FE Week wins loan law battle

Victims of a long-running FE loans scandal are set to benefit from new legislation that gives the education secretary powers to clear their debt – representing a huge win for FE Week’s #SaveOurAdultEducation campaign.

From July 1, 2019 the government will be able to cancel all or part of an advanced learner loan for learners left in debt when their provider goes bust.

FE Week has revealed horror stories involving hundreds of students suffering from such circumstances since early 2017. Many of them, who were training to be, for example, carpenters or chefs, were left with debts amounting to thousands of pounds but no qualification when providers such as John Frank Training and Edudo suddenly went out of business.

After more than two years of stress and worry, this is great news

The government refused to write off their loans, even if the learners couldn’t move on to other providers.

It sparked the launch of #SaveOurAdultEducation which demanded justice for those affected and has now been hailed as a success by Robert Halfon, who was skills minister at the time and is now education select committee chair.

“I’m delighted that students with advanced learner loans will no longer need to be penalised for the actions of bust training providers when suitable alternatives are not available for them,” he said.

“This was something I pushed for as a minister and campaigned for alongside FE Week. I really welcome the hard work of Anne Milton and Damian Hinds in making it happen.”

After our campaign’s launch, the Student Loans Company deferred repayments for the affected learners, but as FE Week has previously reported, money has still been taken out of their accounts in repayments.

The provider central to the scandal was John Frank Training. The London-based firm went into liquidation on November 30, 2016, leaving no assets, despite recording a profit of £1.3 million in the first half of 2016. Around 500 learners were affected.

The situation resulted in the Education and Skills Funding Agency reviewing its audit framework for loans-only providers and changes were made, including the banning of subcontracting for these providers.

The ESFA did not report John Frank to the police because no fraud was identified as part of the original investigation.

Asim Shaheen was among the ex-learners at the provider. The trainee chef still had an outstanding debt of £8,000, plus interest, when the firm collapsed and could not find another provider with whom to complete his training.

After being told the news of incoming legislation to protect learners, Asim told FE Week: “After more than two years of stress and worry, this is great news and I now expect the government to cancel my loan in full at the first opportunity.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “In a very few cases, a small number of students with advanced learner loans are unable to complete their course as a result of provider failure. Our priority in these cases is to ensure those students have the opportunity to continue their studies elsewhere.

Anne Milton

“However, we recognise that this is not always possible. In recognition of this we have introduced new legislation to allow the Secretary of State to consider cancelling all or part of an advanced learner loan in such circumstances.”

Skills minister Anne Milton told FE Week: “At the heart of everything we do is the interests of students and learners.”

A spokesperson for the Student Loans Company confirmed repayments for learners affected by the liquidation of John Frank Training “have been deferred for a further year until April 2020”.

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden was a firm supporter of #SaveOurAdultEducation and hosted its launch event in Parliament. He also put in numerous written questions to pressure the DfE into action.

“It’s welcome news that finally two years on, the Secretary of State is taking steps to find a solution for the many learners affected by the collapse of their training providers – left with huge debts and no qualifications through no fault of their own,” he said.

“It’s disappointing that these learners have been left with the stress and worry of having these repayments hanging over them for so long, without adequate solutions coming forward from the department or the ESFA.

“That is why it is vital that Damian Hinds follows through urgently on this new legislation and writes off their debt to finally end the nightmare for these learners.”

PICTURED: Asim Shaheen confronts then skills minister Robert Halfon at the #SaveOurAdultEducation launch

Let’s develop a skills ecosystem, emphasising cooperation

As we contemplate the future of the skills system, let’s think in terms of devolution and localisation, says Ewart Keep

The Skills Commission is currently engaged in an inquiry into the future of the skills system. How do recent policy developments, such as the expansion of the apprenticeship scheme, the devolution of the Adult Education Budget (AEB) and the imminent introduction of T-levels, join up on the ground so that we build a system that responds to local needs and national  priorities?

The theme is a topical one, since combined authorities and some local enterprise partnerships (LEPs) are contemplating how to move away from competition and a fragmented marketplace of delivery towards local systems of education and training (E&T) that encourage collaboration, and perhaps elements of specialisation. For example, the North East LEP has set up an FE Careers Hub shared across all the colleges in its region.

Let’s think in terms of devolution and cooperation

Some are also starting to go one stage further and experiment with the notion of a skills ecosystem. The idea is to link up different policy areas such as economic development, business improvement and support, and efforts to improve job quality and in-work career progression for low-waged workers in order to find solutions to long-standing employment and skills problems.  An example would be efforts to develop new progression pathways for low-paid workers and support these through new packages of training. So what stands in the way of these developments?

The first and most obvious barrier is the flow of public funding, which sees resources largely following individual student choice via various ESFA tendering processes or via employer choice in the apprenticeship marketplace. This set-up stokes competition between providers to obtain students, a process which it is assumed will drive improved performance but also creates fragmented markets. Some combined authorities which are commissioning the devolved AEB are experimenting with a more cooperative and unified systems-led approach –  perhaps supported via some kind of block grant funding to providers.

Moreover, in some localities, FE and other E&T providers have chosen to work together and organise collectively rather than compete. The UK Innovation Corridor’s Regional Skills Concordat, for example, sees a group of colleges around Peterborough and Cambridgeshire working across local authority and LEP boundaries to map skill needs and build shared programmes that can aggregate skill demand and supply across institutions. They are generally acting despite of, not because of, nationally established incentives. 

A second set of problems is caused by the government’s tendency to draw up place-blind, one-size-fits-all national programmes without involving localities or providers in the design. The lack of input on the ground means that too often national priorities disrupt local priorities and relationships, yet ministers expect these solutions to be adopted whether localities want or need them. 

Changing the nature of dialogue with central government departments is a major objective for some of the combined authorities, LEPs, colleges and their representatives. They want to see national policy capable of being tailored to meet local circumstances and to have a more equal relationship with Whitehall, replacing the existing master-servant model. Given the culture of Whitehall and the constant turnover in civil servants as they move posts, this challenge is likely to take time.

A final problem is time: national and local politicians work on very short time-scales and want quick wins. There is the risk, for example, that central government may attempt to judge the results of the devolution of the AEB too swiftly, with the danger that transitional arrangements are given too little time to bear fruit. This danger is all the greater given that the devolved AEB is a relatively small pot of money that has to be stretched across a wide range of competing demands.

Devolution and localisation really matter.  Outside of city states, such as Singapore, there are almost no successful national E&T systems that do not incorporate a greater degree of local accountability, innovation and control than England.  We need to learn to make localism work for everyone.

Colleges fail to win any OfS mental health funding

All three college bids for a £6 million fund to help reduce student mental health problems have been rejected.

Instead, ten universities have been chosen to share the cash on offer from the Office for Students, along with co-funding of £8.5 million to develop “innovative” projects.

The call was open to both universities and colleges, and a total of 48 submissions were made.

The OfS wouldn’t name the unsuccessful colleges, but pointed out that, of the successful projects, two include FE colleges as partners.

They are Keele University, which will work with Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group and Stoke on Trent College; and Lincoln University, partnered with Lincoln College.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said he was “disappointed that this investment does not seem to have reached many colleges”.

“But,” he added, “I am not surprised, because the funding was only for higher education, which is an important but not major part of college provision.

“I’m pleased that some colleges are part of winning projects and I expect them to play a formative part in those partnerships, sharing their good practice with universities.”

According to the AoC, one in five young people aged 16 to 24 experience a common mental illness, such as anxiety or depression, every year; and 75 per cent of adults with a diagnosable mental health problem experience their first symptoms before the age of 24.

The proportion of full-time UK undergraduate students reporting mental health concerns when they enter higher education has more than doubled over the past five years, the OfS said.

Hughes said student mental health is a “big priority for colleges” and has had “welcome coverage in recent times”.

His association launched a mental health charter last month to challenge mental health stigma, and 24 colleges have “enthusiastically” signed it so far.

The OfS’s competition was aimed at generating new approaches which could be used across higher education. Focuses include new forms of mental health awareness training to staff and students, and developing an integrated approach between university- and collegelevel support services.

Denise Brown, principal at Stoke on Trent College, told FE Week that via the project they are working on with Keele University, “we aim to improve support and opportunities through the college to university transition, working collaboratively with local colleges, universities, NHS partners and the local authority to develop a multi-agency ‘transitions toolkit’”.

“Our commitment to this project includes creating a provision for staff training and education programmes that aim to increase awareness of mental health issues and their impact,” she added.

“We are looking forward to dedicating staff time to help develop this transitional toolkit and delivering essential training targeted specifically at benefiting young Colleges fail to win any OfS mental health funding people in our community.”

The eight other universities that will share the £6 million funding are: Newcastle, University of Derby, University of the West of England, Northumbria University, University of Liverpool, University of Nottingham, University of Birmingham and University of Sussex.

Universities minister Chris Skidmore said: “I am pleased the Office for Students is driving forward action on this vital priority, and these innovative projects will help to improve mental health support by allowing institutions to find what really works to help those students in need.”

Is the Prime Minister planning farewell budget hike for FE?

Theresa May is pushing to announce a huge programme of investment to overhaul schools and colleges in England before she leaves office, according to reports.

However, the current Prime Minister is said to be locked in a row with chancellor Philip Hammond over the plans, as the Treasury fears they could cost more than £10 billion.

As reported on the front page of the Financial Times today, funding rates for 16 to 19-year-olds is one main area that May wants to throw money at.

It comes after she said further education had been “left overlooked, undervalued and underfunded” by successive governments, who have “failed to give it the support it needs”.

She made the comments at the launch event of the post-18 education Augar report, which was commissioned by May in February 2018.

Its “core message” was that the disparity between the 50 per cent of young people attending higher education and the other 50 per cent who do not “has to be addressed”.

The report’s recommendations included an increase in the funding base rate for 16 to 19-year-olds and a £1bn capital investment in colleges.

At the launch event, FE Week editor Nick Linford asked May, if she was so determined that funding for further education should be increased, then why hasn’t it happened before now and why is the government waiting for a spending review to make any announcements.

She didn’t answer the question directly, but said: “We are looking.

“Much has been done for FE but this [report] says more needs to be done and I think it is right that we absolutely make sure that the education for every young person is what is right for them.”

May steps down as Conservative leader on Friday. It is expected that her successor will not act on Augar’s recommendations and implement them as policy as was first thought when the review was announced. The Department for Education has already rejected one of its proposals, as reported by FE Week today.

According to the FT, the Treasury claimed the Augar report could cost £6 billion a year — although Augur said that savings in the scheme would substantially cut that figure.

May has also reportedly urged Hammond to release cash for a three-year school funding settlement. This would include more money for failing schools, teacher training, higher pay for teacher retention, and a review of the way the national schools budget is allocated.

The FT said May wants to use her remaining weeks as caretaker prime minister to “deliver parts of her domestic agenda that were crushed by the pressures of Brexit”.

“There have been several high level meetings on this,” said one person close to the negotiations, according to the newspaper. “Philip has made it clear that the headroom is there as a cushion against a no-deal exit.”

May is expected to take her plans to cabinet for approval.

The prime minister apparently wants to make “an announcement every week” before she leaves.

Number 10 has been approached for comment.

While many of the Conservative leadership candidates have pledged more funding for schools if they’re elected, only one, Esther McVey, has promised extra cash for further education.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 283

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

John Westhead, Director of training services, St Helens Chamber

Start date: May 2019

Previous job: Head of operations and learning, Training 2000

Interesting fact: He coaches children’s football in his spare time

Jo Grady, General secretary, University and College Union

Start date: Summer 2019

Concurrent job (on a leave of absence): Senior lecturer in employment relations, University of Sheffield

Interesting fact: She has a personal alcohol licence, so she could run a pub

Jacqueline O’Donovan, Vice-chair of diversity and inclusion group, Strategic Transport Apprenticeship Taskforce

Start date: May 2019

Concurrent job: Managing director, O’Donovan Waste Disposal Ltd

Interesting fact: She took part in Channel 4’s The Job Interview in 2016

Corrie Harris, Principal, Moulton College

Start date: July 2019

Previous job: Vice principal, Bedford College Group

Interesting fact: She enjoys a game of golf, as well as a cycle ride

Over 1,300 apprentices left without any provider, 7 months after 3aaa collapse

Nearly one-third of the apprentices who were training with disgraced apprenticeship firm Aspire Achieve Advance had still not been found a new provider seven months after its collapse.

Furthermore, questions are likely to be raised about some of the firms the transferred apprentices have moved to, after one was slammed by Ofsted in an ‘insufficient’ monitoring report, four have been rated ‘requires improvement’ and three have never been inspected.

The company, better known as 3aaa, went into administration on October 11 after the government pulled its skills funding contracts following a fraud investigation. The police have since launched a formal criminal investigation.

A total of 4,229 apprentices were left without a place to complete their training, so the Education and Skills Funding Agency immediately began work to find them alternative provision at “high-quality” providers.

FE Week has now learnt, through a Freedom of Information request, that 1,321 of them, or 31 per cent, had still not been found new providers as of May 10.

Of the affected apprentices there were 1,835 non-levy funded. Of these 1,615 have had a transfer “facilitated”, while 210 have either completed their programme or withdrawn, and 10 are “still being supported”.

In terms of levy-funded apprentices, of which there were 2,394, and where the responsibility to find them a new provider is the employers, 1,073 transfers have been facilitated.

Transferring 3aaa’s apprentices proved controversial earlier in the year after FE Week revealed that a few providers had attempted to poach staff and learners using underhand tactics. This led to the ESFA warning that they could withdraw funding from any firms found doing this.

An investigation by this newspaper found that some training providers were “misrepresenting their position” in an effort to recruit those affected. Tactics included alleged false claims that the ESFA and 3aaa had asked the providers to take on hundreds of people affected.

Among them was Prospects Training International Limited, which trades as Geason Training. At the time, it was understood Geason had taken on 3aaa’s former quality director and was trying to recruit around 40 other former staff.

The provider, which was allowed to recruit over 1,000 apprentices before being inspected, was found making “insufficient progress” by Ofsted in a heavily critical monitoring visit published this week.

The FOI obtained by FE Week shows Geason took on 238 of 3aaa’s apprentices.

Babington Business College Limited, a large provider with government-funded skills contracts worth nearly £10 million in 2018-19 (according to ESFA data), was also one of the providers accused of poaching apprentices.

It took on 3aaa’s former operations director, and FE Week’s FOI shows it has taken on 347 affected apprentices – the most out of all providers.

Estio was another provider that formed part of FE Week’s investigation, and the figures show they took on 113 apprentices.

Elsewhere, Ofsted grade three providers Kaplan Financial Ltd, South Staffordshire College, Skills Edge Training Ltd and Chesterfield College took on 69, 28, 16 and 10 of 3aaa’s apprentices respectively.

Presidency London College Ltd, Learnmore Network Ltd, International Correspondence Schools Limited have never been inspected by Ofsted but took on 48, 45 and 29 of 3aaa’s apprentices respectively.

FE Week revealed what was behind the government and police investigations into 3aaa in November.

The company, which had 500 staff before it went bust when the ESFA pulled its £16.5 million skills contract, allegedly manipulated Individualised Learner Records to artificially inflate achievement rates by a huge amount and misused employer-incentive grants.

A previous ESFA investigation into 3aaa, carried out by auditing firm KPMG in 2016, had found dozens of success rate “overclaims”.

3aaa was co-founded by Peter Marples and Di McEvoy-Robinson in 2008, but the pair stepped down in September during the ESFA’s second investigation.

In March, Derbyshire police launched a formal criminal investigation into the provider.

At the time of going to press the police said investigations were ongoing.

It is easy to conclude that the DfE are not serious about apprenticeship quality

This week we report that the Department for Education will announce that the Office for Students, not Ofsted, will inspect the quality of all level 6 and 7 apprenticeships.

It comes after FE Week exposed the fact that thousands of apprentices were at providers where Ofsted had to exclude them from inspection because they were on standards at level 6 and 7 with no degree element, and therefore had no regulator responsible.

It was a situation that irked the chief inspector, Amanda Spielman, who recounted a story of joining an inspection where these learners were off-limits.

But despite Ofsted wanting to take responsibility for monitoring the quality of popular apprenticeships, such as the level 7 accountancy at providers like Kaplan Financial, the DfE has seen fit to call on the Office for Students – even if the provider offering them is not on its HE register.

Given the timing, in that the announcement has not yet been made, this appears to be the first major rejection of a recommendation within the Augar Review.

The high-profile report published last week recommended that “Ofsted become the lead responsible body for the inspection of the quality of apprenticeships at all levels”.

And for good reason, describing the Ofsted and the OfS sharing of responsibility as “wasteful”, that it risks providers being overlooked and fails to ensure consistency.

They rightly go on to say that “a sole inspection body is vital when new and untested providers are entering the market and offering provision at a variety of levels”.

Without wanting to sound unkind, the OfS seem completely out of their depth in the non-degree market, which might explain why they have so far been reluctant to actively take up their apprenticeship responsibilities.

And the only argument I have heard so far against Ofsted taking the responsibility is that “this may not be welcome by some higher education institutions”.

If the government is serious about a high-quality apprenticeship system then it is blindingly obvious they should not burden the OfS with responsibility for something they are totally ill-equipped to manage.

Rejection of this Augar Report recommendation makes a mockery of common sense.

Let’s not make this a case study of poor policymaking, worthy of featuring in the level 4 policy officer apprenticeship standard.

The sector and apprentices deserve better than policies that simply seek to save the blushes of some university vice chancellors.

Ofsted watch: Airports apprenticeship provider slammed by Ofsted – again

A new apprenticeship provider that was suspended from recruiting learners last year has been rated ‘inadequate’ in its first full inspection, in what was otherwise an average week for the FE sector.

The only other bad report came in for Prospects Training International Limited, which trades a Geason Training and was bought out in a multimillion pound deal in December by Speedy, one of the UK’s leading tool hire services company.

It was allowed to recruit over 1,000 apprentices before being inspected and when Ofsted went knocking they found it making ‘insufficient progress’. Read the full story here.

Mooreskills Limited was the provider hit with a grade four this week, following a highly critical ‘insufficient’ monitoring visit report published in May last year.

Its full inspection report found “too many apprentices do not develop substantial new knowledge, skills and behaviours and make slow progress on their apprenticeship programmes, having passed their planned end date”.

Apprentices are “often already skilled and very experienced in their role”, inspectors added.

The company had 177 apprentices at the time of the visit. The vast majority are enrolled on new standards, mainly on retailing and wholesaling, administration, team leading, business management or leadership apprenticeships.

They are based airports and businesses around the country including London Heathrow.

This week’s report said directors at the Birkenhead-based provider failed to deal with the issues raised in the earlier visit, with too many apprentices still not receiving their entitlement of time away from their job role to complete training.

The provider is now expected to be kicked off the government’s register of apprenticeship training providers and banned from delivering apprenticeships.

In better news, T.M.S Learning and Skills Support Limited received a follow-up monitoring visit after being found making ‘insufficient progress’ in its safeguarding provision in a report published in January. Ofsted has now found the provider making ‘significant progress’, with the director being “highly effective” in improving arrangements to safeguard apprentices.

And Alpha Care Agency Limited, a London-based provider of health and social care apprenticeships, has been recognised for making ‘reasonable progress’ after being given a grade three rating in March last year.

The watchdog said senior leaders have since expanded the membership of the board and secured new members with expertise in training, education and the care industry. They have also put in place more comprehensive arrangements to identify where improvements in teaching, learning and assessment are needed.

Elsewhere, independent learning providers Train 4 Limited, DiVA Apprenticeships Limited, Hybrid Technical Services Limited and Acacia Training and Development Limited were all found to have made ‘reasonable progress’ across all their provisions during their first-ever monitoring visits since they started delivering apprenticeships.

Equally, employer provider Jet2.com and University of Leeds were found to have made ‘reasonable progress’ in their first Ofsted visits.

Jet2.com, which offers four-year aircraft maintenance fitter/technician apprenticeships at level 3, was recognised for having leaders with excellent knowledge of, and experience in, the aviation industry, which they use to very good effect. Ofsted said they plan a “coherent and highly relevant” on- and off-the job training.

The watchdog said learners at the University of Leeds gain the new skills, knowledge and behaviours that they need in their job roles as healthcare assistant practitioners and nursing associates, profiting from “effective teaching and learning in well-resourced classrooms and laboratories”.

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Prospects Training International Limited 25/04/2019 05/06/2019 M n/a
Train 4 Limited 26/04/2019 05/06/2019 M n/a
DiVA Apprenticeships Ltd 27/04/2019 07/06/2019 M n/a
Mooreskills Ltd 10/04/2019 03/06/2019 4 n/a
T.M.S Learning And Skills Support Ltd. 09/05/2019 07/06/2019 M n/a
Hybrid Technical Services Limited 01/05/2019 07/06/2019 M n/a
Acacia Training and Development Ltd 02/05/2019 05/06/2019 M n/a
Alpha Care Agency Limited 25/04/2019 07/06/2019 M 3

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Jet2.Com Limited 09/05/2019 03/06/2019 M n/a

 

Other (including UTCs) Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
University of Leeds 08/05/2019 03/06/2019 M n/a

Four-letter verdict on colossal European Social Fund blunder

In what one ESFA official is alleged to have called a “f*ck up of epic proportions”, all 80 training providers in receipt of around £300 million of European Social Funding are being investigated after funding claim “discrepancies” were discovered.

As a result, contract compliance for the 2014 to 2020 ESF programme has been thrown into doubt.

In early April the ESFA wrote to providers with concerns that evidence was missing from learner files. FE Week has seen a copy of the ESF contract which states that where a learner is enrolled on to a course involving a regulated qualification, then the “evidence requirement” for a start payment is registration to an awarding body.

On 1 April, the day after contracts had ended, the ESFA wrote to all providers as part of a “nationwide exercise across all ESF contracts” with concerns that this evidence was missing from learner files.

We have become aware of discrepancies

They requested that a small sample be checked within two weeks because: “We have become aware of discrepancies with the evidence held to support the claiming of a start payment for a Regulated learning aim.”

In April the ESFA did in fact find a significant amount of non-compliance which led to a follow-up email in early May requesting “further investigation at all providers.”

“You are now required to complete a 100 per cent check of the aims and record what evidence you have available for Awarding Body registration, along with the date of that registration,” providers were told in an email dated May 2, with a May 28 deadline to complete the exercise.

Despite the highly unusual nationwide compliance checking of all records, the DfE told FE Week: “As part of our business-as-usual closure checks we validate data and sample compliance check the providers claimed activities.”

And initially the DfE said the checks were not about funding compliance, claiming: “The purpose of these checks is not to cancel funding for any providers and we do not anticipate receiving any money back from providers.”

However, the DfE appeared to backtrack when FE Week shared the ESFA email sent to all ESF providers in early May in which it said “where the evidence is not available you will need to remove these claims.”

Having reviewed the ESFA email, a DfE spokesperson added: “When we finalise the contract for closure we do not anticipate we will need to claw back any funding as we have worked with providers to try and ensure this is not the case. However, if an external audit confirms irregularities we will of course claw back funds.”

FE Week has spoken to several providers affected, who claim the ESFA had not been clear enough in the contracts or previous audits that they would need awarding organisation registration evidence to justify startpayments.

The ESFA has since strengthened the wording in contracts starting April 2019 ensuring that learners are registered with the awarding body prior to the start claim being made.

But it is understood that for the contracts to March 2019 there are likely to be millions of pounds of start payments for thousands of learners who did not finish their course and for whom they were not registered with an awarding organisation.

The ESFA said in their communication with providers in early May that they would need to remove these claims and it remains unclear whether this has been done and, as a result, what scale of funding claw-back could follow.