Seventh time unlucky: Training provider rated ‘inadequate’ after six consecutive grade threes

A private provider has been hit with the lowest possible Ofsted rating after receiving six consecutive ‘requires improvement’ ratings since opening its doors.

Nottinghamshire Training Network was rated ‘inadequate’ today after the education watchdog found the “principles” of apprenticeship provision were not being met, such as apprentices not receiving their entitlement to “well-planned” off-the-job training.

Inspectors said the provider’s management of subcontractors, who deliver most programmes, is “weak”, and leaders and managers have “not remedied many of the areas of weakness identified at the previous inspection”.

The provider, which at the time of inspection had 352 apprentices, told FE Week it will now stop taking on new starts and would like to transfer this its current apprentices to another provider to complete their training.

As it has been rated ‘inadequate’, NTN will be removed from the register of apprenticeship training providers and banned from delivering its own apprenticeships, in line with ESFA rules. The ESFA is also likely to terminate all of its other skills contracts with the provider.

Syed Jafery, managing director at NTN, said the provider is awaiting guidance and formal notification from the Education and Skills Funding Agency to advise on the next steps.

He added: “We are committed to assisting the ESFA in transitioning the remaining learners, to ensure no learner is displaced and let down by this inspection result.”

A DfE spokesperson said: “We will always take action to protect the interests of apprentices. We are currently assessing Ofsted’s findings and will be contacting Nottingham Training Network to set out the action we will be taking in due course.”

NTN was incorporated in 2002 and received its first Ofsted inspection in 2008, which resulted in a grade three rating.

Since then and prior to today’s report, the provider has had five other full inspections, all of which resulted in grade three verdicts.

FE Week asked chief inspector Amanda Spielman in November how many grade three reports in a row is too many before a provider should be hit with a grade four, but she could not give an exact number.

Until recently, three grade threes in a row would automatically have qualified a provider for an ‘inadequate’ grade.

Spielman said she had changed this rule when she took over the top job at the inspectorate in January 2017 “because I thought it was flawed in conception”.

“The job of inspection is to report on what we see when we inspect,” she explained.

“To artificially say that something is ‘inadequate’ and trigger all the consequences that we know go with grade four judgments, because we want to heap up pressure, I don’t think that’s the right thing for us to do”.

In 2017, Ofsted warned NTN that leaders’ and managers’ actions to improve the weaknesses identified at previous inspections were ineffective in driving improvements in the quality of training and outcomes for apprentices.

Two years later, inspectors said leaders and managers have not remedied many of the areas of and that apprentices continue to make “slow progress”.

Its management of subcontractors came in for the most criticism.

“The information that subcontractors provide about the progress of learners and apprentices is unhelpful,” Ofsted explained.

“Different subcontractors provide reports that contain different information presented in different ways. This makes it difficult for NTN managers to gain a clear picture of what is happening. Managers are unaware of the fact that many apprentices’ programmes do not meet the requirements of apprenticeship provision.”

NTN’s effectiveness of leadership and management, quality of teaching, learning and assessment, outcome for leaners and apprenticeships provision were all rated ‘inadequate’, while its personal development, behaviour and welfare, as well as its traineeships ‘require improvement’. Its adult learning programmes were rated as ‘good’.

Jafery said he was “extremely disappointed with the outcome” and that the overall grade “does not reflect our typical delivery and experience”, but his provider was still accepting the decision.

“We are disappointed that the inspection feedback and report has relied so heavily on the judgements for apprenticeship delivery, as over the course of a year, trainees and adult learners will outweigh the number of learners on apprenticeships,” he added.

The Ofsted report did praise staff for providing “good pastoral and personal care for leaners and apprentices” and that “most trainees benefit from good work placements that help them to improve their readiness for employment”.

It also said leaders have a “strong and successful commitment” to making provision for adults in local communities who face barriers to taking part in training and development.

Ofqual issues first ever intention to fine end-point assessment organisation

An end-point assessment organisation is facing a potential fine of £50,000 after “technical issues” affected its delivery of apprenticeship assessments.

The notice of intention to impose a monetary penalty on the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx), published today, is the first such fine floated by Ofqual.

CILEx, an EPAO for two apprenticeship standards, admitted in March to a series of delivery failings in the end-point assessment for the level 3 paralegal apprenticeship in June 2018.

The failings “occurred during both the timed assessment and Interview components of the assessment and affected the entire cohort of 73 Learners,” today’s notice said.

Ofqual, which is CILEx’s external quality assurer, was informed at the time that “technical issues” were to blame.

This included apprentices receiving “error messages, experiencing delays and difficulties accessing the assessment, and being unable to upload their work onto the e-platform”. Some assessments were lost “entirely”.

In July 2018, CILEx reported that “further technical difficulties” had been encountered with the Skype connections for the interview component of the EPA, including difficulties establishing a connection between the assessor and the apprentice, poor connectivity and poor sound quality.

Only four of the interviews were fully conducted by Skype video, allowing the assessors to see the apprentice for the duration of the Interview, as required by CILEx’s assessment plan.

Complaints were received “regarding the disruption and anxiety”.

All 73 affected learners were given “special consideration” by offering them a free resit opportunity which would not cap the outcome at a pass.

CILEx wrote to Ofqual in January to explain that it “conducted a thorough investigation into both the technical and wider issues, submitting its findings to Ofqual voluntarily, together with an action plan”, which it has made “significant progress against”.

It said that CILEx is a “chartered body, not a commercial organisation, and as such has public interest duties, obligations and considerations as well as its responsibilities as an awarding body” while the absence of “key members of staff was a result of unprecedented and unpredictable circumstances”.

“CILEx genuinely believed that it could deliver the EPA in June 2018 to the required standard and in compliance with the Conditions, despite having to deliver under time pressure as a result of the late publication of the Assessment Plan,” it added.

“CILEx agreed to become the EPA Organisation for the Paralegal Apprenticeship in order to support the Government’s desire for legal apprenticeships despite it being a loss-making activity for CILEx. CILEx is the only body able to deliver the EPA.”

However, CILEx admitted to failing to comply with 17 conditions set by Ofqual.

The regulator formally issued the EPAO with a notice explaining its intention to fine it £50,000 on April 18, 2019.

However, the fine will be reduced to a nominal sum of £1,000 if the organisation submits a “Statement of Assurance” confirming that it has “successfully implemented all of the recommendations and actions set out in its Technical Action Plan” and “has successfully delivered the level 3 paralegal end-point assessment to the cohort of apprenticeship Learners sitting the EPA in June 2019, in full compliance with the Conditions” by September 30, 2019.

“Or, in the event that representations are received from interested parties or another relevant intervening factor occurs, such other amount between £1,000 and £50,000 as the Enforcement Committee considers appropriate,” today’s notice said.

“Ofqual has taken this approach to enforcement action in order to prioritise a focus on future improvements and to reflect the unusual circumstances of this case, including that CILEx operated the EPA at a financial loss in 2018 and expects to continue to do so for the foreseeable future.”

It added that CILEx has “agreed to pay a monetary penalty to Ofqual and to submit a Statement of Assurance in the terms specified above”.

Linda Ford, chief executive of CILEx, said: “We have apologised for the inconvenience caused to the students last year and provided free resits to a small number of students where needed.  

“I would like to personally reassure this year’s cohort that we are ready and fully confident in our ability to deliver the EPA successfully.”

A spokesperson added that CILEx “expects to pay the reduced fine amount of £1,000”.

 

Edexcel maths A-level paper leaks referred to prosecutors

Police investigating high-profile leaks of Edexcel A-level exam papers in 2017 and 2018 have passed their first case to the Crown Prosecution Service.

Pearson, the exam board’s parent company, has announced today that officers “have made progress in their investigation” from the first “limited” breach in 2017, and have referred their first case to prosecutors.

The 2017 case involved copies of the Edexcel maths A-level paper being offered for sale online, in a move branded “grossly unfair to all other students” by Pearson president Rod Bristow at the time.

However, Pearson said at the time the content “contained no precise details about specific questions and we do not believe any student has been advantaged”.

The following year, the police and regulator Ofqual were informed after commentators on social media alleged a maths exam paper had been widely leaked, with “hundreds” of college students potentially seeing questions a day in advance.

A second investigation into the 2018 leak is being finalised, and Pearson said it hopes they will send materials about that incident to the CPS “soon”.

At the time of the leaks, the tweets appeared to show a WhatsApp group sharing the first question of the paper.

The company said both incidents “were caused by individuals deliberately setting out to subvert our controls”.

Minutes from an Ofqual board meeting in September 2018 said: “We have evidence that a very small number of students had access to the A level Maths C4 paper (6666/01) ahead of the exam sat on Friday 22 June. Following the examination, we were alerted to the apparent sale of images of questions from the paper in the early hours of the day via two closed social media applications.

“There is no evidence to show that they were publicly available before the examination, but after the paper had been sat individuals posted images of the sharing of the secure content on publicly accessible platforms.”

The minutes added that as a result of their investigation, Ofqual had “identified one individual as the source of the breach, who has been debarred from any involvement with Pearson examinations for life”.

“We have disqualified five students and are currently investigating a further 30 with regards to their involvement,” it added.

In a letter to colleges today, Pearson said: “Whilst we are confident that the extent of the breach was limited to a very small number of candidates, we know these incidents impacted public confidence.

“We have continued to support the police in their investigations, but due to the complexity and unusual nature of these cases, it has taken time to investigate. The police informed us that in February, they referred the first case to the Crown Prosecution Service with the aim of bringing charges against those arrested.

“The individuals responsible for these incidents are therefore now being held to account for the disruption that they caused.”

Ofsted watch: New apprenticeship provider censured in otherwise strong showing by FE

A new apprenticeship provider has been heavily criticised for not monitoring its subcontracted provision in what was otherwise a strong show in this week’s run of Ofsted reports.

Piper Training Ltd, the training arm of the Building Engineering Services Association, received three ‘insufficient progress’ ratings from the watchdog in its first monitoring visit since it was formed in January 2018.

Inspectors criticised the provider as its leaders have not observed any teaching in the subcontracted colleges where most of its 123 apprentices learn, and for not checking whether subcontractors’ plans for learning are clear and logical.

Leaders, and those in the role of governance, were also criticised for “concentrating too much on contractual compliance and financial and business developments”.

Training director Tony Howard said they had had ongoing issues with subcontractors not submitting enough information so Piper Training could monitor progression.

“We are working with our sub-contractors to drastically improve on their capability to report at the frequency we are requiring,” Howard added.

Inspectors did report Piper Training’s leaders understand the needs of heating and ventilation labour market, and work closely with employers to develop apprenticeship standards that are specific to the needs of the profession.

Mitre Group Ltd, which previously received two ‘insufficient progress’ ratings in its early monitoring visit and was subsequently suspended from taking on new starters in August 2018, this week received a ‘good’ full inspection.

Ofsted found that achievement rates for adults in 2017/18 were well above the rate of similar providers and tutors are well-qualified and experienced in the sports-related industries for which Mitre provides apprenticeships.

“Apprentices develop a wide range of sports coaching and training skills that they apply proficiently in schools and community settings,” inspectors added.

As the provider has now scored a grade 2, it should soon be allowed to take on new apprentices.

Birmingham City Council also fared well: moving up from a grade 3 to a grade 2.

Leaders and managers have a “clear vision” for adult learning in Birmingham, the inspectors wrote.

They paid particular praise to the provision of English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses, where learners make good progress and quickly learn the correct phrases to use with doctors and at their children’s school.

Nearly half of learners moved onto another course in the service to develop their skills and most of those who left the service continued into sustained employment or learning.

The Buckinghamshire College Group, which formed out of a merger between Aylesbury College and Amersham and Wycombe College in October 2017, scored three ‘significant’ and one ‘reasonable’ progress ratings in its first monitoring visit since its creation.

A new senior leadership team have implemented processes to monitor and improve progress and outcomes for students, meaning a greater proportion of students achieved their qualifications in 2017/18.

The college was found to deal effectively with poor staff performance. “If teachers are not able to improve, then they leave,” the report said.

Leaders and managers have a “very clear understanding of the quality of teaching and learning in all curriculum programmes”.

“They know where they need to target support and improvement initiatives when teaching practices are not in line with expectations,” the report added.

Dunbia, which offers a level 2 apprenticeship in butchery, earned three ‘reasonable progress’ ratings from its first monitoring visit since becoming an apprenticeship provider.

Apprentices, who were new to the butchery and meat processing environment, gain a “wide range of practical skills and understanding through the apprenticeship”.

Functional skills provision is subcontracted and the inspectors reported the majority of apprentices have achieved functional skills qualifications at level 1 in English and mathematics.

Technical Professionals Limited (TPL) achieved the same result as Dunbia from its early monitoring visit of its apprenticeship provision.

TPL was found to have prepared apprentices well for their end-point assessment, and their recruitment process is rigorous: leaders and managers ensure both apprentices and employers fully understand the apprenticeship programme.

TPL has no governing board however, and directors received insufficient information on the quality of teaching, learning and assessment.

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade  
Piper Training Limited 15/03/2019 16/04/2019 M N/A  
Technical Professionals Limited 14/03/2019 18/04/2019 M N/A  
Mitre Group Limited 19/03/2019 18/04/2019 2 M  

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Birmingham City Council 15/03/2019 15/04/2019 2 3

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade  
Dunbia 08/03/2019 15/03/2019 M M  

 

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade  
Buckinghamshire College Group 27/03/2019 18/04/2019 M 2  

Assessment organisation finally found for nursing apprentices

Thousands of nursing apprentices who have less than a year before they finish their training can breathe a sigh of relief as an organisation has finally been found to assess them.

However, there is likely to be concern over whether enough assessors will be recruited to meet demand seeing as there will be close to 4,500 of the apprentices taking their final exams throughout 2020 alone.

NOCN, an end-point assessment organisation (EPAO) approved to assess the second most standards in the country, was given the green light to assess level 5 nursing associate apprentices yesterday.

The objective is to achieve the demand levels required whilst ensuring quality of EPA results

As previously revealed by FE Week, there was concern that apprentices on the standard would finish their programme and then not be able to sit the EPA and graduate.

The apprenticeship has proven popular since its launch: it had 1,417 starts in 2017/18 and 820 in the first quarter of 2018/19.

The typical duration for the programme is 24 months. The first cohort due to go through EPA are expected to do so in January 2020.

“When we heard that apprentices might be in a position where they cannot complete the nursing associate standard we decided to discuss, with the NHS, what we might be able to do to support these apprenticeships,” said Graham Hasting-Evans, group managing director of NOCN, which is approved to assess 47 other standards.

“As a result of understanding their full requirements we decided that this was something we could carry out and applied for approval to undertake EPA. We are delighted that we have now been informed that we have been successful.”

Denise Baker, head of school allied health and social care at the University of Derby, which had 130 starts on the nursing associate standard in 2017, said she was “relieved” to hear an EPAO had been put in place as “this is an essential part of the apprenticeship”.

“We want to ensure that our nursing associates have the opportunity to finish their apprenticeship,” she added.

But there will be concerns regarding the capacity that one EPAO has to meet demand.

Hasting-Evans admitted that a “large” number of nursing associate apprentices will need to go through EPA, each of which requires discussion and observation by an assessor, over the next 12 months.

Graham Hasting-Evans

He said there’ll likely be around 200 doing their assessment in January, which will require up to 80 assessors. Around 4,300 EPAs on the standard are expected to take place throughout 2020, which will require up to 150 assessors “at peak”.

He added that if NOCN is the only EPAO for the standard then “we will obviously gear up to meet the challenge”.

“To ensure that these have a fair, robust, and consistent EPA experience we are working very closely with the NHS to identify sufficient EPA assessors,” Hasting-Evans explained.

“NOCN will then be training these people to meet the demands. It is early days, but clearly the objective of the NHS and ourselves is to achieve the demand levels required, whilst ensuring quality of EPA results.”

Asked if he knew of any other EPAOs in the pipeline to assess this standard, he said there “may be” but “at this stage we are only aware of our application being accepted”.

Assessment organisation finally found for nursing apprentices

A spokesperson for the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education said it was “very welcome news” that an EPAO has been appointed on the nursing associate standard, which will “make a huge contribution to a skilled workforce in healthcare”.

She added that it would be for the Education and Skills Funding Agency to comment on whether there were any more EPAOs preparing to help with assessment of the standard.

The ESFA, which approves EPAOs for standards, confirmed that NOCN has been approved to assess the “first cohorts of nursing apprentices”, but would not comment on whether more organisations were in discussions to follow them.

There are sector wide concerns about end-point assessment capacity. By 2020, when the apprenticeship reforms will have taken full effect, there are likely to be around 500,000 EPAs carried out every year.

Plans revealed for Londoners to receive free ESOL courses up to entry level 3 from next year

The Greater London Authority is planning to provide free English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses up to the level required for British citizenship.

As part of a new consultation on its Skills for Londoners Framework, which was launched today and outlines how the GLA intends to spend its adult education budget (AEB) from 2020/21, there is a proposal to fully-fund ESOL provision up to entry level 3 from that year.

The GLA is due to take control of London’s £306 million adult education budget from the Education and Skills Funding Agency on August 1, 2019. In that year, London’s Mayor will conduct a review into the quality and delivery of ESOL provision in the capital before offering the free courses.

“ESOL is a vital part of the Mayor’s social inclusion strategy”

According to today’s consultation document, over 50 per cent of the country’s ESOL provision takes place in the capital, but around 210,000 working age adults in London report that they “cannot speak English very well”.

It said the government has “reduced funding for ESOL by 60 per cent over the last decade,” which has had a “devastating effect on provision in London”.

The GLA added that by creating an entitlement for ESOL to entry level 3 shows that London is “open to talent and will support Londoners to get the skills they need to succeed”.

The authority told FE Week that the cost of the proposal is “currently being finalised” but confirmed it will be paid for through its devolved AEB.

“The Mayor believes all Londoners should be able to participate fully in London’s dynamic economy and integrate in their local communities,” a spokesperson for the Mayor of London said.

“Good English language skills are a crucial part of this, and these ESOL proposals, which are currently being consulted on, will help Londoners reach the level of proficiency necessary for British citizenship.”

Mary Vine-Morris, area director for London at the Association of Colleges, said: “ESOL is a vital part of the Mayor’s social inclusion strategy for London so the plans to prioritise this important provision are welcome.

“Colleges are the largest provider of ESOL classes in England, with 96,000 post-16 students enrolled on ESOL programmes. As such, they will be pivotal to successful delivery and therefore central to any planning.”

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers chief policy officer Simon Ashworth said: “One of the advantages of devolved AEB is the flexibility to respond to local priorities such as ESOL in the capital.

“We are therefore happy to support the mayor’s priorities while at the same time hoping the GLA moves forward on its aim to tie these courses to measurable outcomes.”

The ESOL proposal follows an announcement in June last year that revealed the GLA plans to fully-fund training for adults in the capital earning under the London living wage, currently set at £20,572.50, from 2019/20.

This move alone is expected to enable 40,000 more Londoners to access ESOL provision, according to today’s consultation document.

It also explained how the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan is investing an additional £4.5 million in the capital’s ESOL sector, by using the European Social Fund to fill gaps in provision for those with the lowest level of literacy, and helping ESOL practitioners to develop their teaching skills.

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan

The mayor is also running ESOL “Plus pilots”, where the GLA is inviting employers and providers to bid for funding to improve ESOL provision for employers and learners with childcare responsibilities.

Central funding for ESOL has yo-yoed over the past decade.

Up until August 2007, ESOL courses were free due to a system of automatic fee remission. This was then scrapped and fees were introduced for the programmes.

Under current rules, the ESFA only fully-funds ESOL learning delivered in the classroom up to level 2 for eligible learners aged 19 and over who are unemployed and in receipt of certain means-tested benefits.

All other classroom-based adult ESOL learning is co-funded by the ESFA, meaning that the ESFA pays half of the course costs and the provider may pass on the remainder to the learner.

The 2016 Casey Review into social integration found funding for ESOL courses had been slashed by 50 per cent between 2008 and 2015.

In March 2018, the government said it would develop a new national strategy to teach ESOL, which is aimed at improving integration.

The GLA’s consultation will close at 10am on Monday 20 May 2019.

Huge employer provider to downsize and scrap all level 2 apprenticeships

A major retailer is scrapping all of its level 2 provision in a move that will see a huge fall in apprenticeship sign-ups across the business and nearly 50 job losses.

Halfords, a large employer that sells motoring and cycling products and has over 8,250 staff across the UK, began delivering its own apprenticeship programme in February 2015 and currently has over 1,100 apprentices on its books.

The vast majority – around 750 – are level 2 retailer apprentices. FE Week has today learned that Halfords has immediately ceased starts on this provision, and the delivery of it will fully end in 24 months when existing trainees finish their course.

This decision is by no means a result of the content of the programme

It is understood that the employer’s apprenticeship staff numbers will be reduced from around 60 to 16 as a result.

The move will come as a big blow to the national apprenticeships programme, which has seen starts at level 2 plummet by more than a third since the introduction of the levy – from 260,700 in 2016/17 to 161,400 in 2017/18. The fall has prompted the government to undertake an urgent review into the issue.

“Against the backdrop of planned changes to the way in which the national apprenticeship scheme is administered, we are shifting our longer-term focus in order to continue delivering the highest quality training,” a spokesperson for Halfords said.

“We will continue to identify methods of leveraging our levy commitments in ways which support our strategic aspirations.”

Halfords was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted last month in a report that lauded its apprenticeship programme for being “clear and incisive”.

A staff email, seen by FE Week, shows that the reduction in the funding band for the level 2 retailer standard, which was cut by 20 per cent from £5,000 to £4,000 in December, was a key reason for scrapping the provision.

“The reduction in funding at level 2 has provided a number of challenges around the cost of delivering a quality programme which meets the needs of the business and our colleagues,” it said.

“In order to design a revised model in-line with the reduced funding bands, we believe this will adversely impact on the quality of programme Halfords can offer, impacting the current curriculum which received praise during our recent inspection.”

The email also revealed that Halfords conducted a “review of our apprenticeship provision in Q3” which highlighted a “number of risks to the current delivery model which if not addressed will negatively impact on Halfords future as an employer provider”.

FE Week asked what these “risks” were but the employer would not say.

We are shifting our longer-term focus in order to continue delivering the highest quality training

Increased staff turnover as a result of “uncertainty” in the retail sector, which is having a “detrimental impact on our outcomes and future success rates for our level 2 programme”, was another reason given for the decision to get rid of the provision.

The email continued: “With the focus on quality gaining further momentum under the new common inspection framework and the impact retail colleague attrition is having on success rates, we have made the decision to cease sign ups on level 2.

“Level 3 and 4 which are linked to our Aspire succession programme will continue to be delivered and new starts of these programmes remain unaffected. We will also look for further synergies and opportunities to deliver similar apprenticeship programmes across the group talent programme.”

Halfords said its existing level 2 team will reduce over the next 24 months to a “permanent team of 16 with the remaining roles being offered over a number of fixed term contracts between now and March 2021 when the final level 2 learners complete their end point assessment”.

Its email to staff concluded: “This decision is by no means a result of the content of the programme or the excellent development our colleagues receive on a daily basis. It is the consequence of delivering a quality level 2 retail apprenticeship within the governing frameworks of the ESFA and Ofsted within which Halfords operate as an employer provider.”

Ofsted watch: 8 out of 10 providers celebrate positive reports

It has been a very successful week for FE providers, with eight out of the 10 reports published by Ofsted showcasing great strides in their provision.

The most glowing report came in for First Intuition Cambridge Limited, a private provider which was found making ‘significant progress’ in all themes judged during an early monitoring visit of its apprenticeship provision.

Inspectors said leaders and managers at the provider, which trains over 130 learners on finance and accounting standards, have developed a “very effective curriculum strategy” that meets the needs for accountancy skills “exceedingly well”.

They lauded directors for having established a “flexible” programme that gives apprentices the opportunity to mix with those studying other accountancy programmes, at the same time as monitoring the quality of the provision “rigorously”.

“Apprentices develop substantial new knowledge, skills and behaviours,” Ofsted added.

Another provider to receive ‘significant progress’ ratings across the board in an early monitoring visit was PGL Travel Limited, which had 23 apprentices at the time of Ofsted’s visit.

Inspectors reported how the employer provider has a “clear strategy and vision” to develop a skilled workforce through “well-designed and high-quality” provision.

The report said the provider is “highly ambitious” for its apprentices and has invested “a substantial amount of time, money, effort and energy to establish an ambitious curriculum plan for the apprenticeship provision”.

Meanwhile, Academy for Project Management, a training provider based in Bristol with 28 apprentices on a level four project manager standard, received two ‘significant progress’ ratings and one ‘reasonable progress’ in its early monitoring visit.

Inspectors found the provider’s leaders and managers focus on establishing an “effective and high-quality programme” with a clearly articulated vision and rationale for the apprenticeship. Its leaders, managers and tutors also have suitable qualifications and experience with “extensive expertise” in their field.

Ofsted added that senior leaders “are highly responsive to the needs of their employers”.

Also this week, University of Central Lancashire, which trains over 250 apprentices, received a ‘good’ rating in its first full inspection due to its “culture of inclusivity” and its “highly effective employer engagement”.

Ofsted said its apprenticeship programmes are “well managed” and “most apprentices remain on their programme and achieve their module assessments”.

It was also good news for Community Training Portal Limited, which was rated grade two in its first inspection. Apprentices were found to make good progress over time thanks to leaders and managers who have “good knowledge of their training needs”.

“As a result of leaders’ shared ambitions for, and high expectations of, learners, their achievement rates are high,” inspectors wrote.

NACRO, an adult and community learning provider, improved its Ofsted rating from grade three to grade two. This was driven by leaders and managers making “significant improvements” to the quality of the provision since the previous inspection, with trustees and leaders ensuring these changes take place quickly.

The watchdog said the provider holds “high ambitions” for learners that help them make good progress, achieve well and take positive next steps in their education and employment.

Elsewhere, Serco Ltd was found making ‘reasonable progress’ in three areas and ‘significant progress’ in another two following its first monitoring visit since its grade three report last year.

Inspectors said leaders and managers responded “swiftly to the findings of the previous inspection and they have introduced a range of measures to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment for apprentices”.

The last positive report came in for Choice Training Ltd, a private provider found making ‘reasonable progress’ across the board in its early monitoring visit of its apprenticeship provision.

On a more negative note, Right Track Social Enterprise Limited received two ‘insufficient progress’ ratings in its early monitoring visit because its leaders and managers “do not effectively monitor how well an apprentice’s training meets the requirements for an apprenticeship”.

Ofsted warned apprentices complete a large majority of the programme in their own time, which “does not meet the requirements of apprenticeship programmes”.

But it did say that safeguarding at the provider is making ‘significant progress’.

Lastly, Sheffield Hallam University was rated ‘requires improvement’ in its first ever inspection as two fifths of operations/departmental manager apprentices leave their programmes early without completing the NVQ component of their programme.

Governors were found to not having sufficient awareness of the quality of a few important aspects of provision. However, almost all apprentices who complete their apprenticeships remain in secure employment and many progress to further study at a higher level.

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade  
Community Training Portal Limited 27/02/2019 10/04/2019 2 n/a  
Academy for Project Management Ltd 12/03/2019 09/04/2019 M n/a  
Serco Limited 20/03/2019 10/04/2019 M 3  
Right Track Social Enterprise Limited 13/03/2019 12/04/2019 M n/a  
Choice Training Limited 27/03/2019 12/04/2019 M n/a  
First Intuition Cambridge Limited 13/03/2019 12/04/2019 M n/a  

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
NACRO 04/03/2019 11/04/2019 2 3

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade  
PGL Travel 20/03/2019 08/04/2019 M 2  

 

Other (including UTCs) Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
University of Central Lancashire 05/03/2019 11/04/2019 2 n/a
Sheffield Hallam University 06/03/2019 12/04/2019 3 n/a

Treasury took back over £300m despite small employers being turned away

The government has for the first time admitted the vast majority of the £400 million underspend from the Department for Education’s apprenticeship budget was taken back by the Treasury.

In an interview with FE Week editor Nick Linford, the skills minister Anne Milton was asked how much cash the Treasury clawed back in the financial year to April 2018.

Milton replied she “can’t give exact figures”, and referred the question to Keith Smith, director of apprenticeship at the Education and Skills Funding Agency, who said it was “just over £300 million”.

Following the interview, the Treasury refused to comment and the DfE refused to say exactly how much over £300 million they had to give back.

The admission comes despite concerns that small employers are struggling to find providers with sufficient non-levy funds and that the overall levy budget is on track to significantly overspend in the coming years.

Lord Agnew of Oulton had revealed in response to a parliamentary question last month that the Department for Education spent £1.6 billion in 2017/18 to fulfil employers’ demand for apprenticeships, but “lower than anticipated demand” led to an underspend of £400 million. However, the Treasury “made available a portion…for programmes in future financial years”.

He said at the time: “A review of the levy is underway in order to consider, amongst other points, how it can be used most effectively.”

We now know the Treasury took back the vast majority of the £400 million from the DfE budget.

The FE sector has been quick to react to the loss of funding from the education budget, saying it’s “not right” and “desperately disappointing” that the unspent money has been taken by the Treasury instead of being spent on funding apprenticeships for small employers.

But the skills minister defended the claw-back coming ahead of employers losing unspent levy from their pot, a limit on the non-levy funds and over-spend warnings.

 “My job is to make sure employers spend it. And we want non-levy payers in the system,” Milton said.

“We put [the money] in the hands of employers. We said ‘this is a ring-fenced fund, spend the money’. Some of them did it, but not all of them.

“The point is that the money was there if they wanted to spend it. I guess if money is left unspent by employers, then Treasury is going to come and take it.”

Meanwhile, Mark Dawe, chief executive at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, told FE Week: “It’s desperately disappointing to hear the DfE admit that such a significant sum of money went back to the Treasury when we know that all of it could have been spent on funding apprenticeships of SME employers.  Let’s not forget that providers managed to do so the year before.

“The fact is that 200 good quality providers were unable to offer any apprenticeships to non-levy employers after what the minister herself described as an ‘awful’ procurement and those with contracts were not able to get all the growth they wanted to meet employer demand.”

David Hughes, chief executive at the Association of Colleges, said: “It cannot be right that the Treasury is taking back apprenticeship levy funds when colleges and ITPs are having to turn away smaller employers and deny young people apprenticeship opportunities. The non-levy funding cap is unfair but it is also bewildering given that the government is spending millions on marketing apprenticeships to young people and employers. The fact is that many who are persuaded to get involved will not be able to because non-levy funds are too limited.

“This means that bigger employers can take on as many apprentices as they want but smaller ones will struggle. It means young people are ok if they can find an apprenticeship with a large employer but not an SME. That has to change and we need to find ways to persuade government to change it.”

The ESFA director of apprenticeships, Keith Smith responded by saying: “It’s a conversation for the spending review about what resources we need in the programme for the demand that is going to occur in future years. And that is the process we are now talking about.

“It’s absolutely right that funding that was not used in a particular year isn’t just held on to but that of course does not mean that we are not committed to setting out the plans that we actually need to continue to deliver a high quality programme.”