West Kent and Ashford College has scored well in its first Ofsted monitoring visit since it went into administration, in what was a mixed week for FE providers.

The college, which followed its sister college Hadlow to become the second provider to fall under the new insolvency regime in August, received ‘reasonable progress’ ratings across the board. Its last full inspection, in late 2018, resulted in a grade three.

In terms of improving retention and achievement for adults on English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses and students aged 16 to 18, Ofsted found more learners “now stay at college, complete their studies and achieve their qualifications than at the time of the previous inspection”.

“Leaders and managers have accomplished this by improving induction procedures and support for new learners,” inspectors said.

Leaders and managers have worked closely with teaching staff to “improve feedback to learners”, while Graham Morley, the interim principal, and senior leaders have “recently restructured the management of apprenticeships, which has led to improvements”.

Elsewhere, DN Colleges Group was found making ‘significant progress’ in one area, and ‘reasonable progress’ in three others in its first monitoring visit since it was formed in November 2017 following the merger of Doncaster College and North Lindsey College.

“Leaders and senior managers have a clear vision for the college group post-merger and promote high expectations for all students and apprentices,” Ofsted found.

“Leaders and governors have invested significantly in the recruitment of senior quality assurance managers, curriculum leaders and teaching staff to ensure sustained improvement. As a result, the pace of improvement over the last 12 months has been rapid.”

DN Colleges Group’s board of governors has also been “substantially strengthened”.

The most positive report of the week went to Impellam Group PLC, an international specialist recruitment company based in Luton which trains over 180 apprentices.

It was found making ‘significant progress’ across the board in its early monitoring visit.

Leaders “plan programmes very effectively” in partnership with employers, including the likes of British Airways, Ofsted found.

“They establish accurately the existing skills and knowledge apprentices have at the start of their programmes.”

Employer provider Caunton Engineering Limited was also found making ‘significant progress’ in an area of its early monitoring report.

The structural steelwork contractor designs and builds steelwork for large building projects across the UK, and trains 13 apprentices currently.

Inspectors said trainers at the employer “provide well-planned training, and help apprentices to develop their knowledge and skills from design through to manufacture”.

Several current apprentices are “working at a level beyond what would be expected at this stage in their programmes”.

Another provider to pick up a ‘significant progress’ rating in an early monitoring report was private provider Gem Partnership Limited.

This was for its safeguarding provision, with Ofsted noting how leaders “implement a comprehensive approach to keeping apprentices and staff safe”.

But it was bad news this week Selection Training Limited, which was found making ‘insufficient progress’ across the board.

The watchdog said leaders “do not ensure that the requirements of apprenticeships are met or that employers demonstrate sufficient commitment to the programmes”.

Staff at the provider are also “not involved sufficiently in the selection of apprentices to ensure that recruits are suited well to the programme”.

Ofsted also came down hard on one of the UK’s leading firms of financial compliance advisers this week.

New Model Business Academy made ‘insufficient progress’ in two areas of its provision to 113 apprentices on level 4 financial adviser and paraplanner standards, during an early monitoring visit.

It is the not-for-profit training arm of SimplyBiz, which is registered on the London Stock Exchange.

Azilo Training Ltd, which was found making ‘insufficient progress’ in its early monitoring report published in January when it was called BNG Training Limited, was given a grade three in its first full inspection.

Ofsted said senior leaders “have not yet successfully addressed all of the weaknesses identified at the previous monitoring visit” and their strategies to improve the quality of provision “lack rigour”.

Inspectors did say, however, that most apprentices “develop new work-related skills and behaviours and add value to employers’ businesses”.

Lastly, two private providers, Positive Approach Academy for Hair Limited and Avensys UK Training Limited, were both found making ‘reasonable progress’ across the board in early monitoring reports.

 

GFE Colleges	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
DN Colleges Group	11/09/2019	08/10/2019	M	N/A
West Kent and Ashford College	25/09/2019	11/10/2019	M	3

 

Independent Learning Providers	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Azilo Training Ltd	20/08/2019	07/10/2019	3	M
New Model Business Academy Limited	18/09/2019	07/10/2019	M	N/A
Selection Training Limited	05/09/2019	07/10/2019	M	N/A
Impellam Group PLC	10/09/2019	08/10/2019	M	N/A
Avensys UK Training Limited	25/09/2019	10/10/2019	M	N/A
Gem Partnership Limited	10/09/2019	10/10/2019	M	N/A
Positive Approach Academy for Hair Limited	18/09/2019	10/10/2019	M	N/A

 

Employer providers	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Caunton Engineering Limited	25/09/2019	09/10/2019	M	N/A

Apprentices are struggling to raise concerns about poor training, the Department for Education has found, while their tool allowing learners to give feedback is stuck in development.

An internal ‘Discovery’ project is currently being run by the DfE, which has asked apprentices what they consider “most important for successful completion and what drives their satisfaction”.

The “emerging findings” have flagged concern about “how to complain about poor training quality, and responsiveness from training providers more generally,” and has led the DfE to tender for a supplier to deliver an Apprentice Experience Survey to validate these findings.

“A system that values the views of employers over the views of apprentices is inherently unbalanced”

Such concerns come amid delays to a tool that would allow learners to feedback on their training provider by text. It is being developed by the ESFA Digital Service and was originally meant to be rolled out by July-September 2018. It was listed as in “final stages of development” as of last month.

This is despite a similar tool for employers, delivered through the Find Apprenticeship Training website, being launched late last year.

The DfE told FE Week that the tool for apprentices “has been developed” and it has collected initial feedback as part of a “trial phase”.

A spokesperson said this will be “used in the development of future policy for this area”, but could not say when or if it would be fully rolled out.

The National Society of Apprentices said an apprenticeship system that “values the views of employers over the views of apprentices is inherently unbalanced”.

“It comes as no surprise that employers are able to provide feedback on their perception of the quality of education and training that their apprentices receive, but that the views and experiences of apprentices can wait,” a spokesperson added.

“When we speak to apprentices, and we speak to around 1,000 every year, the quality of their education, both on and off the job, consistently makes the top three issues.

“So we would welcome a platform that enables apprentices to report concerns about the quality of their education in a way that does not put their apprenticeships at risk.”

As would the learners: a blog post by the ESFA last November reported it was testing the tool with a small group and apprentices had “consistently” told them they are happy to give feedback regularly by text message.

Former skills minister Anne Milton spoke in favour of a feedback tool for apprentices and employers in October last year, sayingformal Ofsted inspections “often miss the point”.

Speaking this week, she told FE Week that she believes the feedback tool should go further, and allow apprentices to also report on their employers.

“I always have thought an apprentice feedback tool was a good idea,” she said.

“Ideally you would have all three bits of the puzzle on the feedback tool: employers commenting on providers; providers commenting on employers; and apprentices, the most important, commenting on both.

“If you have a really simple feedback tool, it can be very useful in highlighting where there might be problems ahead of inspection.

“If the department is seeing a consistent problem with one provider, it can look into it ahead of time.

“What matters above all else is that apprentices are getting the training they need and deserve and they are getting a good experience in work.”

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education’s panel of apprentices also thinks it is “important apprentices are able to feed back on their experience”, and they “support efforts being made to improve opportunities available to do this”.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “We want all apprentices to be able to provide feedback so we can make sure apprenticeships are high-quality and know what more we can do in this important sector.

“The feedback tool has been developed and we have gathered responses from apprentices as part of our trial phase, which will be used in the development of future policy for this area.”

A former adviser to the minister for higher education has expressed “concern” that dozens of providers delivering level 6 and 7 apprenticeships are still going without inspection more than four years after the courses began.

In June the Office for Students was given responsibility for overseeing this provision at all training firms, even if they are not on its register of higher education providers.

Prior to this, nobody was responsible for checking the quality of delivery at these unregistered providers, as Ofsted’s remit only stretches up to level 5.

“It is hard to prioritise when you have a huge list of priorities”

Analysis by FE Week of the latest individual provider data shows there were 6,140 apprenticeship starts at levels 6 and 7 between 58 training organisations, which are not on the OfS’ register, from 2014/15 to 2017/18.

This number is likely to have rocketed in 2018/19, as national data shows starts for the first three quarters of that year were almost twice those recorded in the whole of 2017/18.

One unregistered HE provider that will be of particular concern is Prospects Training International, which started delivering apprenticeships around three years ago.

It managed to recruit over 1,000 apprentices until Ofsted inspected its level 5 and below provision in April 2019. It was found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ and was banned from recruiting at those levels as a result.

Ofsted was, however, unable to assess the quality of Prospects’ level 6 and 7 provision, of which it has had at least 270 starts since 2016/17.

The unregistered provider with the highest number of starts at these levels, according to the latest government data, is Kaplan Financial.

It is a major financial services provider to high-profile employers including British Airways, Eurostar and Morrisons Supermarkets. It was rated as ‘requires improvement’ by Ofsted in September 2018 for its level 5 and below provision.

Despite the pressing urgency, the OfS appears to be dragging its heels on inspecting this provision.

A spokesperson for the regulator admitted that “no reviews have been completed”.

He did however say that four reviews are “currently underway”, which will typically involve a three-day, on-site visit. Providers will not be graded, like in Ofsted reports, but their review will be published publicly.

The spokesperson claimed that visits to providers have commenced, but did not say when the first took place.

He added that more reviews will “take place in the coming months”.

Once all of the planned reviews are completed, the OfS will sit down with the Department for Education to evaluate the process and decide how best to conduct future reviews. This “lessons learned” exercise will begin in the new year.

The OfS is prioritising the providers that have the highest number of starts in its initial reviews.

Based on the latest provider data, for up to 2017/18, the providers with the most starts at level 6 and 7 are: Kaplan Financial with 1,990; BPP Professional Education with 610 starts; Ernst & Young with 410; and QA with 410.

Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute and a former adviser to HE minister David Willetts, said it was “concerning” that thousands of level 6 and 7 apprenticeships are still going unregulated five years after they launched, and urged the OfS to “get a move on”.

He told FE Week this is a “very important issue” but admitted to having some sympathy for the higher education regulator.

“I do not blame the individual staff at the Office for Students. The organisation only got its full legal powers in August and they have had a huge job to do in getting to grips with the providers on their register, let alone keeping an eye on others.

“It is hard to prioritise when you have a huge list of priorities.”

Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman expressed her deep concern at the issue of unregulated apprenticeship during an interview with FE Week in March, when she said: “I very much hope people will see the logic in us doing it.”

All new providers that fall under Ofsted’s remit will have a monitoring visit from inspectors within two years of the firm starting delivery.

They will then have a full inspection within another 24 months, unless they’re found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in their monitoring report, in which case they’ll be fully inspected within a year.

The OfS explained to FE Week it was directed by the DfE to “look at both on and off-the-job training and to visit a number of providers that currently offer substantial apprenticeship provision at levels 6 and 7 that does not lead to either a full bachelor’s or a master’s degree” in its reviews.

“The purpose of the review exercise is to evaluate the quality of the apprenticeships,” a spokesperson said.

“At the end of each review, we will report to the DfE so that it can identify where high quality apprenticeships are being delivered.

“Whilst we recognise that the providers that are participating in these reviews have not applied for OfS registration, we will review their apprenticeships against criteria that have been adapted from the OfS’ quality-related Conditions of Registration.

“This will provide some comparability with OfS-registered providers of apprenticeships at levels 6 and 7.”

The spokesperson added that once the review activity has concluded, the OfS will undertake the “lessons learned” exercise. This will “give reviewers, providers, apprentices and other participants an opportunity to input to an evaluation of the new review method”.

A DfE spokesperson confirmed the OfS’ approach, and said it has given the regulator this responsibility “to ensure that all apprenticeship training is high quality regardless of whether or not the provider is registered with the OfS”.

A provider of British Sign Language qualifications and an engineering awarding organisation are among the winners of this year’s Federation of Awarding Bodies’ awards.

FAB’s fifth celebration of the awarding and assessment sector was a glitzy ceremony in Leicester, attended by over 230 experts in awarding and assessment.

Chief executive of FAB Tom Bewick said the membership organisation received a “record number” of entries to the awards this year and the standard was “exceptionally high”.

“The FAB Awards is an opportunity for the industry to come together to celebrate success and share good practice and all of the winners were deserving of their award,” he added.

The panel of judges included UCL Institute of Education professor and former Association of Colleges chief executive Martin Doel, head of apprenticeships and HR business partner for Coca-Cola European Partners Sharon Blyfield, and innovation and human potential consultant and transformation coach Nicola Darke.

The winner of Awarding Organisation of the Year was Signature, a provider of British Sign Language and deaf and deafblind qualifications.

The judges said this was for providing “highly valuable and socially-connective qualifications with an innovative approach and a distinctive assessment methodology”, which made a “real difference not only to a defined community, but to help integrate different communities”.

The award for Qualification of the Year has gone to Excellence, Achievement & Learning (EAL), which last week also won its bid to develop, deliver and award the second wave of T-levels.

EAL won for its level 3 award in the Requirements of Fire Detection and Fire Alarm Systems for Buildings. The judges said this qualification “goes towards saving lives” and is “designed to remove the barriers to take-up”.

The engineering and advanced manufacturing awarding organisation also won Innovation of the Year for Engineering Talent, a means of accessing training resources online.

“It enables learners to navigate their way through the industry end-to-end, making it a more effective way to engage, educate and get employed,” judges said.

The winners of the Collaboration of the Year award were Association of Business Executives and United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation.

The judging panel picked them for “assisting learners to gain confidence and contribute to the economy”.

Helen Bull won Learner of the Year with her IQL UK qualification for her “outstanding achievement as a learner and for demonstrating strength and determination to continue with her qualification while paying it forward to support others”.

After being nominated by the Chartered Institute of Housing, Marie Porter from Phoenix Community Housing was awarded for Outstanding Contribution of the Year.

She impressed judges “by changing lives and empowering others to do the same”.

And exporter of the year was awarded to NCC Education after it adapted its programmes to the relevant markets “while still maintaining quality and removing the stigma around online learning”.

These seven winners were selected from 34 finalists across all categories.

The full list of winners:

• Awarding Organisation of the Year – Signature
• Qualification of the year – Excellence, Achievement & Learning Limited (EAL) with EAL Level 3 Award in the Requirements of Fire Detection and Fire Alarm Systems for Buildings BS 5839-1:2017
• Collaboration of the Year – Association of Business Executives (ABE) with United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
• Learner of the Year – Helen Bull, with an IQL UK qualification
• Outstanding Contribution of the Year – Marie Porter from Phoenix Community Housing, nominated by the Chartered Institute of Housing
• Innovation of the year – Excellence, Achievement & Learning Limited (EAL), with Engineering Talent
• Exporter of the year – NCC Education

A college fighting for survival is considering selling a historic building, FE Week understands.

Brooklands College is in severe financial trouble after getting caught up in an apprenticeship subcontracting scandal which has resulted in the government demanding it returns £20 million.

In an effort to save itself from going insolvent, the college is trying to negotiate a deal by which it repays the funding over a number of years.

This newspaper also understands that discussions have started regarding the sale of Brooklands House, at the college’s Weybridge campus.

It is a three-storey, Grade II listed red brick Victorian mansion that was built in the late 1890s. It used to house the family of Dame Ethel Locke King, who was behind the famous Brooklands racing circuit, dubbed the ‘Ascot of Motorsport’ in its heyday.

The cost of the building is unknown but it is likely to go for a substantial price considering it’s within walking distance of Weybridge Station and located inside the M25.

Brooklands College describes the Weybridge campus as being set on “spectacular grounds” on its website.

The campus has another, more modern building, with facilities split between the two including a learning resource centre, hair and beauty salon, a restaurant, training kitchens, media centre and refectory.

Brooklands College said it was unable to comment on the ongoing Education and Skills Funding Agency investigation, including the potential sale of Brooklands House.

FE Week revealed last week that the college is now being run by a Department for Education consultant after its chair, Terry Lazenby, stood down.

His replacement on an interim basis is Andrew Baird, one of the DfE’s National Leaders of Governance, who is on their payroll and takes home £300 a day for his services.

He told FE Week this week that Brooklands College is “not trading whilst insolvent”, as was previously reported, as it has “adequate cash to meet its current liabilities as they fall due”.

“The college continues to work closely with the ESFA on an ongoing investigation,” Baird added.

“I am looking forward to working with governors and staff at the college to continue to meet the needs of local communities in Surrey.

“The staff of the college provide fantastic support and a great student experience for all our students.”

Baird, who is also the chair of governors at Orbital South Colleges, was parachuted into Hadlow College earlier this year after financial irregularities were exposed.

He stopped being chair of Hadlow when it went into administration in May – making it the first to go through the new college insolvency regime.

He will be paid for up to 15 days work between now and the end of the year at Brooklands College, according to the DfE.

As revealed by FE Week last month, a whistleblower reported the Brooklands College subcontracting scandal to the Education and Skills Funding Agency in 2017 but no action was taken until this newspaper exposed it nearly two years later.

Former chancellor Philip Hammond, who is the MP for the constituency the college is based in, said the revelation was “very concerning” while shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden demanded an “urgent” independent investigation into this lack of oversight.

Hammond, who resigned as chancellor to the Treasury in July, was scheduled to meet the college’s leaders at the end of September. He has since been unavailable for comment.

Ofqual’s chief regulator has tasked awarding organisations with answering three questions as part of the watchdog’s work on ensuring “public confidence” in qualifications.

Addressing the first day of the Federation of Awarding Bodies’ annual conference, Sally Collier said she wanted AOs to “be in the best shape you can be” and it was “the time for you to take stock of your capacity and capability”.

In order to ensure this, she posed three questions that she said were at the top of the watchdog’s mind:

1. Do you have enough assessment expertise in your organisation – people who really know how to design, develop, deliver and review qualifications? And if you don’t employ such people, how can you access them on a sustainable basis?
2. Is your technology, and your technology expertise, up to the challenge of facing the increased risk posed by cyber threats and keeping your data safe?
3. If you are a responsible officer, do you know what is expected of you, in terms of fulfilling your obligations as the key accountable person?

Reaction at the conference on whether Collier’s questions were helpful was mixed.

Louise Bangham, the quality assurance manager from Safety Training Awards, told FE Week she was “on the fence”, saying the expertise question was important as “we all have to have the competence for the assessments to make sure they are all fit for purpose”.

But the technology expertise “depended on the organisation,” as some will bring in contractors to get their systems into place.

“It is an important question, but I don’t know if it’s fitting for AOs.”

Sarah Edmonds, a former FAB board member who has just stepped down from being a responsible officer at Active IQ, said she “absolutely” thought the questions were helpful.

This was because the questions responsible officers have to answer are much more “focused” and “clearly articulated” than in the past, when AOs had to discern what regulators meant by their questions and whether there were any “hidden messages”.

She also agreed the technology question would be helpful, as “we’re all mindful of technology, its advances and what’s possible and what is not”.

However, she added: “You have such a wide variety of awarding organisations where many people wear many hats and it is sometimes a challenge to them with the sheer heft of the role.”

Collier also used her speech to criticise the “rather superficial media coverage” of a recommendation by the independent commission on exam malpractice around banning watches in exams.

She said many of the commission’s proposals were “far more important” and will have implications for qualifications.

This, and much of her speech, was focused on Ofqual’s attempts to crack down on qualification malpractice.

Just this week, Ofqual launched a consultation on introducing fixed penalty notices and rebukes for organisations found to be flouting official regulations.

And in February, Ofqual announced it would start auditing awarding organisations’ on the “control” they have over their individual providers after concerns were raised over AOs only moderating assessments after results had been issued – what is known as a direct claims status.

Photos by Osborne Photography.