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.
A college with 200 vulnerable young learners has been warned by Ofsted its arrangements to keep students safe are “weak” and it’s not taking appropriate action to protect them from “acute risk of self-harm”.
The education watchdog carried out an unannounced monitoring inspection last month at Suffolk New College following safeguarding concerns that had been brought to its attention, including a “serious incident”.
The vulnerable leaners, who are all under the age of 19, include care leavers, children in the care of the local authority, learners on child protection plans and those designated as children in need. Ofsted said that of those learners in the care of the local authority, almost half are unaccompanied asylum seekers who do not have English as their first language.
Leaders, including the designated safeguarding lead, “do not have a good enough oversight or understanding of the actions staff take, or need to take, to secure the well-being of vulnerable learners”, inspectors said.
“They do not know how staff help vulnerable learners to remain in learning, feel safe at college and thrive.”
Suffolk New College, which was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted in its last full inspection in October 2017, said it was “disappointed” with the monitoring report, including the way it was conducted, and “doesn’t feel it is a fair reflection of our care and commitment”.
The report states: “Following a serious incident, governors and senior leaders have been slow to respond and review their existing procedures. Leaders and managers were unable to identify to inspectors the changes they had made as a result of their own review of safeguarding procedures following this incident.
“They have not acted with sufficient urgency to strengthen the reporting of concerns or managers’ oversight of safeguarding arrangements for vulnerable learners. For example, they do not identify precisely or monitor carefully the well-being of learners known to be at high risk of self-harm.”
Ofsted also said that even when staff recognise and record key indicators of learners at risk of self-harm, they do not always take “suitable steps” to safeguard them.
Moreover, leaders and managers are unaware of this failure and have therefore not rectified it, and have yet to ensure that staff record meetings with vulnerable learners in adequate detail, including what action staff plan to take to help learners stay safe.
Ofsted also found that “too few vulnerable learners attend well”.
During the visit, leaders and managers said they plan to initiate training to help staff identify learners at risk of self-harm and to introduce a new system of monitoring learners’ well-being. However, they were unable to provide any supporting information at the time of the inspection, the watchdog said.
A Suffolk New College spokesperson said: “The visit took place over a couple of hours, and focussed on an extremely small number of student records. We do not consider that this gave sufficient time or scope to accurately review and reflect the work that the College does to safeguard vulnerable students. This has been raised with Ofsted.
“The view given by Ofsted about the levels of attendance of certain categories of vulnerable students is one which does not fully explain the approach that the college has.
“These students are often the most difficult to engage with due to the unpredictable nature of their lives. The college has taken the decision to provide support to these young people, and to try and keep them involved in education, to help provide opportunities for them in the future.
“This has often meant that personalised timetables and a more flexible approach to attendance have been used. This is enshrined in our Attendance Policy. This group also includes a significant proportion of unaccompanied minors, who by the nature of their circumstances are more transient.”
A huge 5 per cent staff pay rise costing over £2 million per year was a big win for the University and College Union in November, and for the time being, this settlement put an end to troublesome disputes at Capital City Colleges Group.
But a closer look by FE Week has found unplanned multi-million-pound budget deficits persist, resulting in a precarious financial position that has led to nearly 50 job cuts so far. The board has been warned that failure to address this will have “serious consequences”.
What’s the plan to turn things around at this London mega-college? FE Week chief reporter Billy Camden sat down with new chief executive Roy O’Shaughnessy to find out.
There is hardly a part of London that isn’t a short tube ride away from a Capital City College Group site. Its 13 centres employ nearly 1,500 staff and teach over 30,000 students who live across 26 boroughs.
But the complexities and costs of merging three individual colleges – City and Islington, Westminster Kingsway, and The College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London – have hit it hard.
The group is expecting, for the third year in a row, to record a significant deficit, despite early predictions from the leadership and board that they would achieve a healthy surplus.
New chief executive Roy O’Shaughnessy, who joined at the start of the academic year from national charity The Shaw Trust, has a number of radical solutions to overcome the situation – including a venture in Cuba. But firstly, he tells me how the group has ended up in a financial muddle.
“There were several things that we have to be upfront about,” he says. “There was a complete failure of our IT systems regarding marketing and enrolment, as an example” – an issue that has led to the group spending £2 million on computer equipment, infrastructure and network upgrades.
For 2017-18, when it recorded a deficit of over £6 million, he says “around £600,000 of sixth-form income was lost, the adult education budget stood still, and on 16-to-18 we got £2.9 million less income because we didn’t get those systems robust”.
He adds that there also wasn’t a “sophisticated ‘sense testing’ of budgets” during the years following CCCG’s merger.
The government gave the group a £200,000 transition grant, but merger costs in 2016-17 hit £1 million and then another £737,000 the following year.
“The mistake that was made, in my mind, was not saying ‘it’s actually going to cost an extra £5 million to do this, let’s be clear and upfront, let’s be very cautious on our budgets and where the savings are, and let’s make absolutely certain we always come out a little bit ahead each time’,” O’Shaughnessy admits.
The group has also under-delivered across a number of other income lines, particularly in apprenticeships, where its target income for 2017-18 was £8.4 million but it ended up making just £5.9 million.
“Sense testing” is now pivotal for O’Shaughnessy to ensure budget predictions are realistic and accurate from the get-go. If, in a particular area, “we think £16 million is safe in income”, for example, “we are discounting it by 5 per cent no matter how safe it is”, he tells me.
CCCG has a combined income of almost £112 million. It also has net assets of just over £300 million – the vast majority of which are its buildings – and long-term debt of £600,000.
A large operating deficit, currently estimated at £3.684 million, is expected for 2018-19, even though early predictions by the board showed a £750,000 surplus.
Of the deficit, O’Shaughnessy says £2.8 million is due to the generous 5 per cent pay award agreed with the University and College Union in November.
But it also doesn’t take into account the savings that will be made following a period of voluntary redundancy, which O’Shaughnessy says was agreed with the UCU at the time of the pay deal.
He tells me that 48 jobs were cut at the end of June, and has not ruled out more in the future.
The group is also struggling to use up its adult education budget, and faces a potential clawback of £1 million this year following a £690,000 clawback in 2017-18.
Despite CCCG’s repeated deficit position, the Education and Skills Funding Agency has continued to grade its finances as “outstanding”, according to minutes from a board meeting in April.
The same minutes state that failure to address the budget deficit going forward “would have serious consequences for the group’s financial viability, with a significant impact on learners, employers and staff”.
Considering this, does O’Shaughnessy regret the staff award?
“I’m absolutely convinced that if we didn’t do that we would be facing a whole raft of different challenges right now,” he says, adding that it was a “tactical move”.
“When you look at what we have got to do to maintain a good rating, the actual pay award pales into insignificance if we can get the productivity and the will to really work on this in a way that would be the FE of the future.”
O’Shaughnessy took the reins at the group in September following the retirement of Andy Wilson.
His remit is clear: instead of “salami slicing” CCCG’s budget year after year, “I’m here to come up with a long-term sustainable model” as “we’re not counting on government to bail us out”.
There is “no doubt” in his mind that the group needs, in certain parts, to operate “much more like a private provider” and generate non-government income.
In this space, CCCG has recently set up a “little organisation” called Visionnaires, where Pablo Lloyd, who was the first chief executive of Activate Enterprise – the apprenticeships arm of the Activate Learning Group – is the founder.
The idea behind the venture is that any FE student who has a “credible business idea and passes our selection process will receive the help required to plan, implement and found their business”.
“On certain projects 51 per cent of the ownership will be gifted to the college for a specified number of years but will reduce to 0 per cent by a specified date.”
O’Shaughnessy is also thinking of expanding the college group’s work overseas – with Cuba being one potential venture.
Earlier this year Cuba’s minister for higher education visited the UK and during his trip, he toured CCCG’s renowned Victoria Centre, which is known as one of Europe’s leading centres for teaching hospitality and the culinary arts and boasts celebrity alumni such as Jamie Oliver.
O’Shaughnessy followed this up with a visit to Cuba himself, at the request of the country’s government, during the May half term where he spent four days on the island to discuss a partnership.
He has now been asked by the Cuban government to write a proposal for how CCCG may support their plans for improving the quality of training for hospitality and tourism workers, as well as specialist training for chefs.
One possible outcome of this could be, for example, a teaching hotel and restaurant on the island that would employ Cubans, trained by CCCG to run and manage the initiative.
The college group asserts that any final plans would be would generate an income.
Colleges have been warned off overseas projects at various times following many failures. In January, for example, FE Week revealed that Highbury College called in lawyers to recover a long-running £1.4 million debt held up in Nigeria, after a technical education project in the country went wrong.
O’Shaughnessy says he is aware that international development is “fraught with dangers” but believes it is a “fruitful area” and stresses that any overseas work that CCCG embarks on will be done “very cautiously, only working where the contracts are guaranteed”.
On the other side of this, he says CCCG has “one of the best estate portfolios”, which he wants to use as “income generators, rather than selling off as a one-time assets”.
A new estates strategy is being developed, he says, and he picks out the group’s site on Regent’s Park as an example.
“It is the only undeveloped piece of property between King’s Cross and Westminster,” he explains. “It is a five-storey building. We know we can put 16 storeys there – we could put 22.”
The college site would retain the space for educational purposes, but the rest of the development would be “used for profit activity, from luxury flats to London living wage flats” as well as “branded restaurants”, which would create “an £80 million endowment if we maintain control over it”.
“Our vision is that anything we do as part of this, our students will be able to work there, they will be trained there, their apprenticeship programme could be linked with that,” he adds.
“We have properties in the middle of London that we should be maximising and that is part of the solution – it’s not just cost-cutting and trying to reduce in the classroom.”
The plans are certainly ambitious, but “if we can’t do this, then I don’t know who can”, O’Shaughnessy believes.
He says there are “no fixed plans for property sales at the moment”, but the group is looking to consolidate its 13 sites in consultation with staff and students as there is “no doubt that in our centres there is replication of services.
“I don’t have a plan to take 13 sites to 10 or something, but logically, when you look around the world of business, if you put together a group you must answer the question: are we doing this as efficiently as possible for the beneficiaries.”
Final plans are expected to be in place by January.
O’Shaughnessy is keen to stress that he doesn’t “want it to seem like we’ve got it all figured out, because we don’t”.
But, “what I can say is we are not taking the easy way out on this.
“We’re being realistic, underestimating income, overestimating expense until we get this model right, and we’re thinking ahead to what could go wrong, and at the same time saying we have got to develop our own funding streams going forward.
“Not only have we got the scale, we’ve got very good reputation, and if you take the buildings strategy, the Visionnaires, the private enterprise growth strategy, the future is bright.”
The chief executive of the Education and Training Foundation has warned that FE is on the brink of a “crisis” in leadership because of a historic lack of investment.
David Russell was speaking to FE Week in an interview marking five years in post at the body which provides professional development to the sector.
The former civil servant, who became ETF chief executive after a career in the Department for Education, said that in the 20 years he has worked both in the department and with them outside it, he has “never seen as good an understanding of the importance of the FE workforce as there is now”.
“The chance the ETF has now is to really shift from a series of effective tactical interventions in the sector, which is what we have been doing, into the strategic role we have the potential to play,” he added.
“But it feels we’re at the cusp, because that understanding and awareness has not yet converted into major strategic investment, but I think it can over the next few years, and that’s why ETF is still a really exciting place to be for me.”
The foundation, which is co-owned by the Association of Colleges and adult community education body HOLEX, is well-placed to offer strategic advice to officials on workplace development, having trained teachers, trainers, governors and leaders for the sector for years.
Understanding and awareness hasn’t yet converted into major strategic investment
Yet it is the training for the last of those that is concerning to Russell, who worries the sector is “not far off from a crisis of leadership”, which will hit once the current generation of leaders leave their posts, taking with them their experience at a time of “acute” challenges for FE organisations, and coming off the back of a lack of investment in leadership development.
“I think the pipelines through to senior leadership are quite broken. You don’t see the diversity of people coming through in terms of visible diversity.”
An FE Week investigation this week, which found only 12 English college leaders are from an ethnic minority, throws that lack of diversity into sharp relief.
Russell, who is a governor of adult learning provider Friends Centre and Greater Brighton Metropolitan College, believes rebuilding those pipelines will take “a lot of thinking and a lot of doing”.
Greater Brighton Met College
The ETF’s main duties include: awarding Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) as well as Advanced Teacher Status (ATS), designing Taking Teaching Further, Prevent training, running an annual workforce survey, and managing Centres for Excellence in SEND and maths.
Winning the contract for the latter was a coup for the foundation, Russell says, and shows how it has been diversifying their income, instead of pursuing self-sufficiency.
He says the “ideal place” for the ETF to be in is to have a “good mix” of grant funding from the DfE, which accounted for 86 per cent of its total £27 million income in 2017-18, combined with longer-term contract income that gives them “continuity of income”.
There is also the foundation’s other income, for example, from its teaching qualifications QTLS and ATS and its membership body, the Society for Education and Training, which was acquired in 2015 and has gone from around 9,000 members to 20,000.
“Having those three different types of income in a diversified model is a really important part of our future I think,” Russell said.
Taking on the responsibilities of leading the ETF was a “big jump” for Russell, after spending 16 years in the “mothership” at the DfE, where “you can just do and the system will have to respond”.
The pipelines through to senior leadership are quite broken
“Whereas with the ETF, everything we do is in partnership with other organisations around the sector; and even as a pretty senior civil servant, you’re not publicly accountable for much, but as a chief executive, you feel you are all the time.”
One advantage, Russell believes, is that decisions the ETF takes can be implemented in weeks, perhaps days, rather than the years and months the DfE takes.
It has not been plain sailing for the foundation, however: the Association of Employment and Learning Providers abandoned its stake in the ETF in March 2018, claiming it is “no longer an organisation run by the FE sector for the sector” and was instead an extension of the DfE.
Asked about this controversy, Russell described the relationship between the bodies as “cordial” and said he and his AELP counterpart, Mark Dawe, “regularly” meet up to share intelligence.
“We are here to serve and support all teachers and trainers in all types of FE institutions.
“Of course, we can do that in partnership with other bodies like AELP. That makes things easier, but in the end our commitment is to the workforce. It’s not to other individual organisations.”
