Shock new subcontracting rule to be phased in following sector criticism

A “shock” new rule that will require thousands of subcontracting contracts to be rewritten will have a phased implementation, the Education and Skills Funding Agency has revealed.

It will only apply from 1 December 2019 for new learner and apprentice starts where existing subcontracts need to be revised.

But for new starts where a new subcontract is yet to be agreed and entered into, the rule will apply from 1 August 2019.

The staggered transition follows a strong backlash from the FE sector when a change to the funding rules was revealed last Thursday, just four weeks before the start of the new academic year.

All subcontracting contracts, for both adult education budget and apprenticeship funding, must include for the first time a “list of individually itemised, specific costs for managing the subcontractor”.

In addition to listing the services, the contract must include “how each cost contributes to delivering high-quality training” and “how each specific cost is reasonable and proportionate to delivery of the subcontracted teaching or learning”.

These costs are typically referred to as a management fee or “top-slice” and have proven controversial for many years.

After learning of the rule change last week, Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, labelled it as an “immensely bureaucratic process” that “appears both out of the blue and shockingly late in the day”.

And a spokesperson for Learning Curve Group, a provider that operates as both a prime and subcontractor, told FE Week: “The administration connected to these updated requirements seems overly onerous and ambiguous from an audit perspective. 

“It is also hugely unhelpful that the publication of the rules is so late.”

According to ESFA figures for 2017-18, there were over 3,292 subcontracting contracts involving 516 main contractors and 1,032 subcontractors.

In an update about the rule change published today, the ESFA said it “recognises that subcontracting has a role to play in delivering high quality learning to apprentices and adult learners”.

“In recent years, we have strengthened our funding rules on subcontracting and we are continuing to do so,” it continued.

“We expect providers to maximise the amount of funding that reaches front line delivery of high quality learning.”

The agency said it will, ready for delivery from 1 August, implement a “risk-based approach for monitoring these rules” and “impose compliance measures when appropriate”.

“These expectations will be reviewed in 18 months.”

DfE name first 37 colleges to pilot T-level transition year

The colleges to take part in the first round of the phased implementation of the T-levels “transitional” course have been named.

The programme, recommended by Lord Sainsbury in his technical education report in July 2016, will be for 16-year-olds to take if they are not ready to start a T-level at level three, but can “realistically achieve it” by age 19.

It is being developed by the Association of Colleges, following a secretive tender earlier this year.

Thirty seven providers will pilot the course next year.

Timescales for developing and testing it will be tight, as there is just over a year to go until the first three T-levels, in digital, education and construction, are delivered.

The 37 colleges to pilot the T-levels transition course:

Access Creative College (Access to Music Ltd.)
Barnsley College
Bishop Burton College
Blackpool and The Fylde College
Bridgwater & Taunton College
Cardinal Newman College
Chichester College Group
Cirencester College
City of Stoke-on-Trent sixth Form College
Cranford Community College
Derby College
Dudley College of Technology
East Sussex College Group
Exeter College
Fareham College
Farnborough College of Technology
Gateshead College
Grimsby Institute of Further & Higher Education
Havant and South Downs College
HCUC (Harrow College and Uxbridge College)
La Retraite RC Girls School
Lordswood Girls’ School & Sixth Form Centre
Nelson and Colne College
New College Durham
Norwich City College of Further and Higher Education
Oldham Sixth Form College
Peter Symonds
Priestley College
Runshaw College
Scarborough Sixth Form College
Shipley College of Further Education
Strode College
Suffolk New College
The College of Richard Collyer
Truro and Penwith College
Ursuline High School
Weston College

 

MPs to launch inquiry into benefits of lifelong learning and local authority support

A new inquiry into the current state of adult education and lifelong learning is being launched by the House of Commons education select committee.

Former apprenticeships and skills minister Robert Halfon (pictured), who chairs the committee, will make the announcement during a speech at an event hosted by the Centre for Social Justice in London tomorrow.

A spokesperson for the committee said the inquiry is “going to be looking at the benefits of life-long learning to the economy and individuals, and also how improving adult skills can promote social justice”.

Poor access to lifelong learning is one of the great social injustices of our time

It will also be “examining the level of support available to learners from local authorities”.

Halfon will say in his speech that while it might not get the same attention as other “big-ticket items in Westminster”, poor access to lifelong learning is “one of the great social injustices of our time”.

Warning of an “enormous wave of lost opportunity about to come crashing down on the next generation of employees”, he will say it is a scandal that lifelong learning is out of reach for the millions already most disadvantaged in society.

“Lifelong learning is a more affluent person’s game,” he will tell the Centre for Social Justice.

“Those who might benefit most from adult learning and training – low-skilled people in low-income work or the unemployed – are by far the least likely to be doing it.”

Another potential problem, according to Halfon, “is the numbers of people undertaking community learning have dropped – from around 650,000 in 2011/12 to around 500,000 in 2017/18”.

He’ll say that while “just over half of those in higher socioeconomic groups engaged in learning in the last three years, just 26 per cent of people in lower groups did.

“Adult learning should be a lifeline for the shocking number of those who left school ill-equipped to grapple with the rough and tumble of the jobs market … around nine million working adults in England have low literacy and/or numeracy skills. Yet in the last ten years just 17 per cent of low paid workers have moved permanently out of low pay.”

Before announcing the select committee’s inquiry into the current state of adult learning, Halfon will say the UK lags behind other wealthy nations in spending on lifelong education, and a recent study by the Social Mobility Commission shows England’s adult skills budget “fell by 34 per cent in real terms between 2010-2016”.

Halfon will call for an adult community learning centre to be put in every town in the country, and a top-slice of the existing £60 million support fund – which is meant to specifically target those living in deprived areas – for apprenticeships and use this to support more organisations like the WEA, the UK’s largest voluntary sector provider of adult education.

Halfon will also propose increasing tax incentives both through Corporation Tax and by ensuring increased benefits for employers investing in training people with lower skill levels.

“Only by recognising this crisis and taking urgent actions to reverse it can the UK avoid today’s divisions multiplying because those with most to gain from lifelong learning continue to be the ones with the least access to it,” Halfon will say.

Grassroots community based learning is a lifeline for many in our most deprived communities

A spokesperson for the WEA said the inquiry into lifelong learning announcement is “very welcome”.

“Grassroots community based learning is a lifeline for many in our most deprived communities,” they added.

“As working lives get longer and we all need to keep pace with change to live full and active lives, lifelong learning becomes more and more vital.”

The select committee is inviting written submissions addressing the following questions: 

  • What are the benefits of adult skills and lifelong learning (ASALL) for productivity and upskilling the workforce?
  • What are the benefits of ASALL for social justice, health and well-being?
  • What role can local authorities/combined authority areas play in ASALL provision?
  • To what extent is the range, balance and quality of formal and informal ASALL education adequate?
  • Who currently participates in and benefits from lifelong learning? 
  • What lessons can the UK learn from abroad?

The deadline for written evidence submissions is 15 August.

The select committee isn’t the only body to have launched an inquiry into lifelong learning in recent times.

A team of 16 education experts joined Labour’s lifelong learning commission in February, and before that, in March last year, the Lib Dems launched a similar commission.

IfA adds kite-marking higher-level qualifications to expanded remit

Quality-marking level 4 and 5 qualifications, to help boost the overlooked programmes, has become the latest addition to the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education’s expanded remit.

Education secretary Damian Hinds has announced a consultation on whether qualifications at those two levels, which are offered at universities, colleges and national colleges, should be renamed Higher Technical Qualifications (HTQs).

The change would affect a variety of existing qualifications, including higher apprenticeships, foundation degrees and higher national diplomas.

It is intended HTQs will be in place by the time the first cohort of T-level students finish that level 3 qualification in 2022.

The IfATE will be approving new and existing HTQs that “deliver the knowledge, skills, and behaviours set out in employer-led occupational standards”, and awarding them a quality mark.

Awarding bodies will submit HTQs to IfATE’s employer-led route panels, which already oversee the approval of standards and T-levels, for approval.

The submissions will be managed through a phased application process, much like was done with T-levels, and it will be possible for more than one qualification to be approved against an occupational standard.

The Department for Education is considering making it so approved Higher Technical Qualifications are only available with access to student finance at “high-quality further and higher education providers”.

A DfE spokesperson said these high-quality providers will have to have “suitably qualified and experienced teachers with current, relevant occupational and industry experience and expertise, as well as high-quality pedagogical skills”.

Leaders must also have the capacity and ability to ensure provision is sustainable and retains a clear focus on quality.

There must also be strong links with employer networks so they value what is being delivered; and learning environments with up-to-date facilities.

The DfE is also considering adopting a proposal from the Augar Review, that approved qualifications should be entitled to the same tuition fee support and teaching grant, and equivalent maintenance support, as level 6 qualifications.

The IfATE itself will be able to commission the creation of a qualification where there is a need for a HTQ to recognise a need for one to meet specific skills at levels 4 and 5, but no qualification has been put forward.

Despite this wide-ranging role for IfATE, on top of its responsibility for apprenticeship standards and the classroom-based element of T-levels, HTQs will still be regulated by Ofqual to “help ensure consistent standards in terms of complexity and challenge.”

These proposals come after Hinds announced last December the government would build a “new generation” of higher technical qualifications, to end the snobbery over technical education.

A spokesperson said: “The Institute will continue to work closely with the department as this policy proposal develops.”

The consultation has opened today, and will close on 29 September.

IfATE consulting on content for three new T-level pathways

Providers and employers are being asked for their views on the draft content for three more T-level pathways.

A consultation, launched by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education today, is for courses in business and administration, human resources, and hair and beauty.

The deadline for responses is 6 August. The pathways are expected to be taught from September 2021, in the second wave of the T-levels rollout.

The content has been developed by the institute’s “panels of experts” and will be used by awarding bodies to develop technical qualifications for each T-level.

“We are seeking your views to help ensure that the content captures the right knowledge, skills and performance outcomes that will enable students to enter employment within their chosen occupational specialisms,” the institute’s consultation’s webpage states.

Its chief executive, Sir Gerry Berragan, added: “We are working closely with employers to ensure the technical qualifications are delivering what they need for a more skilled workforce.

“I would encourage all employers in the business administration and hair and beauty sectors to contribute to this consultation and hope those that do respond will continue to engage with us as these qualifications are developed.”

T-levels are new two-year, technical study programmes that will be available across 11 industry routes. They’re being designed as the technical alternatives to A-levels.

The outline content for the first T-levels (in education and childcare, construction, digital, and health and science) has been approved and published, and will be taught from September next year.

There has been two other previous T-level content consultations which covered courses in onsite construction, building services engineering, digital support and services, health, healthcare science, and science.

The full T-levels rollout, when a total of 25 subject areas will be covered, will not be until 2023.

 

New subcontracting rule slammed as ‘immensely bureaucratic’ and ‘shockingly late in the day’

The Education and Skills Funding Agency has “shocked” hundreds of providers by requiring thousands of subcontracting contracts to be rewritten just four weeks before the new academic year.

The agency is demanding that all subcontracting contracts, for both adult education budget and apprenticeship funding, include for the first time a “list of individually itemised, specific costs for managing the subcontractor”.

In addition to listing the services, the contract must include “how each cost contributes to delivering high-quality training” and “how each specific cost is reasonable and proportionate to delivery of the subcontracted teaching or learning”.

These costs are typically referred to as a management fee or “top-slice” and have proven controversial for many years.

Nearly all providers currently charge their subcontractor a percentage of the funding, with some colleges still charging in excess of 30 per cent.

The ESFA committed to considering a per cent cap last year, but this new rule, requiring costs to be listed, appears to be a different solution and could force providers into a very different pricing model.

Training providers have reacted angrily to the requirement, which appeared this afternoon (July 4) in a new version of the funding rules for 2019-20.

Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “We proposed a 20 per cent cap solution to end extortionate subcontracting management fees. But once again, a simple solution has been ignored and instead, this immensely bureaucratic process appears both out of the blue and shockingly late in the day.

“The ESFA should implement a percentage cap and bin this complicated rule of listing and justifying management services immediately, before thousands of providers spend even more scarce resources with lawyers and accountants rewriting contacts or worse, start looking for obvious loopholes.”

And a spokesperson for Learning Curve Group, a provider that operates as both a prime and subcontractor, told FE Week: “We would always support additional scrutiny on management fees as there have been a series of examples which would not be regarded as beneficial either to the subcontractor or the learner.

“However, the administration connected to these updated requirements seems overly onerous and ambiguous from an audit perspective.  

“The investment needed to monitor subcontracted activity tends to be fairly standard across Primes, so a capped percentage rate would be something we support. It is also hugely unhelpful that the publication of the rules is so late.”

According to ESFA figures for 2017-18, there were over 3,292 subcontracting contracts involving 516 main contractors and 1,032 subcontractors.

The new rule reads, in full: “You must include in your contract with each delivery subcontractor a list of all services you will provide to them and the associated costs for doing so. This must include a list of individually itemised, specific costs for managing the subcontractor, specific costs for quality-monitoring activities and specific costs for any other support activities offered by you to the subcontractor.

“You must include in your contract with each delivery subcontractor a description of how each specific cost is reasonable and proportionate to delivery of the subcontracted teaching or learning and how each cost contributes to delivering high quality learning.”

The Department for Education was approached for comment.

Clearing up misconceptions about the new inspection framework

The new EIF will be wholly fit for purpose when it comes into effect in September, says Paul Joyce

One of Ofsted’s core strategy promises is to improve the validity of inspection continually. As part of meeting that commitment, last autumn we carried out research on lesson visits and work scrutiny. Our aim was to test whether inspectors reliably assess the right things when they observe lessons and look at learners’ work.

Unfortunately, when the research was published last week, there was some misunderstanding about its findings. This was particularly the case with regard to the validity of our methods for observing lessons or training in further education and skills (FES) providers.

I want to clarify those findings and hopefully provide reassurance that our new education inspection framework (EIF) will absolutely be looking at the right things when it comes into effect in September.

Lesson visits and work scrutiny are just two important methods in our inspection toolkit. They help inspectors gather evidence and reach a judgment about the quality of education in a school or college. But we have not judged or graded individual lessons for some years now, and we will not do so under the EIF.

For the lesson visit research, inspectors were given a set of 18 measurable indicators and asked to evaluate independently the training or lessons they saw, against a five-point scale. The indicators covered three areas of interest: curriculum, teaching, and behaviour.

It’s important to clarify that these indicators were developed for the research study only. They will not be used on actual inspections under the new framework.

The education inspection framework will be the most tested that Ofsted has ever introduced

Our findings are encouraging. They show that inspectors are able to assess behaviour, teaching and the curriculum separately when they observe lessons or training. This has given us greater confidence about the validity of our new inspection framework, which has separate judgements for the quality of education and behaviour and attitudes.

But what we also found was that the research model did not quite fit the FES context. This meant the likelihood of two inspectors rating any of the indicators exactly the same was lower in colleges than it was in schools. This does not mean that the way we gather evidence from lesson visits in FE colleges is flawed, or that it leads to unreliable judgments. Only that our research model was not designed to take account of the complexity of further education providers.

With that in mind, we will be conducting a further research project later this year, specifically designed to test the validity and reliability of further education lesson and training observations. We have also established a research group of academics with expertise in this area and will be publishing a series of blogs and a literature review in due course.

But that doesn’t change where we are now with the EIF and shouldn’t cast any doubt on its suitability for further education and skills contexts.

We need to make sure our inspection tools are suitable for the uniqueness of each provider, as well as sufficiently reliable. That’s why we developed a flexible inspection methodology. We tested this methodology in a variety of FE providers as part of our piloting work, which is set out in our further education and skills inspection handbook.

Under the EIF, evidence from a number of different observation activities will be drawn together alongside meaningful discussions with leaders, governors, trustees, staff and students, as well as scrutiny of curriculum documents, learner records and published national data. We are confident this will enable inspectors to collect a secure evidence base on which to judge a provider.

The EIF will be the most tested inspection framework Ofsted has ever introduced. We recognise there is more to do, but that should not stop us from doing what we know is right – shifting our focus to the real substance of education and training, for the benefit of all children, young people and learners.

Why FE colleges need “big data” in the battle to recruit apprentices

Smart technology that transforms data management is available in an FE college near you, says Richard Alberg

Big data is everywhere; it enables the analysis of how we shop, vote and even make our way around cities. But what can it do for further education, particularly when it comes to the highly competitive apprenticeship market?

Technological innovations have amplified our capacity to store large data sets and use them to understand human behaviour. Whether by default or design, FE colleges, like education in general in the UK, have yet to fully embrace the potential of big data to help recruitment, retention, completion, career, course innovation and business development, to name but a few benefits.

The reluctance in some quarters is understandable. Data, as the academic Rebecca Eynon points out, comes with ethical dilemmas over privacy and its potential use to whittle out failing students, teachers and institutions. Furthermore, making sense of the vast amount of raw data out there is a huge job. You can download local apprenticeship market data from the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA), but these come as massive spreadsheets. Understanding the trends that can inform decisions elude all but the most motivated.

However, I would argue that data should be essential to the work of the FE sector, since apprenticeships are one of the fastest-growing post-16 training routes. Apprenticeships are complicated. Each learner is an individual with her/his idiosyncrasies. Programmes generally last for more than 12 months and are split between workplace and training centre. Add in compliance, audit and Ofsted, and it is easy to see how, with multiple learners, there are many moving parts where things can go wrong.

Colleges must also decide which programmes to offer. Apprenticeship standards require curriculum development, an expensive undertaking. Ensuring that the college invests its scarce resources in the right areas matters.

Using data to analyse learner progress is also a challenge. Data has to be exported from several systems – CRM, ePortfolio, LMS and funding – and then brought together. It can take an analyst several days, so unsurprisingly it is rarely done. Since there are often errors in the data, management can become sceptical about the information and revert to gut instinct.

Is there a solution?

For a while now, some of the more sophisticated training providers have been investing in very smart technology that transforms data management. Two elements are available, and we are on the cusp of a third.

We are on the threshold of using artificial intelligence in education

The first is end-to-end delivery in a single technology platform and one database, which helps administrative efficiency and eliminates double-keying of data. And it means that any required information can be generated instantaneously from this single database. There is no need to bring diverse data sets together because it is all in one place. Many industries, from medicine to banking, use this kind of structured data to help with regulatory compliance.

The second element is about interpreting and processing the data. Business intelligence tools, such as Microsoft’s Power BI and Tableau, are becoming popular. These allow you to select fields from a database and then view them visually, drilling in and out as required, making the intelligent business management decisions that lead to success.

For example, we created an interactive mapping project from ESFA apprenticeship data, that shows which apprenticeship standards and frameworks are being delivered in localities across all providers. Data like this enables college managers to plan around growth areas and market gaps with greater ease.

Finally, I believe we are on the threshold of using machine learning or artificial intelligence in education. Much of how it will evolve is still speculation, but machine learning can draw on the vast array of structured data to identify institutional patterns around efficiency, retention and completion rates.

And much like the recommendations we receive from Spotify or Netflix, algorithms can target students with courses or career options and can deliver personalised learning.

There is no getting away from the inevitable. Colleges that embrace data will be the colleges that prosper.

How we can get the talent pipeline flowing properly

Only by employers and educators working closely together can the UK’s chronic and increasing skills gap be closed, says Sandra Kelly

Employers must take ownership of the skills agenda to ensure that vocational programmes reflect what industry really wants and needs. The recent funding-band cuts across multiple sectors just go to show how important it is for employers to be proactive and to work in partnership.

The importance of this employer-led ethos really hit home when we invited the head of the Food Teachers Centre (a 5,000-strong self-help group for secondary-school teachers) to one of our quarterly Hospitality Skills & Quality Board meetings.

The idea was to exchange ideas to address the vastly reduced number of students on food-related courses at schools, which is set to have a profound impact on the talent pipeline, apprenticeships and full-time college hospitality and catering courses.

It’s no exaggeration to say that some of them looked shell-shocked to learn that fewer than 50,000 students in the UK are now taking GCSE Food Preparation and Nutrition – 50 per cent less than a decade ago.

Budget cuts and the new Ofsted inspection framework offer nothing to guarantee food education. This challenge is amplified by the fact that hospitality and tourism have one of the highest levels of skills gap of any sector.

It is estimated that by 2024, they will need to recruit an additional 1.3 million people (‘People & Productivity’, People 1st report, 2017).

On another occasion, we arranged for last year’s AA College Restaurant of the Year, Milton Keynes College, to meet with the Hospitality Skills and Quality Board to share what works well, and to set out why they refuse to work with employers that fail to provide a quality student experience.

The employer-led approach at the heart of both these initiatives highlights the need to encompass the whole talent pipeline. There’s no reason why this approach can’t be applied elsewhere.

FE colleges, for example, could be invited to meet with employer-led boards in other sectors where curriculums are being delivered. After all, why would you not want to influence and collaborate with employers who are actively investing in apprenticeships and further education in their workplaces?

One of the challenges with change initiatives is that to succeed they must be deeply embedded at a cultural level. Whilst it’s true that infrastructures and frameworks provide a platform for colleges to develop innovative partnerships, a sound strategy and effective communication at all levels helps to set the tone.

Our employer-led college accreditation board is an approach that can be mirrored in other sectors. Similarly, the partnership we have established with the AA for the AA College Restaurant of the Year award for student-run college restaurants is an idea that can be replicated in other sectors.

We need more initiatives like these to give the colleges an opportunity to be creative and really stretch the boundaries of what’s possible.

Another way to do this is to collaborate with the government and other key stakeholders. The Aviation Industry Skills Board, for example, is working closely with the Department of Transport to ensure the Aviation 2050 strategy delivers a ready supply of talent to meet current demand and future need.

Ultimately, these types of initiatives can only succeed if employers are fully engaged and working in partnership with education. Having industry around the table to develop entry-level standards for apprenticeships and the future T-levels simply isn’t enough.

We need to capitalise on the energy and passion of committed employers. This means not only unearthing what’s happening to their talent pipeline, but also taking collective responsibility to finding a sustainable solution.

Skills shortages are without doubt one of the biggest challenges currently facing the UK economy. It’s time to take action now.