introduction, and without the guaranteed employment and high earnings of a university education enjoyed by previous generations, many young graduates are facing crippling financial debt with no escape in sight.
While university rightly remains one of the routes into work for many people and is valued by a number of industries, it is not the only route. There is significant work to be done, not only to increase visibility and viability of technical pathways for young people, but also to ensure that decision-makers, parents and teachers are aware of the full range of post-16 education options, not least the learners themselves.
Vocational training opens up direct routes into employment for so many industries at a time when the associated skills could not be more in demand. What’s more, research from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research shows that those with higher vocational qualifications in STEM subjects earn on average £5,000 more than university graduates by the age of 30.
This week’s announcement is a positive step to open up choice, but it needs to be placed within the broader context of our education and skills landscape. With a changing government it is uncertain which, if any, of its recommendations in the recently published Augar review of post-18 education and funding will be adopted.
Rebadging qualifications to help persuade parents, employers and, crucially, learners of their value is important, but this must go hand in hand with investment into further and technical education as a whole, as well as being clearer on the impact measures.
At City & Guilds we know that skills policy has the potential to transform the future of the UK, but to succeed it needs to be accurately measured against pre-determined benchmarks – and technical qualifications are no exception.
Without evidence-based policy development and a transparent approach to measuring the value of such reforms, vocational education will never be able to truly demonstrate its potential to benefit our society and economy.
The new prime minister will have to rise to the skills and productivity challenge, and make sure that everyone, no matter where they come from, can get a chance to have a great job, says skills minister Anne Milton
With the end of term in mind, and alongside all the changes that are going on in government, I thought it a good moment to comment on some of the vital work in progress. I want the next prime minister to make sure the work on technical and vocational education continues to be a priority and that we build on what we have already achieved.
Significant progress has been made on our technical education reforms: the first T-levels are on track to be rolled out in 2020; the first Institutes of Technology will launch later this year; and we continue to see more people starting on apprenticeships.
I want the progress we have made to be a step change in how further education (FE) is viewed in this country. People are finally waking up to the need for a rebalance between FE and HE. There is much more recognition of the huge impact our further education sector plays in supporting more people to gain the skills they need to get a good job, get on the path to great careers – and for the country, boosting productivity.
This week we published the findings from our review of level 4 and 5 qualifications – or Higher Technical Qualifications – and we launched new proposals to make sure more people and employers can take advantage of them in the future.
All the evidence from our review highlights that higher technical skills (the type that many level 4 or 5 qualifications can provide) are increasingly in demand from employers, but the uptake remains worryingly low. Only 1 in 10 adults in England have studied for a qualification at this level, despite the prospect of better wages and job prospects.
I want the progress we have made to be a step change in how FE is viewed in this country
The skills our economy needs now and in the future are not always aligned with the qualifications on offer and we need to make sure that we change that. Young people need to be better informed when it comes to studying for jobs and careers in key sectors such as science, technology and engineering.
Some of this is about all of us continuing to bang the drum about the benefits of technical education. We need to dispel the intellectual snobbery that still exists which dissuades some students from choosing this route in favour of a traditional academic option.
There is no overnight fix for changing the way technical and vocational education is seen by the public, but we can make sure that the qualifications and options that are available are high-quality, are valued by students, parents and employers and ultimately get more people on a path to a good, well-paid job.
That is at the heart of everything we are doing – from the introduction of new T-levels, our reforms to apprenticeships, as well as consulting on changes to post-16 qualifications at level 3 and below, and our new level 4 and 5 proposal. It is all about providing a choice of high-quality options as well as logical, clear training routes that everyone can understand.
I have said it many times before but it’s worth repeating that the further education sector is the beating heart of all of this. Without it, without you, none of this would be possible.
You all do an amazing job and I want that continue. We still have a long way to go and I know many of you have raised concerns about funding in particular.
These are once-in-a-generation reforms and while I don’t imagine that we are going to get everything right at the first time of asking, if we want to make a success of them in the long term, we need a strong sustainable and coherent technical education system. This will help unlock untapped potential and boost our economy.
The new prime minister will have to rise to this challenge if we are to have the skills we need to increase productivity and make sure that everyone, no matter where they come from can get a chance to have a great job and fulfilling life. This will be critical to the future prosperity of individuals and the country as a whole.
It’s been a week of celebrations for most providers, as nearly 40 reports have returned mainly positive results.
A highlight was Lincoln UTC, which climbed from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’, but scored a grade one in three areas of its inspection.
Its report reads: “The determined and ambitious leadership of the principal, senior leaders and governors has rapidly transformed the quality of provision at the college.”
Another UTC, Energy Coast, excelled from grade three to grade one, winning admittance to an exclusive club of such institutions with a grade one – the only other is UTC Reading.
Adult and community provider North Yorkshire County Council rose from grade three to two, thanks to effective action to improve provision.
Leaders have focused available resources “effectively” to establish a curriculum that targets the most disadvantaged and vulnerable residents, and through the skills learners gain, they “engage more actively as citizens in their communities”.
New Directions – The Learning and Employment Service for Reading maintained its grade two rating for the third consecutive inspection.
While leaders and managers have not rectified every weakness from the last inspection, they have made sure the learning and employment service continues to provide a good educational experience, and high-quality information technology has been installed in most classrooms.
Plymouth City Council let the adult and community providers down though, dropping from grade two to three for a decline in its quality of teaching, learning, assessment, and outcomes for learners.
Staff at independent provider Skills Edge Training, with 160 apprentices, were praised for working “effectively with partners to ensure provision meets local and national skills needs”, and it went from grade three to two, following a monitoring visit.
The Business Portfolio (UK) scored a ‘reasonable progress’ rating for its safeguarding provision, after a previous ‘insufficient progress’ rating. Inspectors said the provider must ensure the designated safeguarding officer and their deputy attend advanced safeguarding training.
After BPP University achieved a grade two last month, its sister independent provider BPP Actuarial Education made ‘significant progress’ in every area of provision to 39 apprentices, in a report published this week.
The Learning Foundry maintained its grade two, as: “Governors, leaders and managers have taken incisive and effective action to eradicate poor quality provision.”
WDR Limited scored ‘reasonable progress’ for its safeguarding of 60 apprentices, thanks to quick and effective action after its last monitoring visit found it had made ‘insufficient progress’ in the area.
And a making ‘insufficient progress’ in all three areas of a previous monitoring visit, Arriva London North and its 68 apprentices can take comfort in achieving ‘reasonable progress’ in safeguarding from its latest visit.
Specialist college Uplands Educational Trust scored two ‘significant progress’ and one ‘reasonable progress’ ratings for using a “variety” of assessment methods to accurately identify learners’ English and maths knowledge.
Arden College kept its grade two because leaders and managers have continued to foster highly effective partnerships with employers and community bodies.
SupaJam Education In Music and Media scored a grade two in its very first inspection; inspectors reported a “well-defined, ambitious mission for the college.”
Community College Initiative’s first outing did not go as well: it got a grade three for its directors not having sufficient knowledge of the quality of learning.
FE college Askham Bryan College was found to have “effective” procedures for keeping learners safe, and a “rigorous” system to monitor and report safeguarding problems.
USP College scored three ‘reasonable progress’ and a ‘significant progress’ ratings; leaders have carefully redesigned courses since Seevic College merged with Palmer’s College to form USP.
Suffolk New College received an ‘insufficient progress’ rating for “weak” arrangements to keep learners safe.
Eleven independent providers scored ‘reasonable progress’ across the board in monitoring visits; these were: Absolute Care Training & Education; Canal Engineering; Coleg Cambria; Construction Works (Hull); Everton in the Community; Excellence-Solutions; Innovative Alliance; On Course South West Cic; Presidency London College; Skillcert Limited; and The Federation of Groundwork Trusts.
The two universities which had Ofsted inspections of their apprenticeship provision published this week achieved three ‘reasonable progress’ ratings: University of Chester and University of Exeter.
Furthermore, both employer providers which had reports published this week, Wealden Leisure and Young & Co.’s Brewery, got three ‘reasonable progress’ ratings.
We at the IAPG seek to build an apprenticeship system that boosts both individual success and UK productivity, writes Neil Carmichael.
Ministers have rightly been focusing on the apprenticeship system in England over recent years as we face extraordinary change in the face of multiple challenges. These include: low productivity; skills shortages; changing skills needs; increased automation; demographic change; an ageing workforce, and the uncertainties of Brexit.
In the face of all the above, the Department for Education wants to transform apprenticeships to better meet employer skills needs, to create opportunities for apprentices to progress in their careers, and to draw apprentices from a wider range of social and demographic groups.
Additionally, employers are more engaged and there is more commitment and enthusiasm from a range of stakeholders. Yet despite all this, we know the apprenticeship system is experiencing its fair share of challenges. One of the key ones is the apprenticeship levy and whether it is adequately supporting the needs of all employers. This was the focus of the first roundtable discussion held by the Independent Apprenticeship Policy Group last month, which I chair.
This expert group has been brought together to provide a clear and independent overview of the problems facing the UK apprenticeship system and to generate practical solutions.
Bureaucracy can be a burden to small companies without access to an HR department
Members, who represent a wide array of interested parties that includes providers, employers and employer representative bodies, and professional and trade associations, focused on five key areas around how the levy is working: quality, affordability, SME engagement, the levels of training available and devolution.
What they found in the main was that the levy had had a positive impact on the quality of training but there are questions about how it can better support more flexible “forward-looking” quality training.
On the question of affordability, the group questioned whether apprenticeships received the necessary financial support from the levy and the accompanying funding system that sits behind it. Also, is the process used by the Education and Skills Funding Agency for allocating funds to non-levy payers fit for purpose?
We then turned to the ability of small employers to engage with, and benefit from, apprenticeships, and the bureaucracy that can prove to be a major burden to companies that are too small to have access to an HR department or support functions.
Another area discussed was “levels” of training available under the levy: while large employers may prefer to train existing staff at higher levels, small to medium enterprises (SMEs) may benefit more from support for newer and/or more junior team members. This led us to question whether the levy should distinguish between supporting higher and lower-level apprenticeships, and, if so, how.
Finally, we looked at how the different apprenticeships arrangements under devolution can raise significant hurdles for someone trying to build a UK-wide workforce development strategy.
The group will continue to hold a number of events in 2019 to bring together evidence and interview witnesses. We will look at the provider system, end-point assessment, stakeholder roles and responsibilities, and progression opportunities for apprentices. A full and final report with our findings and our practical recommendations for change will be published in time for Apprenticeship Week early in 2020.
We want to hear from the experts working within the system to help ministers understand how we can build on the huge efforts made by all involved to ensure the apprenticeship system works.
To join us in this dialogue to contribute to a successful and long-term vision for apprenticeships, visit our website or contact us on IAPG@pearson.com
Neil Carmichael, chair of the Independent Apprenticeship Group, an independent expert group sponsored by Pearson
The number of colleges led by a non-white principal has fallen to a low of 7 per cent, new FE Week analysis has revealed.
A number of initiatives to encourage and support Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) leadership have stalled in recent years and now three of the nine regions in England have no ethnic minority principals at all.
When shown the figures, the Association of Colleges admitted “there are not enough BAME leaders in FE” and said it has set up an equality and diversity steering group in response.
A series of groups aimed at increasing the number of ethnic minority college bosses have ended in recent times, including the disbanding of the AoC’s BAME Principals’ Group in 2017, the failed attempt to revive the Network for Black and Asian Professionals in 2016, and in 2015 the closure of the Black Leadership Initiative, which was launched in 2002.
Ali Hadawi, principal at Central Bedfordshire College – one of just 13 non-white general FE college bosses of 185 identified in FE Week’s study – said he was “not surprised” by the numbers and called for a “programme that targets the under-represented to understand what holds them back”.
Ali Hadawi
He told FE Week he was “fortunate enough” to benefit from two targeted initiatives during his career which no longer exist and were facilitated by the now-defunct Black Leadership Initiative.
These included a shadowing experience offered by Ofsted for BAME FE staff in 2005 and another shadowing senior civil servants to understand how policy development works in FE.
Ofsted is currently developing a similar initiative among schools in London, but it won’t be piloted in colleges.
Hadawi says the sector has shown that it can overcome underrepresentation problems, considering the current number of female college leaders. Of the 185 general FE colleges in England, 52 per cent (97) are women.
“If we look at the work that was done to enable more women principals, then that worked,” Hadawi said.
“So we have a blueprint as a sector and as a country where that has worked very well. That could be extended [to aspiring BAME leaders].”
Data released by the Education & Training Foundation (ETF) last year revealed that 9.8 per cent of college principals or chief executives were from a BAME background.
The fall this year, to 7 per cent, is likely to have occurred partly because of college mergers.
Pat Carvalho, principal at Harrow College, is no longer listed as the top boss for her institution following its merger with Uxbridge College to become HCUC in 2017. Its chief executive is Laraine Smith.
And while Andy Forbes is still the principal at City and Islington College, he’s not classed as the college’s top leader following its merger with Capital City College Group where Roy O’Shaughnessy is the chief executive. More recently, Epping Forest College announced that its principal, Saboohi Famili, was leaving her role as a result of its merger with New City College, where Gerry McDonald is the boss.
The proportion of non-white college bosses does not reflect the country’s demographics. The BAME population stood at 13 per cent at the 2011 census.
“There are not enough BAME leaders in further education, it’s as simple as that,” said Kirsti Lord, AoC’s deputy chief executive. “And this issue goes beyond just leadership roles – there is often a real lack of diversity in governing bodies and the make-up of staffing structures.”
The association told FE Week that its BAME Principals Group was wound up as part of its restructure in years gone by, but its new equality and diversity steering group is aiming to tackle the issue.
It will “keep a focus on increasing diversity in colleges’ workforce and leadership throughout future policy change, recruitment and development initiatives to ensure that this remains at the heart of decision-making and that college leadership is seen as an aspirational, achievable career for all”.
After being shown FE Week’s analysis, Lynne Sedgmore, who led the Centre for Excellence in Leadership (now the ETF) between 2004 and 2008, said: “These figures are very disappointing. When I ran CEL we placed diversity at the heart of our vision and mission and worked tirelessly to increase the number of BAME leaders in the sector at every level. There were no BAME coaches so we paid for 12 to be trained and made available to existing and aspiring black leaders.
“And we also introduced targeted support on the fast-track programmes, which included part- or fully subsidised opportunities for BAME candidates.
“I look forward to the ETF being clear about its leadership commitment to urgently support and develop more BAME leaders along with the necessary financial investment.”
The ETF said it currently offers a number of free places on numerous courses and programmes to BAME staff designed to inspire middle managers to progress. These courses include the Chairs’ Leadership Programme, which usually costs £750; the Leading from the Middle programme, which costs £975; and the Preparing for CEO programme, at £3,750 until November, and £4,500 after that.
Mark Wright, head of leadership development at the ETF, said: “We are very conscious of the need and importance of ensuring that senior leadership in the sector better reflects the ethnicity of our society and of learners. We also recognise there is a long way to go, especially as only 10 per cent of the overall FE workforce is from a BAME background.
“We also offer a one-day leadership course ‘Beyond the Blind Spots’ aimed at senior decision-makers and designed to develop leaders to overcome unconscious bias and seed cultures that are more conducive to BAME leader progression. In addition, we have a BAME mentoring programme which seeks to raise the confidence and capacity of potential BAME leaders.”
Colleges aren’t alone when it comes to a lack of diversity in leadership. Government data shows that just 7 per cent of school headteachers are from an ethnic minority background, and an investigation by FE Week’s sister paper FE Week last year found only 3 per cent of the largest academy trusts are led by non-white leaders.
A Department for Education spokesperson said: “It is vital that the teachers, leaders and governors of FE providers reflect the learners and communities that they serve.
“We provide grant funding to the ETF, which is continuing to develop support for the FE sector by running specific programmes designed to support greater diversity in leadership in the FE sector.”
A note on method
Since the DfE doesn’t publish data on the ethnicity of college principals, we’ve had a go ourselves. We’ve done this by examining photos plus names, and where we thought it necessary, contacting the person in question. We think we’ve managed to arrive at a good estimate but, as always, we are happy to be corrected regarding any errors.
Correction
The original version of this article stated there were 12 BAME principals out of 185 general FE colleges. We have since spotted that we had not counted Nav Chohan from Shipley College in Yorkshire. We updated this story on 15 July to reflect this.
