Paul Hannan has resigned as principal of the Hadlow Group following investigations into financial irregularities at its two colleges.
The announcement comes hours ahead of the group’s first board meeting since December, at which it is expected two new chairs for the boards of Hadlow College and West Kent and Ashford College will be appointed, who will then conclude investigations into Hannan and former deputy principal Mark Lumsdon-Taylor.
The pair were suspended in February after the FE Commissioner came knocking, who was sent to visit the group following a request for over £20 million in restructuring funds from the agency’s Transaction Unit.
With cash running out, the group has in recent weeks been in receipt of government bailouts.
The commissioner’s team, the Education and Skills Funding Agency, and Hadlow’s own board are all currently running their own separate investigations into Hannan and Lumsdon-Taylor.
A spokesperson for Hadlow Group told FE Week today that Hannan (pictured) has now resigned, but would not provide further comment.
The group has been asked for its plans for appointing a permanent principal. Graham Morley was appointed on an interim basis in February while Hannan was on sick leave, before being suspended days later.
FE Week revealed what was behind the Hadlow scandal earlier this month, which includes allegations of doctored ESFA emails to gain additional funding. You can read our full investigation here.
FE Week also reported earlier this month how the boards at the Hadlow Group went into meltdown as serious governance failings and financial inexperience were put in the spotlight.
The appointment of two new chairs expected tonight will follow the resignation last week of Theresa Bruton, the chair of both Hadlow College’s and West Kent and Ashford College’s boards.
Bruton filled the latter role on an interim basis following the departure in February of Paul Dubrow, who claimed he and the board had been “misled and lied to”.
The Hadlow Group has seen the departures five other governors aside from Bruton and Dubrow, including several members of the finance committee.
An experienced commercial training provider new to the apprenticeships market has been heavily criticised after Ofsted found staff at an employer were being forced onto their apprenticeship programme.
WDR Limited, which has 83 apprentices, received insufficient ratings cross the board in its first monitoring visit since it started receiving public funding to train apprentices in 2017.
Inspectors found level 3 team-leading apprentices “were given no choice by their employer about participating on an apprenticeship programme”.
Apprentices were given no choice by their employer about participating on an apprenticeship programme
This led to a significant number of them dropping out of the course: “In one group of team-leading apprentices, only four out of 12 who started in June 2018 remained on the programme” at the time of the inspection.
FE Week asked WDR Limited, which has operated as a commercial training company offering mostly leadership and management courses for nearly 50 years, for the name of the employer, but it declined to release it.
Bosses at the provider did change their recruitment policy after realising what was happening, but Ofsted said it was too soon to judge whether the change had made any difference.
Under Education and Skills Funding Agency rules, any provider with an ‘insufficient’ rating in an early monitoring visit Ofsted report will be banned from taking on any new apprentices until the grade improves.
WDR declined to comment when asked if it had been suspended from recruiting new apprentices yet.
Summing up what they found at WDR, Ofsted’s report said: “Leaders and managers have not sufficiently implemented the full requirements and principles of an apprenticeship.
“They do not have effective arrangements in place to monitor and review the progress apprentices are making or understand how they benefit from their training.”
Inspectors found WDR’s coaches do not identify a starting point so they can effectively measure how apprentices develop.
In addition, leaders and managers do not have a “clear overview of the skills, knowledge or behaviours apprentices are developing”; and do not check apprentices are receiving their entitlement to off-the-job training.
“Apprentices are not able to link what they are doing in the workplace to their apprenticeship programme,” Ofsted added.
“Apprentices are not always aware of the progress they are making or what they need to do to complete their full apprenticeship.”
Leaders and manager also do not comply with the statutory requirements of ‘Prevent’ and inspectors considered apprentices to have a poor understanding of safeguarding.
WDR has and will continue to take significant actions in response to the findings
Ofsted did however praise WDR for establishing “good working relationships with employers”, and for recently recruiting “new senior managers to strengthen the management of the apprenticeship provision” who have started making “improvements”.
A WDR spokesperson said: “As a learning provider with 50 years’ experience, we are extremely disappointed with the outcomes of our first Ofsted monitoring report.
“We are a new apprenticeship training provider and we take this feedback very seriously.
“WDR has and will continue to take significant actions in response to the findings of the report and has every confidence we will achieve a successful outcome at full inspection in the coming months.”
WDR is the tenth provider out of 158 to be rated ‘insufficient’ across the board since Ofsted started monitoring new apprenticeship providers in August 2018.
The police has today launched a formal criminal investigation into disgraced apprenticeship firm Aspire Achieve Advance (3aaa).
It follows a meeting between the Department for Education and police yesterday where a number of allegations of fraud against the firm were discussed.
FE Week understands the allegations against 3aaa, which had over 4,200 learners and 500 staff before it went bust when the ESFA pulled its £16.5 million contracts, relate to manipulated Individualised Learner Records to artificially inflate achievement rates and misuse of employer-incentive grants.
The company, which received nearly all of its income from government skills funding, was co-founded by Peter Marples and Di McEvoy-Robinson in 2008, but the pair stepped down in September as the ESFA came knocking.
In a statement released today, Derbyshire police said: “A formal criminal investigation has today been launched into 3aaa.
“This follows a number of allegations of fraud that have been made by the Department for Education against the firm.
“Officers from Derbyshire Constabulary’s specialist fraud investigation team will now begin the process of making formal inquiries into these allegations.”
A DfE spokesperson said: “As a criminal investigation is now underway, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”
3aaa was one of the biggest apprenticeship firms in England when it went into administration on October 11.
It received over £31 million in government funding last year and had the largest allocation for non-levy apprenticeships – standing at nearly £22 million.
Derbyshire Constabulary started making enquiries into the defunct provider, following a referral from Action Fraud in October , while the DfE continued to conduct its own investigation separately, which got underway in the summer.
While the government and police investigations have been ongoing, FE Week has shone a light on the truth behind the 3aaa scandal.
Evidence from a whistleblower shows how achievement rates were inflated by more than 20 percentage points at the provider, which would ultimately lead to it gaining a high Ofsted grade and more public funding.
In addition to the data manipulation, 3aaa sales documents obtained by FE Week showed a potential £700,000 ESFA clawback. It is understood that this related to a range of apprenticeship and traineeship funding overclaims made via Individualised Learner Record submissions.
On the other side of the investigations was the alleged misuse of grants from an apprenticeship incentive scheme in which 3aaa held on to £1.2 million that was supposed to go to employers.
The defunct apprenticeship firm’s latest accounts show that the company’s directors took out huge directors’ loans totalling more than £4 million between them, and at the end of 2015, both owners purchased multi-million pound properties.
But this didn’t stop the agency from giving the provider a £7 million apprenticeships contract increase in the same year.
After launching its second investigation into 3aaa in June, the DfE called in an independent auditor to investigate the ESFA over its contract management of the former apprenticeships giant.
Ofsted paused its inspection at 3aaa, which was expected to result in another ‘outstanding’ rating, in the summer after the DfE launched its investigation. The education watchdog told FE Week in November it was continuing to look into the provider but a final outcome has still not been reached.
In January FE Week reported that more than half of the apprentices that were affected by the collapse of 3aaa had still not been found a new provider.
Outsourcing giant Interserve is reportedly going to be put into administration today with nearly 5,000 apprentices on its books.
However, the company has insisted this will not be a Carillion-style collapse and it is very much business as usual, with no big job losses anticipated.
Shareholders at Interserve, which employs 45,000 people in the UK, today failed to secure investor backing for a rescue plan, meaning lenders who lent the company more than £600 million will now seize control of it, according to the BBC.
The outsourcing giant is an international support services and construction group with huge UK government contracts in areas including health, education and defence.
It also runs a large UK training provider called Interserve Learning and Employment Ltd, which is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted and holds ESFA contracts worth £10.6 million – but this doesn’t factor in its apprenticeship levy contracts.
According to it websites, the provider trains “around 14,000 apprentices each year”. Skills minister Anne Milton said Interserve had around had 4,567 apprentices on programme as of November 2018, in an answer to a parliamentary question in December.
Interserve told FE Week it will be business as usual if the company does go into administration, and it will honour all of its contracts, meaning there will be minimal disruption to the apprentices it trains and employs.
A formal statement is expected to be released later today.
Interserve accumulated debt after construction project delays and a failed energy-from-waste project.
The crisis surrounding the outsourcing giant has sparked fears that it could be heading for the same fate as its former rival Carillion, which went insolvent in January 2018.
Over 1,100 apprentice bricklayers, carpenters and builders were left jobless in the wake of the collapse.
Interserve told FE Week today its position is not the same as Carillion.
UPDATE: Administrators Ernst and Young were appointed late on Friday and the company’s assets were moved immediately to a group controlled by Interserve’s lenders.
Debbie White, chief executive of the Interserve Group, said: “With a stronger financial platform in place, Interserve will be able to concentrate on delivering value for our customers.
“Interserve is fundamentally a strong business and with a competitive financial platform in place we see significant opportunities ahead as a best-in-class partner to the public and private sector.”
West Nottinghamshire College entered the public eye last year when it ran into financial difficulties that led to government bailouts, substantial job losses, and, ultimately, the resignation of its longstanding, high-profile principal, Dame Asha Khemka. An FE Week investigation has now uncovered more details about the scale of trouble at the beleaguered college
Bailouts soar to £10m in just six months
Government bailouts for West Notts have rocketed to more than £10 million in just six months.
Its main monetary issue was related to subcontracting rule changes that meant it had to drastically scale back on this provision and lose out on millions in management fees.
The financial strain surfaced in July when the college received £2.1 million in exceptional financial support (EFS) from the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) following the failed sale of its eLearning business bksb, which FE Week later revealed was requested just 48 hours before it was due to run out of cash.
The college’s recently published 2017/18 accounts show that an application for an “additional tranche of up to £4.675 million of EFS was approved by the ESFA in October 2018 covering the period November 2018 to January 2019”.
It will provide assurance on the college’s future planning and income streams
Then, in December, the college’s financial plan showed the “need for an additional up to £4.7 million of exceptional financial support in the period February to March 2019”.
West Notts told FE Week that, of the requested amounts, the DfE approved a total of £10.3 million.
“This covers the college until March 2019 when EFS is no longer a feature of government support across the sector,” a spokesperson said.
The cash is being used to finance “ongoing deficits, payment of clawback to ESFA, further restructuring and the exceptional professional fees incurred as a result of the college’s current financial position”.
Since requesting the financial support, the college has launched an independent business review (IBR) with chartered accountants BDO, which “will enable the college and its funders to agree the strategic direction of the college and a robust financial base moving forward”.
The review will form the college’s basis of negotiation with its lenders for financial support post March 31, 2019, according to the accounts.
Government guidance on the college insolvency regime states that an IBR “does not automatically result in insolvency proceedings of any kind – and the earlier it is conducted, the wider the range of potential viable solutions that can be identified for the future of the college”.
A spokesperson for West Notts said an IBR is “standard practice for colleges in situations such as this”, and has been “agreed as part of negotiations with the bank and ESFA”.
She added: “It will provide assurance on the college’s future planning and income streams. The review process is nearing completion.”
West Notts’ 2017/18 accounts paint a bleak picture of its current financial state.
The college generated a £9.54 million deficit before gains and losses, up from £2.57 million the year before.
Meanwhile, the college’s group income fell from £51 million in 2016/17 to £41.56 million in the last year.
To try to find savings the college has undergone a major restructure over the last year, which resulted in the loss of nearly 200 jobs as at the end of February 2019.
A college spokesperson said it is “presently assessing staff redundancies for the next academic year”, but could not say how many jobs were at risk.
Land and buildings offered to Lloyds bank as security
All of West Nottinghamshire College’s land and buildings have been offered up as security to its bank so that it can continue accessing a credit facility.
The college’s 2017/18 accounts show that during the year, West Notts continued to repay its long-term debt with Lloyds Bank at a rate of “£0.74 million per annum and as at 31 July 2018 had an outstanding debt of £13.995 million”.
However, as a result of a breach of bank covenants at the year-end “all of this debt has been reclassified as a current liability”.
The security over buildings should not be an issue for us
The college also had a “revolving credit facility” of £3 million in 2017/18 with Lloyds, all of which “had been drawn down by 31 July 2018”.
The college identified a “breach of warranties and, for a period of time, the college could not access its facility”.
However, the bank issued a “waiver letter” agreeing not to take action in respect of the breach in “consideration for security over all of the college’s freehold land and buildings”.
West Notts has five different sites spreading across Mansfield, Ashfield and Sheffield.
Its main site – Derby Road campus – has undergone a £40 million redevelopment in recent years. It is equipped with the “latest facilities and state-of-the-art technology” as well as a 150-seat theatre, fine-dining restaurant, and hair and beauty salon and spa.
Meanwhile, the college’s Vision University Centre, for higher education students, opened in 2016 for £6.5 million.
The college told FE Week it was unable to disclose the full valuation of the college’s estate as “this would contravene the terms of engagement with the valuer”.
A spokesperson said: “The college has confidence in its plans to right its finances and, as such, the security over buildings should not be an issue for us.
“The college has received the necessary assurance from the ESFA regarding EFS and the bank has extended credit facilities to us.”
A spokesperson for the Lloyds Banking Group told FE Week it has been working “for many months with the management of West Nottinghamshire College to achieve a consensual restructuring in order to put the business on to a stronger financial footing”.
“We will continue to work alongside West Nottinghamshire College whilst the terms of the restructure are agreed,” she added.
£1.1m ESFA clawback
Nearly 10 per cent of West Notts’ £10.3 million government bailout will be used to pay for ESFA clawback after it was caught failing to comply with funding rules.
The college’s accounts show that it undertook a “data cleansing review of apprenticeships” in 2017/18.
This “identified instances of non-compliance with funding guidance resulting in a provision of £1.1 million in the accounts relating to activity which should have been withdrawn from the funding return to the ESFA before 31 July 2018”.
A spokesperson for the college said none of the clawback “related to sub-contractors; it related to the incorrect rolling-over of directly delivered apprentices”.
FE Week revealed last month that the ESFA had started conducting short-notice mystery audits to providers after finding evidence that apprenticeship funding rules were not being complied with.
They are understood to have been prompted by concern at the unpublished results of the qualification achievement rates for 2017/18, as well as the ESFA’s investigation into disgraced apprenticeship firm Aspire Achieve Advance (3aaa), which went bust in October after the government pulled its skills funding contracts following allegations of fraud.
FE Week understands the agency is looking into whether other providers have inappropriately taken funding and boosted achievement rates for apprentices by misusing reporting of withdrawals, as well as the way they record breaks in learning and transfers.
It is understood the agency will soon write to the whole FE sector expressing concern over data gaming, just as Geoff Russell, then-chief executive of the Learning and Skills Council, infamously did in 2010.
A DfE spokesperson said: “We do not regularly comment on investigations, ongoing or otherwise.”
Secret investigations into subcontractors
Numerous investigations have been launched into West Nottinghamshire College’s subcontracting partners after “historic funding irregularities” were found.
For years, West Notts has been one of the biggest subcontracting colleges in England, with its latest accounts showing it subcontracted 86.4 per cent of its apprenticeship provision in 2017/18.
The government’s latest subcontracting figures, for 2016/17, show the college earned £4.4 million in top-slicing fees from provision worth £19.6 million.
But the scale of this subcontracting has led to some unscrupulous work.
Its latest financial statements reveal that the college has “recently concluded an investigation that identified some historic funding irregularities relating to activity undertaken by subcontractors”.
This resulted in the college agreeing to repay around £300,000 to the ESFA.
The accounts also show that the college is “currently investigating two subcontractor partners where potential irregularities have been identified”.
“The final quantum of the potential irregularity is not known,” they state.
“However, the total value of funding claimed by the college in respect of the activity across both subcontractor partners is £3.2 million.”
When quizzed on the investigations by FE Week, a spokesperson for West Notts said: “The college is robust in protecting public funds and, as such, when concerns are raised related to subcontractors these are investigated, and in many cases accusations are unfounded.
“The college will make no further comment on previous or ongoing investigations; the findings of which are confidential.”
West Notts board minutes from a standards meeting in October expressed concern that the college’s overall achievement rates had fallen for 2017/18, with its high-level subcontracting “contributing” to the data.
“It was reiterated again that subcontracted activity this year has been a huge challenge as the programme is on run off, with most of the existing subcontractors not expecting to be working with the college beyond July 2019 and therefore the business relationship has changed,” the minutes said.
“It was reiterated that the college data is very close to the minimum standard numbers and therefore this is a risk.”
If the college’s data does full below minimum standards it would be brought into scope for an Ofsted inspection.
The minutes continued: “A challenge from the committee was that overall and timely achievement appears to be very varied as between the subcontractors.
“They questioned how much of the variation is as a consequence of data collection as opposed to poor performance.
“It was explained that there has been a deterioration in the 17/18 year as the college has lost its ability to influence (either through stick or carrot) contractor activity and also any historic issues are now becoming evident as both subcontractors and the college close down the whole programme.”
In March last year, West Notts blamed changes to subcontracting rules for the fact it was having to cut more than 100 jobs in an effort to make £2.7 million in savings.
Subcontracting rules, which came into force in May 2017, mean lead contractors can no longer subcontract entire apprenticeship programmes. Instead they must “directly deliver” at least some of each programme.
In addition, many providers that were previously subcontractors are now able to contract directly with employers to deliver apprenticeships.
Whistleblower prompts anti-fraud, bribery and corruption training
Senior staff at West Notts are being given anti-fraud, bribery and corruption training following whistleblowing allegations.
While the college launched inquiries into its various subcontractor partners last year, its audit committee board revealed the actions by its own staff were also being probed.
Minutes from a November meeting state: “There were two whistleblowing investigations undertaken in the year.
“The committee discussed the information provided and questioned whether the individual who has left the organisation poses a threat to any other organisation.”
A West Notts spokesperson would not reveal details about the allegations. “Whistleblowing investigations, by their nature, are confidential and, as such, the college will make no further comment,” she said.
Whatever the accusations were, the college is taking them seriously.
“Following some general discussion the committee stated that they would want to see that all staff who have delegated authorities are provided with anti-fraud, bribery and corruption training, this can be done by way of an e-module,” the audit committee minutes said.
“They asked that this be provided to anyone in the organisation with delegated authority limits, no matter how small. It was agreed that the vice-principal would pick this is up as an action with the HR team and add this to the list of mandatory training for all staff.”
Major overhaul of college board with 14 appointments
The turbulent year at West Notts has led to major leadership and governor changes.
Martin Sim, an experienced troubleshooter, took over as interim principal in October following the resignation of Dame Asha Khemka.
And, more recently, West Notts has bolstered its corporation board with the February appointment of Sean Lyons as its chair. He succeeded Nevil Croston who stepped down in December after almost five years in the role.
Lyons has more than 30 years’ experience in the steel and manufacturing sectors, where he held “high-ranking positions at some of the world’s leading steel firms”, and is a former NHS chairman, according to West Notts.
Sean Lyons (left) and Martin Sim
“Although the college is going through some significant difficulties at present, I’ve experienced similar situations at other organisations in the past, where things needed to improve, so I’d like to see what I can do to help,” Lyons said.
In a massive overhaul of its governing body, West Notts has appointed 14 other new members, who bring a range of expertise, since October.
Nine previous members have stepped down in that time.
Among the new appointments is Paul Frammingham, an experienced chief financial officer who has worked at companies including Babcock Networks and Rolls-Royce.
Another new governor with a finance background is Jon Mold, who joined West Notts in November when he retired from full-time work. He has 25 years’ experience in the FE sector, and previously worked at Wilmorton (now Derby) College and Stoke on Trent College where he was the finance director.
New members have also been recruited from the retail sector, the rail industry, HR and general FE management.
Lyons said: “We can’t change what has happened in the past – but we can influence the future.”
Sim, who was principal of Salford City College from 2010 to 2015, has specialised in an interim principal capacity for the last four years, taking Gateway Sixth-Form College out of special measures before steering the financially troubled Barnfield College to a merger.
At the time of his appointment he said his main priority is to “ensure West Nottinghamshire College remains a vital asset to the communities of Mansfield and Ashfield”.
Four providers – including a major college – have boosted their grades from three to two this week, while seven others either maintained the ‘good’ rating or achieved it in either their first inspection.
Elsewhere it’s been a busy week for monitoring visits, with 16 reports published – 14 for new apprenticeship visits which produced a mixed bag of results.
The Manchester College, part of the LTE Group, was celebrating after improving from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’.
Inspectors said that since its previous report back in 2017, leaders and managers have “overseen improvements in the quality of education they provide” and have an “ambitious strategy”.
“Almost all students, including a high proportion of those who have high needs, benefit from effective work-related learning and high-quality work experience activities,” the reported said.
At The Manchester College’s last inspection it was rated ‘inadequate’ for apprenticeships. Since then, the college has dropped that provision.
Inspectors said a “high proportion” of its students, of which there are over 10,000, now achieve their qualifications.
The University of Derby also improved its Ofsted grade from three to two this week.
A “very high proportion of apprentices at levels 4 and 5, who form the majority, successfully complete their apprenticeships” and “progress to employment at the end of their programmes”, inspectors found.
London South Bank University and the Universities of Essex both received grades two in their first ever inspections.
Meanwhile, adult and community learning provider CVQO Ltd also boosted its grade to ‘good’.
CVQO, which has 5,500 learners aged 16 to 18, has taken “decisive and successful action” to deal with weaknesses identified at the previous inspection, including introducing “well-planned staff development” that has led to an improvement in tutors’ skills.
Worcestershire County Council maintained its ‘good’ rating after “significantly” improving the performance management of subcontractors and ”skilfully” planning its teaching, learning and assessment to motivate and engage learners and apprentices.
Among employer providers, Halfords went from grade three to two and British Academy of Jewellery received a grade two during its first-ever inspection.
Blue Arrow Limited was also inspected for the first time but was not as successful, receiving a three rating. Ofsted said “too few” apprentices achieve their apprenticeship within planned timescales and senior executives have been “slow to remedy the poor performance of the division”.
Elsewhere, UTC Sheffield Olympic Legacy Park achieved a ‘good’ rating in its first inspection since opening in 2016, but Scarborough University Technical College didn’t do as well, being graded as ‘requires improvement’.
Over at independent providers, nine early monitoring visits of new apprenticeship providers resulted in ‘reasonable progress’ ratings across the board, while two others were found to be making ‘significant progress’ in at least one theme judged, with one of the providers scoring the top mark across the board.
Temp Dent Dental Agency was the provider that scored this impressive result. Inspectors said the provider, which has around 600 apprentices, has a “well-established” programme of learning that makes “excellent use of technology to enable a large number of apprentices with little or no prior knowledge to train in dental nursing”.
One other new apprenticeship provider, JT Development Solutions, was rated as ‘insufficient’ in two themes and ‘reasonable’ in one.
Leaders and managers at the provider, which has 125 apprentices, “do not ensure that employers provide apprentices with their entitlement to relevant, high-quality off-the-job training”.
“Although the training activities are relevant to apprentices’ job roles, not all are directly relevant to the apprenticeship standards,” inspectors added.
It was better news for FW Solutions Limited and AmacSports Limited, two independent providers that received a ‘good’ rating in their first ever inspections.
And grade two-rated PeoplePlus, which received a monitoring visit after Ofsted identified a “risk” at the size of its growth over the last year, was found making ‘reasonable progress’ in its provision for nearly 4,000 apprentices.
Lastly, Central Bedfordshire College was found making ‘reasonable progress’ in a monitoring visit carried out after it received a grade three in June last year.
The adult education budget should be used to help communities that aren’t benefiting from the region’s economic success, says Julie Nugent
The West Midlands is experiencing a renaissance. Civic pride is growing, with Coventry set to be the UK’s city of culture in 2021, and Birmingham hosting the Commonwealth Games in 2022
Our economy is growing too. Across a range of indicators – including GVA, skills and employment levels – the region has welcomed many recent and significant improvements. Investment is increasing, with companies like HS2, Deloitte, HSBC and PwC all choosing to expand in the region.
Unfortunately, too many of our communities are still not participating in this economic success. Currently, the regional average employment rate of 68% is well below the national average (75%)¹, and there are particular challenges for our BAME communities.
Too many of our residents lack skills, particularly at higher levels, with less than a third (30%)¹ qualified to NVQ Level 4 – this in an economy where, by 2024, 42%² of all jobs will be at Level 4 and above.
We need to free up our skills system to respond to these challenges.
In 2017/18, only 6% of the Adult Education Budget (AEB) went towards helping our residents gain Level 3 skills (only 1% of all enrolments).
Our view is that national funding systems have frustrated the further education sector’s ability to respond to regional skills challenges. The causes of this are complex. They include a lack of strategic investment in FE, particularly in capital, cuts in funding and national prioritisation of scarce resource.
The West Midlands needs a different approach.
Last year, we worked with regional partners to establish a shared ambition for skills: more people in employment, more people in higher-skilled jobs and a more agile system.
The devolution of the £126m adult education budget to the West Midlands gives us all an opportunity to achieve this.
But devolution is about much more than money.
For the West Midlands, devolution is a catalyst for new ways of working, symbolised by the creation of the Further Education Skills and Productivity Group (FESPG) – a collective of the 21 colleges delivering across the region.
We are working closely with the region’s colleges and providers
Lowell Williams, chief executive officer of Dudley College, chair of the FESPG, is strongly supportive of the devolution of funding for skills. He sees the group as a mechanism for constructive collaboration, with each other and with the combined authority, and to get behind the regional agenda for growth in productivity, skills and employment.
The FESPG, along with regional representatives from adult and community learning providers and the AELP, has been critical to the development of our regional skills policy.
We know our region needs more technical skills, but we also know that establishing a new technical skills offer for young people and adults is not easy. Our sector needs new models of delivery, new teaching capabilities, and significant investment in facilities and kit.
We are therefore working closely with the region’s colleges and providers to understand and mitigate the risks in developing new provision, helping the sector to rebuild capacity to address our changing economic needs.
We will build on our experience of career learning pilots, with subsidies to support adults in priority Level 3 qualifications, as well as testing sector-led innovations around delivery and fees structures, to develop new provision that can better address current and future economic needs.
The West Midlands will shortly publish its local industrial strategy – where we set out the challenges and opportunities for our continued economic growth. FE is critical to delivering this strategy, and we are asking the government for more investment in our colleges to underpin the robust technical education system that our region requires. We will continue to support the sector’s broader role in engaging and supporting individuals and communities, developing their skills and confidence, and helping them to progress in learning and employment.
The West Midlands has some deeply entrenched skills issues to tackle. But we have a new ambition, a clear sense of purpose and an FE sector that is up for this challenge.
It is an add-on rather than an update – and could be an attempt to claw back funding or scare providers into discount pricing, says Simon Ashworth
Earlier this week the ESFA published guidance on the recognition of prior learning. It’s important to note this is additional guidance, rather than specifically new or updated funding rules. With apprenticeship funding now finally acknowledged as running in short supply, there may be more emphasis on how providers account for prior learning in order to claw back funding or scare providers into discount pricing.
Ten years ago the sector experienced a crackdown on providers claiming additional learning support. A few providers were made an example of and others quickly scaled back their financial claims but continued to offer the additional support while not getting paid for it. Let’s hope we don’t see a repeat of the latter.
The previous iterations of the funding rules were much more specific about tackling “embedded qualifications” with fixed rates of funding reductions that governed the apprenticeship frameworks, which were all built around qualifications.
The move from apprenticeship frameworks to standards has changed both the dynamics of the system and the tangible variables that were used previously to make adjustments for where apprentices had recognised prior attainment.
In the latest guidance the ESFA identify five areas that they want to reinforce and, arguably, the key point is having a robust initial skills assessment. An initial skills assessment doesn’t just mean an initial assessment for maths and English assessment but a wider diagnostic assessment to understand the level of competency and starting point for the individual’s skills, knowledge and behaviours in their chosen standard.
The current rules offer room for flexibility rather than taking a blunt approach
However, having conducted an initial skills assessment, a provider shouldn’t make the mistake identified in a recent Ofsted inspection where, at the start of the programme, staff assessed apprentices’ prior knowledge, skills and behaviours but they did not use this information to adjust the content and duration of an individual’s programme. This highlights that it’s not only the ESFA focusing on the recognition of prior learning from a funding perspective, but that Ofsted are also interested – a theme we will see more of in the coming years under the new education inspection framework.
A provider should have an internal policy for how staff identify, define and take into account prior learning. The current rules and guidance offer room for interpretation and flexibility rather than taking a blunt and arbitrary approach. Having a clearly defined policy not only helps staff, but gives confidence to inspectors and auditors about interpretation and subsequent approach.
Another key point is that just because someone may have the knowledge or a prior qualification, it doesn’t always mean that they have put that knowledge to the test. In fact, the individual may need more intense support in helping develop their competency as opposed to developing their knowledge.
This is why under the new standards we need to avoid an arbitrary rule where the system says no to funding or yes to forcing a discount simply based on possessing a prior qualification.
At the other extreme is the issue of stretch. The apprentice may be more competent than average with higher levels of knowledge skills and behaviour, but the provider’s stretch plan would be to get the apprentice to distinction, requiring more on- and off-the-job training compared with the average apprentice. This would still need full funding and training to take the apprentice to a higher level of achievement.
Finally, to reinforce the absolute need for having a robust initial skills assessment, the results of which are used to tailor and personalise each apprentice’s individual programme, the provider should account for current levels of skills and knowledge.
This should then be used to plan, and act as evidence of, the required off-the-job training, which should be recorded in the evidence pack.
The Department for Education forked out £1 million to settle a legal dispute at a college group under investigation and already relying on government bailouts to survive, FE Week can reveal.
The department paid off BAM Construction after West Kent and Ashford College (WKAC) was ordered by the High Court to pay outstanding debts for the construction of a state-of-the-art teaching building in November.
This is the latest revelation about the financial scandal embroiling the Hadlow Group, which runs WKAC, and is now looking for two new board chairs and half a dozen governors after the previous holders quit.
The group has been receiving an unknown amount of exceptional financial support from the Education and Skills Funding Agency, as well as visits from the FE Commissioner.
The commissioner met the agency last Friday to decide what advice to give to the education secretary: bail out the group, or let it become the first college to become insolvent.
BAM Construction was contracted to build the new Elwick Road building for Ashford College in 2015, and finished it in 2017.
Ashford College, part of West Kent and Ashford College, was adopted by Hadlow College in 2014 after K College collapsed. The Hadlow Group was then formed to run Ashford College, Hadlow College and West Kent College in Tonbridge.
WKAC accumulated a debt of £1 million for the Elwick Road construction work, and, according to a BAM spokesperson: “Despite our making a number of attempts to negotiate payment of this debt, the college failed to settle.”
The case was taken to the High Court, which found in favour of BAM and ordered WKAC to pay the £1 million bill, which the DfE covered.
According to BAM, the college has now paid most of the outstanding debt.
The High Court case was not the last monetary problem for the £26 million building – which features a recording studio, a hair and beauty salon, and a lecture theatre.
The project received support from Ashford Borough Council, which gave WKAC a £2 million loan in February 2015 to deliver phase one of the development – the £26 million teaching block.
The college loan was converted into a grant in September 2018, meaning it did not need to be paid back when the teaching block was completed.
In July 2016, the council gave the college a further extra £1 million, again on the basis that they would not need to pay it back as long as a further phase of development was completed, a technologies block known as “phase 1a”.
The technologies block was never completed and it is understood that the council now wants their £1 million back.
The February council cabinet meeting agenda lists a relevant report and a request from the college for an extension on phase 1a completion until March 2021.
However, after FE Week reported – the day before the meeting – that the FE Commissioner had visited the Hadlow Group, deputy principal Mark Lumsdon-Taylor had resigned and principal Paul Hannan had gone on sick leave, Ashford Borough Council leader Gerry Clarkson pulled the item off the cabinet’s agenda.
At the cabinet meeting, Clarkson said: “Following the recent news that came out only yesterday about changes to the management of the West Kent and Ashford College, and having not received any further detail or an official position from the college at this stage, it is felt prudent to withdraw the cabinet report on the Ashford College campus.”
Asked whether the college can continue with phase 1a without support from the council, a group spokesperson would only say: “We understand and respect Ashford Borough Council’s decision on this and value the close working relationship we have with them.”
The Hadlow Group declined to comment on the court case.
Asked to confirm if the Department for Education had spent £1 million to settle the college’s legal dispute, a spokesperson said: “The ESFA is working closely with the colleges to maintain stability and to ensure that education for learners is not adversely affected and appropriate steps are taken to manage public money.”
