My main priority is the students in Hadlow college insolvency

The application for educational administration by Hadlow College is a watershed moment for FE. It will be the first time the College Oversight guidance has been used to steer an FE provider out of trouble. In some senses, this is an opportunity to see if the guidance works. But my overwhelming feeling is of concern for the students and staff, and disappointment that we are even considering this at Hadlow College.

I’ve represented Tonbridge and Malling in parliament for four years. Over that time I’ve had an excellent relationship with the college. I knew Paul Hannan, the former Principal of the Hadlow Group and his former deputy, Mark Lumsdon-Taylor and when asked, I put a lot of work into securing funding for the college. We had some monumental battles, primarily about FE funding with the then Skills Funding Agency,  and I have been proud to get millions of pounds for further education in Kent. That’s why this news is so disappointing.

Hadlow College matters because it is different; its land-based teaching has attracted students from across the county who had no interest in courses run by other colleges. Over the years it has become a major landowner in the Hadlow area and has seen its teaching expand. Hadlow Rural Community School, on the same site and part of the Hadlow Group, is a wonderful example of somewhere where students do their GCSE’s and gain other qualifications through a unique method of teaching.

Kent is known as the Garden of England and for centuries its agricultural heritage has been at the forefront of growth in the economy. As the industry looks to adapt, and the county deals with new pressures, it needs the workforce skilled in agricultural learning. Hadlow College provides this like nowhere else.

That’s why my main priority is the students. Courses must be completed, and land-based learning must remain on the site. It’s something I’ve pressed home to the skills minister, Anne Milton MP, at the Department for Education (DfE) and Richard Atkins, the FE Commissioner, over the past few weeks. Simply transferring students somewhere else won’t work for Hadlow. It can’t – because there’s nowhere else like it.

Just two weeks ago, following my latest meeting at the DfE, I wrote to Ms Milton to highlight this. I’m still talking to them and am carefully watching their approach.

So far, the DfE has been responding to the further challenges we face. Hadlow College is part of a wider group, including the rural community school, and also West Kent and Ashford colleges. Though more traditional in their approach, the relationship between each establishment means they have deep roots in our community. In Tonbridge and Malling, almost everyone knows someone who has studied, or is studying, at one of the Hadlow Group’s colleges.

In Kent we are not immune to financial difficulties in Further Education. West Kent and Ashford College came into the Hadlow Group in 2014 because of the financial problems with the then K College. While this acquisition hasn’t affected the finances of the group, clearly FE funding needs reform.

It’s why I’m pleased the DfE College Oversight guidance was introduced earlier this year. The route forward is defined, if uncertain. It shows a clear and co-ordinated response from the government to colleges in financial difficulty. We will have to see if this works.

What is clear is that a thorough investigation is needed to understand why we got into this position in the first place. I know I’m not the only person who spent a considerable amount of time with the previous leadership trying to get more funding for the group. It’s important to know where this has been spent.

But my thoughts are with the staff, students and all those who work at the college. The uncertainty is leaving us all, including all businesses who work with the college, with doubt as to what the long term impact will be. Securing the day to day running of the college is important, and I’ll be working closely with the Interim Principal, Graham Morley, over the coming months to make sure this continues.

Apprenticeships programme ‘out of kilter’ with DfE’s own objectives, PAC warns

The way the apprenticeships programme is evolving is “out of kilter” with the government’s own objectives and “poor execution” has created “serious longer-term problems”, the Public Accounts Committee has warned.

The damning conclusion was made in the influential committee of MPs’ new apprenticeships progress report that said the reforms made in spring 2017 are failing to deliver.

It hits out at the DfE’s “focus” on higher-level apprenticeships and levy-paying employers which “increases the risk that minority groups, disadvantaged areas and smaller employers miss out on the benefits that apprenticeships can bring”.

They ought to come clean and think about how to reset this

The PAC reiterated what many other sector leaders have warned: that some employers are using apprenticeship funds to pay for professional training or management courses that they would otherwise have paid for themselves.

Speaking to FE Week, PAC chair Meg Hillier (pictured) said the Department for Education has “given away the power to control” this unintended consequence, and it has lost sight of the original goals of the apprenticeship reforms.

“Obviously some companies were already funding people through MBAs and so on, and I’m absolutely fine with people having continuing professional development at every level, but that’s not really what we all thought was going to happen with apprenticeships,” she said.

“If levy funding goes on these expensive standards there will be less for lower level apprenticeships where the investment in somebody makes a huge difference to their lives, the productivity of the UK and the sector they are going into. A few people doing an MBA I’m sure is helpful to them and the company they are working for, but that’s not what ministers intended when coming up with the reforms.”

The PAC report said employers’ “preference” for higher-cost apprenticeships means the programme is expected to come under growing financial pressure in the coming years.

In December, the Institute for Apprenticeships estimated that the apprenticeships budget for England could be overspent by £0.5 billion this year, rising to £1.5 billion during 2021/22.

The National Audit Office then warned in March there was a “clear risk” the apprenticeship programme is not financially sustainable after the average cost of training an apprentice hit double what the government predicted – rising from around £4,500 to £9,000.

It said that employers are developing and choosing more expensive apprenticeship standards at higher levels than was expected, which is “absorbing” the public funding.

Following this, the Association of Employment and Learning Providers called for all level 6 and 7 apprenticeships to be removed from the scope of levy funding in order to relieve mounting pressure on the budget.

Jonathan Slater, the DfE’s permanent secretary, then admitted to a PAC hearing that “hard choices” will need to be made in the face of an imminent apprenticeship budget overspend – which could include prioritising some apprenticeships over others.

Hillier told FE Week that it will be a challenge for the government to now tell employers what they can and cannot spend their apprenticeship levy funds on after giving them free rein to do so.

“There is a big issue there,” she said. “The DfE needs to say they didn’t expect these consequences and what they’re going to do about it.

“They ought to come clean and think about how to reset this while keeping the best bits.”

Anne Milton

She added that the DfE is “in danger of moving the goalposts” if they say they are happy with the current set-up and the “hard choices could be saying to some companies ‘you may think you can do what you want with the apprenticeship levy but we’re going to push for a focus at the lower end’”.

The PAC made a series of recommendations to the DfE in its report, which FE Week has pulled out here.

Apprenticeships and skills minister, Anne Milton defended the government’s reforms.

“We are making apprenticeships better,” she said. “They are now longer, higher quality and have more off-the-job training.

“Our reforms have also seen more employer buy-in giving employers greater control so they can invest in the people and skills they need.”

She added there is “still work to be done, but we won’t sacrifice quality for quantity”.

The DfE is now “considering the PAC’s recommendations carefully and will respond in due course”.

 

Revealed: The 19 winners of the Liverpool City Region AEB tender

The names of the 19 training providers that have won contracts with Liverpool City Region to deliver its devolved adult education budget (AEB) have been revealed.

The combined authority will take control of an annual £50.35 million budget to deliver adult education from September.

Up to 30 per cent – or £15.11 million – of its overall budget was put out to competitive tender in October. The other 70 per cent will be dished out to colleges and other institutions that currently receive adult education funding via a grant from the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

FE Week has been leaked the name of the 19 providers who’ve won a slice of the funding that went out to tender, but their contract values have not yet been revealed.

One of the providers included in the list includes Interserve Learning, the training arm of outsourcing giant Interserve that was put into administration two months ago.

With nearly 5,000 apprentices on its books, the company has offered reassurance that this was not going to be a Carillion-style collapse and it was very much business as usual, with no big job losses anticipated.

Administrators Ernst and Young were appointed on March 15 and the company’s assets were moved immediately to a group controlled by Interserve’s lenders, which is continuing its operations.

Another provider that won a contract in the Liverpool City Region AEB tender is Warrington and Vale Royal College, which received a grade three rating from Ofsted back in 2016 but has since been found to have made ‘reasonable progress’ in a monitoring visit.

The list features a number of grade two providers, including Aspire Education Academy and North West Community Services Training Ltd.

There is also a grade one provider on the list – Women’s Technology Training Limited. The adult and community provider has been commended by Ofsted for “outstanding governance” and a “strong impact on improvement, strategy and performance”.

Several providers which have won contracts have not been inspected yet.

The West Midlands was the first combined authority to release the winners from its AEB tender last week, as revealed by FE Week.

Meanwhile, there are delays to the procurement being run by the Greater London Authority.

Tees Valley Combined Authority is understood to currently be in the final stages of funding awards and is expected to make a decision in the coming months, and the West of England Combined Authority is making decisions on allocations at its next committee meeting on June 14.

The procurement exercise being run Greater Manchester Combined Authority is still live, according to a spokesperson. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough’s is also still ongoing.

The 19 winning providers in Liverpool City Region’s AEB tender:

Antrec Limited

Aspire Education Academy Ltd

B-Skills Ltd

Crosby Training

Innovative Alliance Ltd

Interserve Learning

Kickstart2employment Ltd

Mode Training Ltd

North West Community Services

Seetec Business Technology Centre Limited

South West Regional Assessment Centre

St Helens Chamber

Sysco Business Skills Academy

The Growth Company Limited

Three Dimensional Training

Vocational Skills Solutions Limited

Warrington & Vale Royal College

Women’s Technology Training Limited

Workers Educational Association

PAC apprenticeships progress report: The 6 recommendations

The Public Accounts Committee has today published its progress report into the apprenticeship reforms that were introduced in April 2017.

Members of the committee grilled a number high-profile government officials on the affordability of the programme in March following a National Audit Office report earlier that month that warned it is not financially sustainable.

The PAC’s final report dissects the evidence given, offers its view on how the apprenticeship reforms are going, and gives six recommendations for the DfE and Institute for Apprenticeships to act upon.

 

  1. DfE should assess whether there are enough level 2 standards

The PAC said the way the programme is evolving risks leaving behind people with lower skills and those from disadvantaged communities.

It reported that the programme is now “more heavily weighted towards higher-level apprenticeships”, as around 20 per cent of the new apprenticeships standards are available at level 2, compared to more than 40 per cent on the old-style frameworks previously available at this level.

The report added that the proportion of apprenticeship starts among people from disadvantaged areas has fallen, partly because of the growth in starts at level 3 and above.

The PAC wants the department to assess whether there are enough level 2 standards to “allow school leavers or those with fewer skills to easily access apprenticeships”, and report back within six months.

 

  1. More stretching diversity targets need to be set

The DfE’s approach to widening participation among under-represented groups has been “inadequate”, according to the PAC.

Despite this being one of the apprenticeship programme’s four main objectives, the committee believes the targets for apprenticeship starts among the black, Asian and minority ethnic population, and among those with a learning difficulty, disability or health problem, are “unambitious in that they are below the respective levels of these groups in the working-age population”.

Additionally, there are no gender-based targets for the programme despite the fact that only 9 per cent of people taking STEM subjects are women, a position that the DfE’s permanent secretary Jonathan Slater has admitted is “hopeless”.

The PAC wants bigger targets for 2021 and beyond, as well as an evaluation of the impact of the DfE’s efforts to attract more women into STEM apprenticeships.

 

  1. Evaluate the impact of interventions at failing providers

“Too many apprentices are being trained by sub-standard providers,” the PAC said, after finding around a third of apprentices covered by Ofsted inspections in 2017/18 were being trained in providers rated as ‘inadequate’ or ‘requires improvement’.

It added that the “poor quality” of some providers contributes to a situation where over 30 per cent of apprentices fail to complete their apprenticeship successfully each year. In 2016/17, this equated to more than 132,000 apprentices.

And since 2014/15, a growing proportion of training providers have fallen below minimum standards for their apprenticeship achievement rates.

The PAC points out that the ESFA may issue these providers with additional conditions of funding or extra contractual obligations. Ultimately it can terminate providers’ contracts, but this is “extremely rare” — it has taken this step with only 11 providers in the past five years, according to the PAC.

 

  1. DfE needs to set out how small employers can benefit fully from the reforms

The PAC said the apprenticeships programme is not supporting smaller employers “well enough”.

It explained that while levy-paying employers have direct access to their funds via an online system, to pay for apprenticeship training and assessment, smaller employers currently access apprenticeships via training providers who are funded through contracts with the ESFA.

The DfE expects all small employers to be on the online apprenticeships system with levy-payers next year to access training funds directly.

But until then and under the current arrangements, if levy-payers spend “more than around half of their funds, the ESFA will have less money available to fund apprenticeships among smaller employers” and while levy-payers have spent a “relatively small proportion of their funds so far, training providers are already reporting that they do not have enough funding to offer as many apprenticeships to smaller employers as they would like”.

The PAC wants the DfE to consider “protecting” funding for non-levy-paying employers.

 

  1. Strengthen assessment arrangements for apprentices

The PAC said they do not have “confidence” in the arrangements for assessing apprentices.

Under the standards, each apprentice is assessed by an independent third-party at the end of their apprenticeship. However, in late 2018, 19 standards had no end-point assessment organisation in place, and 98 standards had only one assessment organisation. In addition, the arrangements for checking the quality of end-point assessments are “muddled, and it is unclear whether the numerous bodies involved provide a consistent level of assurance”.

The committee wants the ESFA and Institute for Apprenticeships to write to them within six months to “provide more detail about the coverage and capacity of end-point assessment organisations” and “set out what they will do to streamline and strengthen quality assurance arrangements in order to give greater confidence that end-point assessments are robust, fair and consistent”.

 

  1. DfE needs to set out what productivity gains it expects from the programme

The department uses a ‘skills index’ as a proxy measure for the impact of apprenticeships on productivity, which takes account of the number of apprenticeship starts, apprentices’ progression into jobs, and the subsequent increase in their earnings.

However, the PAC said the DfE has not set out what improvement in the headline value of the index would constitute success.

It recommends that the department should “publish the level of improvement in the skills index that it is aiming to achieve in the short and long term”.

College testing insolvency regime seeks speedy buyer for park and unfinished mining museum

Scandal-hit Hadlow College has confirmed it is looking to sell its £40 million visitor and business park, following the college’s application for insolvency.

FE Week revealed on Friday the education secretary Damian Hinds had applied to the High Court to put the college into education administration.

While this does not affect any of the college’s subsidiaries, or its sister college West Kent and Ashford (WKAC), a college spokesperson has said Hadlow is “currently in discussion with a range of potentially interested parties” about selling its subsidiary business Betteshanger Sustainable Parks.

This is due to the “financial challenges” faced by the college, which has required huge government bailouts to survive.

The college is looking to find a new owner for the 422-acre site by 31 July, but the spokesperson stressed the park will stay open, adding: “The key project funders and community partners remain committed to the delivery of the project and are all working to secure a successful future for the parks.”

Betteshanger Sustainable Parks, which has around 25 staff, is made up of two sites – the business park and the country park – and is built on what was a colliery.

Despite being owned by a college, none of its provision takes place at the park.

The college’s disgraced ex-deputy principal Mark Lumsdon-Taylor previously said the project was “personal” to him, as he grew up in Sunderland and saw the effect closing mines and shipyards had on the area.

Hadlow College previously attempted to sell the business park for £4 million; however, this fell through.

On the country park site, known as Betteshanger Park, the college is constructing the Kent Mining Museum with the Kent Mining Heritage Foundation, which was once chaired by Mark Lumsdon-Taylor.

The museum has received at least £1.8 million in charitable donations to fund its development, including a £1.3 million grant from the National Lottery.

The museum will be based inside a £9.5 million visitor centre, which was embarked upon in 2014 and was due to open in March 2019.

But that was delayed following several resignations from the college’s board, including that of the principal, Paul Hannan, Mark Lumsdon-Taylor, as well as the chairs of both WKAC’s board, Paul Dubrow, and Hadlow’s board, Theresa Bruton.

Their resignations came after the FE Commissioner’s team and the ESFA intervened at Hadlow and WKAC, following allegations of financial irregularities.

Hadlow College was landed with an extra £1.2 million bill for the Betteshanger visitor centre, because it had to replace the foundations it installed on the basis of incorrect advice.

The trustee board of the Kent Mining Heritage Foundation has been contacted, but declined to comment at this time.

Betteshanger Park’s MP, Charlie Elphicke, has asked the FE Commissioner to hand over the Kent Mining Museum to East Kent College, as it is “85 per cent complete” and: “We need to get this project back on track. Handing it over to East Kent College could be the answer. This facility would be great for our community, celebrating its mining heritage alongside a range of activities for families to enjoy,” according to a statement on his website.

A three-acre open-air amphitheatre is also being built at the park, with a price tag of around £70,000.

A Dover District Council spokesperson said: “We are seeking clarity on the situation with Hadlow College and the Betteshanger Sustainable Parks project.  Betteshanger is an important regeneration site in the Dover district and we are keen to see its full potential realised.

“We are in dialogue with Hadlow and other partners, but it is too soon to comment on specifics.”

This is the second of Hadlow College’s new buildings that it is looking to sell off: FE Week reported last week East Kent College is looking to take over WKAC’s Ashford campus, which was completed in 2017.

This is part of work being undertaken by the financial advisory firm BDO to oversee the potential sale or transfer of assets within the Hadlow Group – which includes Hadlow College and WKAC – to neighbouring colleges, such as East Kent.

East Kent College has been asked whether it is taking over any part of the Hadlow Group, which includes Hadlow College and WKAC as well as Betteshanger, but has yet to comment.

The High Court is expected to hear the application to put Hadlow College into administration on May 22.

Spring clean of standards underway as IfA reveals outcome of digital review

The Institute for Apprenticeships has officially begun its spring cleaning of old standards, and started by withdrawing three in the digital sector.

A review of 12 digital apprenticeships developed prior to April 2017 got underway in September to ensure their content is of high-quality, meeting employer needs and do not overlap with each other.

The outcome, unveiled at an event in London today, reveals that six of the standards will be retained as they currently are but also “revised” to “ensure the content is relevant and up to date”.

The six digital standards being retained

The six other apprenticeships in the review will become three, with the content of those being withdrawn being merged into the three that are being kept.

The six digital standards that will merge

The institute said it will seek to approve the revised and merged apprenticeship standards, which may include new assessment plans and funding bands, within 12 months of today’s announcement so that the existing standards can be withdrawn.

Asked what this meant for end-point assessment organisations currently assigned to the standards that will be merged, Gerry explained they’ll have to rebid to assess the apprenticeships once they’ve been signed off on.

“The trailblazer will go back in, look at the knowledges, skills and behaviours for both merging standards, see what needs to come in for the new standard, and at the end of that will review what the assessment plan should be to test it,” he said.

“So the end-point assessment will be rewritten. At that stage, the current EPAOs delivering the two standards can bid to deliver the new merged standard. There will be a change.”

Ana Osbourne, the IfA’s deputy director for apprenticeship approvals, stressed that any apprentices who have started on the existing standards will “continue on them and finish” in their current form.

Last year the institute came in for criticism for having failed to carry out any formal review of duplicate, narrow or low-skill standards since its launch.

Taking account of people on existing apprenticeships as we go through the review process is really important

It was urged to do so “at the earliest opportunity” by Lord Sainsbury in his report of the independent panel on technical education, published July 2016.

The peer made clear he was concerned about standards that overlapped, were too job-specific, or lacked enough technical content to justify 20 per cent off-the-job training.

The digital review was the IfA’s first statutory review of apprenticeship standards for a specific route. The institute has 14 other routes which will be reviewed over the next couple of years.

Those next in the pipeline will be in hair and beauty and creative and design, which will both commence in July 2019.

Following this, the agriculture, environment and animal care route review will get underway in September, followed by engineering and manufacturing in October.

It is not yet known how many standards will be involved in each review.

When the IfA first launched it had been planned that each standard would be reviewed every three years.

Asked today what this meant for standards that, for example, last for six years, Gerry said this timeline was no longer used.

“The plan for three year reviews was written in somewhere but it has never been in law, it has always been periodically,” he told FE Week.

“Taking account of people on existing apprenticeships as we go through the review process is really important so we don’t leave them high and dry halfway through an apprenticeship, we’d never want to do that.”

He added that the periodicity of the reviews will depend on the age of the standards and how many there are. The IfA is prioritising its first route reviews on standards linked to T-levels.

The IfA celebrated signing off on its 400th standard in February and around another 100 are expected to be launched by next year.

Gerry said the “impetus” was initially to get a significant number of standards available so that the government can turn off frameworks, but his institute will soon have the resource and time to focus on reviews instead.

READ MORE: IfA to trial ‘gender-neutral’ language in bid to boost female STEM applicants

“Even though there are still standards coming through the pipeline, they’re not coming through at the same pace which does give us the capacity to start to look at historic standards,” he added.

“I wouldn’t want to set a number against how many standards there will be because it always fluctuates slightly but we are now reaching a stage where the volume is reducing and that gives us the time to look back at existing ones.”

The IfA also used today’s event to officially launch its trial of gender-neutral language in digital standards. It comes after FE Week revealed the plan earlier this month (read more here).

Ofsted slams large employer provider with no apprenticeship passes – again

A large employer provider in the security sector that was suspended from recruiting apprentices last year has been rated ‘inadequate’ after Ofsted found none of its apprentices achieved their qualification.

Securitas UK said today it will challenge the education watchdog after it criticised leaders and managers for being “too slow” to improve the weaknesses identified during an early ‘insufficient’ monitoring visit it received in August, which found the provider forcing workers onto apprenticeships.

Ofsted’s new report found that “poor leadership and management” of the apprenticeship provision has since led to a third of learners withdrawing from the programme since January, with the number of learners dropping from 668 to 270.

Inspectors said “too few” apprentices gain new knowledge and skills or develop appropriate occupational behaviours to “achieve their learning goals or make progress at work”.

They concluded that apprentices at Securitas have all made “inadequate progress” and “none have achieved their qualification”.

Under the Education and Skills Funding Agency rules, any provider with an ‘insufficient’ rating from an early monitoring visit will be banned from taking on any new apprentices until they improve to at least a grade three in a full inspection.

Today’s ‘inadequate’ report means Securitas will be chucked off of the agency’s register of apprenticeship training providers, meaning it can no longer deliver the provision itself.

Securitas told FE Week it was contesting the report’s findings, as it believes it has made “important changes to improve the learning experience” since the early visit.

A spokesperson said: “We are deeply disappointed at the outcome of the Ofsted report and have lodged an official complaint which Ofsted have acknowledged and confirmed will be fully investigated.

“Following the initial Ofsted monitoring visit, we’ve made a number of important changes to improve the learning experience for our apprentices, including increasing the number of field assessors and restructuring our learning and development team.

“We have introduced a clear governance programme and with our new leaders and managers in place, these changes are beginning to have a beneficial impact, as acknowledged by Ofsted in their report.”

The employer has around 11,500 staff and provides protective services across the UK. Apprentices enrol initially as security officers and on successful completion of the apprenticeship can progress to the role of protective services officer.

Today’s report did acknowledge that the new leaders and managers had started to improve the experience for the apprentices who remain on programme, and that their actions were beginning to have a beneficial impact.

Leaders and managers have also introduced “suitable governance arrangements”, enabling them to receive constructive challenge and scrutiny.

However, Ofsted still accused Securitas of not managing the apprenticeship provision “effectively”, failing to assess accurately apprentices’ starting points and not having quality assurance processes in place to improve provision.

Inspectors added there was no evidence that the off-the-job training that is recorded is “relevant, or of good quality, or that apprentices can evaluate the benefit of it”.

But Securitas defended itself, saying that its apprentices are “recognised as being professional, courteous and respectful and their confidence in dealing with both internal and external customers is increasing”.  

“We understand the importance of expediating progress and will continue to work closely with an independent consultant to address the findings of the report,” its statement said.

The provider said 95 apprentices will be sitting their end point assessment and finishing the programme over the next three months.

Revealed: The 19 areas splitting £2.5m in careers hubs funding

The government has announced the names of 19 areas that will join its careers hubs programme, but they will split just half the amount of money handed out in the first round.

Damian Hinds, the education secretary, said today that £2.5 million will go to 19 local enterprise partnerships across England. Between them they will form 20 “careers hubs”, which will each work with up to 40 schools and colleges to train staff to give better careers advice and offer pupils more “encounters” with employers.

Each area will have one careers hub except the north east, which will have two.

It takes the total number of areas involved in the programme to 39 and the total number of schools and colleges involved to 1,300. Last July, Hinds announced that the first 20 areas would split £5 million in funding. It is not known why the amount on offer has been reduced for the second round.

The Careers and Enterprise Company, which runs the careers hubs scheme and distributes the funding on behalf of the government, has also reported “rapid improvement in careers support” in the first wave of 20 hubs, with progress strongest in disadvantaged areas. The project has also received the backing of the Confederation of British Industry.

“It is so important that young people get to know about a range of different jobs and careers so they can see the possible opportunities out there,” Hinds said today.

“Good careers education is such a valuable asset that helps children to explore future possibilities and go on to lead happy rewarding lives.”

He said the hubs would bring to together schools, colleges, universities and employers to share “their expertise and improve the careers education on offer to make sure young people have the information they need to make the most of their talents”.

“Today’s investment will give thousands more young people access to expert careers guidance as they take those first exciting steps into their future.”

The CEC said today that schools and colleges involved in the first round of careers hubs are now outperforming the national average on every single one of the eight Gatsby benchmarks of good careers guidance, which are used by the government to rate schools’ performance on careers.

Of those involved, 58 per cent are providing every student with “regular encounters with employers”, while 52 per cent are providing every student with experiences such as work experience, shadowing or workplace visits.

The improvements were strongest in the Tees Valley, Lancashire, the Black Country and Liverpool City Region, three of the most deprived areas in the first wave, the CEC said.

Claudia Harris, chief executive of the company, said it was proof that careers education “is improving across the country”.

“The accelerated progress we’re seeing in the first wave of careers hubs shows that this model is working and delivering for young people, with schools and colleges in this first wave of careers hubs already outperforming the national average across all aspects of careers education.”

The CEC was criticised last month after FE Week’s sister paper FE Week revealed the quango will no longer become self-sustaining, as was originally promised when it was set-up by former education secretary Nicky Morgan.

 

The 19 areas in the second wave

Black Country

Liverpool

Tees Valley

Leeds

Solent

West of England

Birmingham

Thames Valley Berkshire

North East x 2

Dorset

Swindon & Wiltshire

SEMLEP

Hertfordshire

Heart of the South West

D2N2

Solihull

Coventry

Warwickshire

Oxfordshire

 

The 20 areas in the first wave

Cornwall & Isles of Scilly

Lancashire

Leeds City Region

Black Country

York, North Yorkshire and East Riding

Cumbria

Swindon & Wiltshire

Stoke & Staffordshire

The Solent

West of England

Buckinghamshire Thames Valley

Greater Manchester

The South East (East Sussex)

Leicester & Leicestershire

Heart of South West (Devon, Plymouth, Somerset and Torbay)

Humber

Tees Valley

Worcestershire

Liverpool City Region

New Anglia (Norfolk and Suffolk)

City and Guilds calls for new quango to oversee skills policy

The City and Guilds Group has called for the creation of a new independent body to oversee skills policy in the UK to put a stop to decisions being made in “short-term political cycles” by ministers.

In its ‘Sense & Instability 2019’ report, the education giant warned that government policy is being created “without any clear success measures”, any “identified business case” nor “understanding of its intended value for money”.

Because of this, City and Guilds said it is “impossible to tell if the millions going into new initiatives like T-levels, the National Retraining Scheme or apprenticeship standards is set to make a difference or just go to waste”.

Its report claimed that skills and education policy has become “short-term in outlook, disjointed and inconsistent”, partly due to the fact that 70 different ministers have held responsibility for skills policy in the last three and half decades, compared to 20 for schools policy and 21 for higher education in the same period.

It argued that “important lessons from the implementation of skills policy over several decades have not been learned”, such as the doomed Train to Gain initiative, meaning “badly-needed” training and education programmes are “not fit for purpose or delivering the right results”.

City and Guilds believes a Skills Policy Institute needs to be developed to fix this.

According to its report, the new institute would assist in gathering evidence to feed into revisions of policy delivery and provide a research base.

Chris Jones (pictured), chief executive at City and Guilds, said: “We’re navigating a period of unprecedented uncertainty and change, which makes effective skills policy more vital than ever. Unfortunately, our research shows that successive governments have failed to learn the lessons from implementation of policy over recent decades and are not properly evaluating whether it’s really working. This is not good enough.”

Jones called for “stability and longer term perspective”, but warned this is difficult to achieve “with the normal rate of political churn”.

“Policymakers must look further over the horizon to better anticipate and prepare for the challenges and opportunities that the future of work will bring – and if they can’t easily, they should have access to something that can provide this,” he said.

“To tackle this, we believe there needs to be an independent body to oversee policy development, demonstrate best practice and model a more rigorous approach to implementation, as well as hold government to account over the effectiveness of its skills policy-making.

“This can provide a view of skills demands both now and in the future, and build a solid evidence base over time that can be used to formulate new policy. Importantly, it would also act as a centre to bring together people from across the skills and education ecosystem – along with employers – to ensure policy works for all.”

City and Guilds’ report also suggested “more and better” use of policy pilots, comparison groups, baseline/endline data comparisons and longitudinal impact studies is needed in policy development.

Other recommendations include developing a value for money framework for skills policy, similar to the frameworks already in place within the Department for Transport and the Department for International Development.

City and Guilds also urged government to seek to include a “reliable evidence base or rationale” when developing new targets and setting up impact measures to ensure programmes achieve policy objectives as well as quantitative targets.

Apprenticeships and skills minister Anne Milton, said: “As the City and Guilds Group report recognises, T Levels and the National Retraining Service are brand-new initiatives so we will make sure we get them right.

“Right from the start we worked with, and consulted employers and stakeholders to make sure that these initiatives benefit all students, employers get the skilled work force they need and the economy benefits as well.

“We will continue  that work as we progress and refine the initiatives where needed. I’m confident both T Levels and the National Retraining Scheme are going provide young people and adults with valuable opportunities and help to boost our country’s productivity.”