Employers join forces to overturn ‘highly-damaging’ funding rate cuts for popular management apprenticeships

The employer group behind three popular management apprenticeship standards has the backing of more than 150 employers – including retail giant Tesco – in its fight to overturn plans to slash their funding bands, the Chartered Management Institute has claimed.

The chartered manager, operational manager and team leader standards are all facing cuts of between £500 and £5,000, following the Institute for Apprenticeships’ recent rate review.

The group behind the standards is appealing against the recommendations, and has enlisted the support of 152 employers, including BT, Asda, IBM, Aldi, ODEON, Tesco, Next and Birds Eye.

They all signed an online appeal, led by the CMI, against the proposed “extensive and highly-damaging cuts” and urging the IfA and the Department for Education to “undertake a full and transparent economic and social impact assessment” before making any final decision.

“We simply can’t see why government is shooting one of its most successful policies in the foot”, said Petra Wilton, director of strategy at the CMI.

“As the overwhelming outcry from employers demonstrates, it makes so little sense.”

Anne Thomas, education director at Serco, and co-chair of the employer group, said the proposals would “clearly undermine” the company’s “future ability to use our levy on the management skills we need for our future business growth”.

“It also frustrates the hard work of the employer trailblazer group which has invested significant time and resources into developing high quality apprenticeships which will no longer be funded as promised,” she said.

It’s not clear exactly who has signed the appeal, as FE Week’s request for a full list of signatories was turned down.

HMRC, one of the Trailblazer group members, would not say whether it supported the appeal.

Our request to the IfA for an employer who supported the recommendations was also denied.

FE Week exclusively reported two weeks ago that the three standards – which between them accounted for almost 20,000 starts in the first nine months of 2017/18 – were in line for funding cuts as a result of the IfA’s review, which launched in May.

The level management degree apprenticeship will have its funding cap cut from £27,000 to £22,000.

The band for the level five operational manager standard will go from £9,000 to £7,000, while the level three team leader standard will be capped at £4,500 – down from £5,000.

The Trailblazer group is appealing against these recommendations on the grounds that the process behind them wasn’t “fair and transparent”.

Employers in the group are said to be particularly concerned that the review did not consider the economic and social impact of the proposals.

In addition to the formal appeal by the Trailblazer group, the CMI will also be appealing to the DfE before it makes a final decision.

Both the CMI and Serco have a vested interest in the outcome of the review: the CMI is an end-point assessment organisation for all three standards, while Serco is an apprenticeship provider – although it doesn’t currently offer the three standards, according to the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

The IfA would not be drawn on the CMI’s actions and the appeal when asked for a comment, beyond reiterating the process behind the review – which included the right to appeal.

“We encourage all our stakeholders to engage with us about any concerns regarding the review process,” a spokesperson said.

The funding band review, launched in May, covered 31 standards.

FE Week has so far learned of the outcomes of eight of these – six of which resulted in recommendations to reduce the funding rate.

Just one so far has led to a recommendation for the funding to increase, and one to stay the same.

 

On the eve of the controversial T-level tender – when, how and why?

On the eve of the launch of the government’s first ever tender for a single awarding organisation for a qualification, FE Week takes a look at the twists and turns of the tangled T-levels procurement process to date.

The controversial full tender process to find awarding organisations to offer the first T-levels qualifications is due to launch on Monday.

It follows an open early engagement notice, published by the Department for Education in late May, which closes on Sunday (September 2).

According to that notice, the purpose of the procurement will be to “select and appoint an AO to be responsible for developing and delivering each of the wave one T-levels, under an exclusive licensing approach”.

There are expected to be three separate tenders launched – one for each of the first pathways to be delivered from 2020, in digital (digital production, design and development); childcare and education; and construction (design, surveying and planning).

The development of these new qualifications has so far proved to be highly contentious.

The Sainsbury report, published in July 2016, which paved the way for the introduction of T-levels, recommended that each qualification should be offered by a single AO or consortium.

This is a very different approach from that taken for A-levels and other level three courses, in which multiple awarding organisations offer the same qualification.

The DfE said at the time of the Sainsbury report that it intended to implement its recommendations in full – a line it has stuck to, despite concerns over the single awarding body approach.

These were first raised in July last year. Research carried out by Frontier Economics on behalf of the DfE concluded that limiting access to a single AO risked “system failure” both in the short and long-term.

It warned that an alternative AO may be unable to step in if the single AO offering the qualification failed.

And in February the exams regulator Ofqual said it had “advised on the risks related to the single provider model” in its response to the government’s consultation on T-levels.

However, writing exclusively for FE Week in July, skills minister Anne Milton defended the approach, insisting it was essential to “protect the standard of T-levels”.

“By selecting one AO to work on each T-level, it means they will have been successful against other competitors in demonstrating their vision to us, making it a shared vision to give our T-levels the greatest chance of success,” she wrote.

Further trouble started brewing after the DfE published its early engagement notice in May.

AOs were left fuming over the draft commercial terms they would be expected to sign up to, unveiled at a series of DfE market engagement events in June.

The Federation of Awarding Bodies called in the lawyers on behalf of its members, and in July issued the DfE with a letter outlining its plans to launch a judicial review over the T-level implementation plans.

But just weeks later it announced it had dropped its legal challenge – in part because some of the rules that had provoked AOs’ ire at the DfE’s events in June had been watered down by the time the department published its draft invitation to tender in July.

At the same time, Ofqual’s four-week consultation on how it should frame its rules for policing T-levels, launched July 10, prompted an angry response from Public Accounts Committee chair Meg Hillier.

She hit out at the “ridiculous” timescale, which was half that of a usual consultation.

The exams regulator itself acknowledged that the timing was tight, but blamed it on the DfE’s schedule for the introduction of the new qualifications.

That timetable, which will see the first T-levels being taught from 2020, has also proved controversial.

Education secretary Damian Hinds took the highly unusual step of issuing a ministerial direction in May to overrule his permanent secretary Jonathan Slater’s request to delay the start date to 2021.

During a PAC hearing in June Mr Slater admitted to having concerns about a lack of “contingency” in the government’s plans, but just days later his boss told an education select committee hearing that T-levels were being introduced at a “good pace”.

In July, Ms Milton left MPs on the latter committee “staggered” after admitting she wouldn’t encourage her own children to study the first T-levels.

The DfE is currently responsible for overseeing the development of the first wave of T-levels.

The Institute for Apprenticeships is set to take over responsibility for the second wave, but no date has yet been set for when this will happen.

T-level industry placements ‘likely’ to reduce apprenticeship offers, new DfE commissioned research finds

Substantial T-level industry placements are expected to reduce the number of apprenticeships that employers offer, new Department for Education research has found.

A major report, which included interviews with 120 employers, has this morning laid bare the major issues faced to make the key component of the new technical qualifications work.

Employers reported that while they were mostly supportive of 45 to 60 day placements, they’d need to be paid to offer them, while some explicitly said they will not offer them in industries such as construction and engineering because they “could not see the benefit of this type qualification”.

But probably most troubling was the finding that there could be “trade-offs” with T-level placements and apprenticeships.

“This research shows that particularly in routes where apprenticeships and other vocational training programmes are already established, we are likely to see trade-offs between employers’ willingness to offer T-level industry placements and their ability to continue with existing vocational placements, traineeships and apprenticeships,” the report said.

It comes at worrying time for apprenticeship take-up, as latest government figures show starts for May are down 40 per cent compared with the same period in 2016.

Today’s T-levels research report noted that “overall, employers welcomed the idea of industry placements” and the proposed length is viewed as being “sufficient to enable the young person to undertake work of value to both employers and learners”.

However, it found that employers not currently engaged in offering work-based placements “struggled to foresee how they might go about finding the resource for these tasks”.

“They are concerned about their capacity and are reluctant to divert resources away from productive work to training and supervising a young learner,” it said.

The report added that successfully generating industry placements is likely to “require a package of support that demonstrate the company benefits of an industry placement and/or sufficiently minimise the costs to the extent that altruistic motivations are able to kick in”.

It recommends that government quickly informs employers about “what type and level of support (including potential financial support) will be available”.

Employers are also “not currently clear” on how T-levels “fit with the range of other qualification options available”.

“To be able to understand whether and how the qualification (and providing a placement) might benefit their organisation, they need to understand how it fits with and compares to options such as A-levels, apprenticeships, NVQs and university degrees,” researchers said.

“Where the industry is one in which vocational qualifications are already well-established, the value of a T-level, compared to an apprenticeship or a qualification with a more significant work placement component, is questioned.

“This is based on a perception that a primarily classroom-based qualification is a poor substitute for work-based learning.”

The first three T-level pathways set to start teaching in 2020 will be in digital (production, design and development), childcare and education, and construction (design, surveying and planning).

However, the DfE research found that for the education and childcare pathway, the “nature of work means it is impractical for young people to take part” in placements.

This includes “being in contact with young and/or vulnerable people (DBS checks may be required)” and “dealing with sensitive or confidential information”.

A Department for Education spokesperson confirmed that the completion of an industry placement will be a “requirement” for full certification of T-levels.

“Industry placements will be a key part of the new T-level programmes,” she said.

“Many businesses have said that the inclusion of a meaningful and substantial industry placement would make sure learners are better prepared and motivated for work.

“That is why we are investing nearly £60 million in 2018/19 with further funding to come in 2019/20 to support education providers to work with employers to deliver placements.

“We will continue to work closely with employers to explore ways to make sure they are able to offer placements from 2020.”

Students ‘distraught’ after college blames T-level preparation for last minute decision to dump all A-level courses

Forty students who were supposed to be inducted onto their A-levels today have been left “distraught” after Northampton College cancelled their courses a week before the start of term.

In a fiery meeting about the decision this morning, of which the principal was allegedly “too busy” to attend, angry parents slammed the college’s timing.

One parent, Jamie Simms, told FE Week that the encounter got to the stage “where we could have all had pitch forks and torches” after being told the college made the decision last Friday while they were still accepting students onto the courses.

Parents and students were not informed until yesterday.

Mr Simms said his daughter Katherine, aged 16, and all affected students are “distraught” and have been left to frantically scramble around the local area for alternative courses.

The college allegedly failed to guarantee they will secure places for all of them during the meeting.

Northampton College says it made the decision to stop enrollment onto new A-level courses to ensure a smooth transition to the government’s new technical qualifications – T-levels – of which it will be one of the first providers to offer them in 2020.

The excuse is strange, considering that T-levels are supposed to be the alternative to A-levels and the college is not on the government’s list of providers taking part in the T-level pilots in 2020.

It will instead offer the students a place on equivalent BTEC courses.

The affected learners were accepted to study A-levels at Northampton College just last Thursday after receiving their GCSE results.

“It isn’t the fact they’ve cancelled the courses it is the timing of it,” Mr Simms told FE Week.

“When the deputy principal admitted the decision was made last Friday the meeting erupted with lots of screams of ‘liars’. I actually thought someone was going to get arrested at one point.

“It was getting to the stage where we could have all had pitch forks and torches.”

His daughter Katherine was due to start A-levels in history, sociology and psychology. Northampton College doesn’t have an equivalent BTEC course to offer her.  

“She has no choice and can’t stay here,” Mr Simms said.

“The college has cut her loose now really because they basically said it is down to us to find a place for her.

“None of the other schools are open as it is still the holidays and as it stands she has no place to go to in September.”

He described that the planning of the situation as “inept” and said that as it is the college’s mess they should be the ones to clear it up.

“Katherine is very distraught about it as are all the students,” he added. “They just don’t know their futures now.

“She’s had to go through months of stress of exams, then months of stress waiting for the results. She then thinks she is sorted after getting into college and now it has all gone to crap again.”

Principal of Northampton College, Pat Brennan-Barrett, said: “Northampton College will be one of the first providers to offer the Government’s new technical qualifications, T-levels, and will be piloting a programme of ‘Industrial Placements’ to prepare for the change.

“As part of that transition, we have taken the decision to not continue with our current A-level offering and will instead be focusing on ensuring students can continue their journey into Higher Education with BTEC Diplomas – which are viewed by universities as an equivalent qualification.”

She added: “This change will affect all students who have applied to study A-levels at Northampton College from this September.

“We are working closely with all students and their parents to offer an equivalent BTEC qualification here at Northampton College and we are partnering with alternative providers to offer places on A-level courses in local sixth forms.”

Current students progressing from AS level will continue to study their A-levels at Northampton College and will not be affected by this decision.

Skills minister on hunt for apprentice but excludes applicants with GCSE grade 4 (a pass)

Anne Milton has posted a job advert looking for an apprentice to work in her parliamentary office which excludes candidates with a GCSE grade 4, even though it is considered a pass.

The advert for a level three business and administration apprentice was published two days ago by the skills minister and states that applicants must have achieved “GCSE A-C (9-5) or equivalent in maths English and IT”.

Her request for a grade 5 or above comes despite a grade 4 also being equivalent to a C and therefore a pass under the government’s new GCSE grading system – which has frequently been slammed for its confusion by parents, employers and experts.

Anne Milton’s apprentice job advert

It appears that the skills minister’s office is just as baffled by the system, as it was only after FE Week got in touch with the Department for Education and training provider who will offer the apprenticeship to point out the issue that they realised it was wrong.

The training manager said the advert will now be amended and the DfE added: “Minister Milton’s parliamentary office are looking into how this error occurred.”

Tom Sherrington, an education consultant and former headteacher, said the situation will leave Ms Milton “red-faced” and “absolutely proves that even the government doesn’t understand its grading system”.

“They’ve confused the government’s idea of a ‘good’ pass which is a threshold for school accountability with the meaning of the qualification,” he told FE Week.

“A pass is a C and a 4 is absolutely equivalent.

“If they put C is a 5 then they simply don’t understand their system.

“It leaves the minister red-faced, particularly because she is responsible for a department which is responsible for communicating this system to the general public.”

The new grading system was introduced by the Department for Education for all GCSEs for the first time this year.

A grade 9 and 8 is equivalent to an A*, 7 is an A, 6 is a B, and 5 and 4 are considered a C (see image below).

The government has tried to push the idea that a 5 is a “strong” pass while a 4 is a “standard” pass.

However, they’ve come up against resistance to this. Ofqual, for example, wrote to schools about the changes in March last year but left details of the new “standard” and “strong” passes off its aide-memoire.

After being shown Ms Milton’s job advert, NUS vice president for FE Emily Chapman said: “We welcome the Department for Education amending their job specification, however the fact it needed to be raised as an issue in the first place is a further indication that the new system of grading adds confusion.

“It seems like a step in the right direction that the government wants to take on its own apprentices, but they must ensure that their application processes are adhering to their own grading boundaries and not rush through new systems that haven’t been fully thought through.”

The successful candidate in Ms Milton’s job hunt will study at Westminster Kingsway College.

Duties include assisting her parliamentary assistant and caseworker with constituency correspondence and research, data entry and data management, and diary management.

It will also include organising constituent visits and tours of parliament, general administrative tasks and handling telephone calls, and drafting letters and emails to constituents on a range of policy issues.

They will be paid £213 per week. The advert closes September 16.

Interested candidates can view the application here.

The government’s new GCSE grading system explained:

‘I wouldn’t accept college place even if I was offered it’, says dwarf learner at centre of rejection row

An 18-year-old learner with dwarfism at the centre of a row over whether a college discriminated against him has said he wouldn’t accept a place even if it was offered to him.

Louis Makepeace, who has achondroplasia and is just 3ft 10 inches tall, hit the headlines at the weekend after claiming he was turned down for a place on a hospitality and catering course at Heart of Worcestershire College because of his height.

He said the college had branded him a “health and safety risk” – claims that have led to TV appearances, stories in the national press and even a job offer from Gordon Ramsay.

Louis’ story has been one of the most widely-read on the BBC

Speaking exclusively to FE Week, Louis said he’d been treated “appallingly” by the college and he would “absolutely not” accept a place if it was offered to him.

“I think it’s outrageous the way they’ve treated me, making me wait so long just to get an answer if I could be in their kitchen or not. It’s just disgraceful,” he said.

The college has denied Louis’ claims.

The saga started on August 16, when Louis said he went for a one-on-one interview with the course leader, following his application to the level one introduction to professional cookery course at HoW College.

“The first thing he told me in the interview room was that I’d never get any future employment if I wanted to be a chef. There was no point me going to the college and learning the trade,” Louis alleged.

He said he asked about having a kitchen adapted to his needs, but was told “it would be far too much work to put in” and “it would disrupt the other students”.

“I said, well, can’t I just use a stool in the meantime? And he said I’d be a health and safety risk to have a stool in the kitchen,” Louis told FE Week.

The interview left Louis “heartbroken”.

The first thing he told me in the interview room was that I’d never get any future employment if I wanted to be a chef

“I’d never been discriminated against like that before – I didn’t even think that that was acceptable.

“This is my education they’re ruining. I want to be a chef, and they’re stopping me from getting a chance a train,” Louis told FE Week.

He said he’d been told by the course leader that he had a conditional offer of a place, subject to a health and safety check.

But he claimed he never heard back from the college – and that when his mum chased it up a few days later she was told by that course leader that Louis should look for another course.

Both Louis and his mum said that was the last contact they’ve had with the college.

The apparent rejection prompted the pair to go the newspapers, with his story featuring on the BBC, Daily Mail, The Sun and the Daily Star, and on ITV’s This Morning show on Wednesday (August 29).

Celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay even got in on the action, with a tweet that said he would “offer him an apprenticeship any day”.

Louis said he’s been in talks with the TV star’s agent about starting an apprenticeship with him, but hadn’t yet made up his mind – in part, because he’s also in talks about doing an apprenticeship at a Michelin-starred London restaurant called Pied-a-Terre.

“I’m not too sure yet, because I’m overwhelmed by the amount of support I’ve been given,” Louis said.

Louis’ story has capture the attention of the media – including the Mail Online

The college has refuted Louis’ version of events, however.

After initially declining to comment, it released a statement on Monday denying that Louis had ever been told he didn’t have a place.

It said it was carrying out a review to ensure that “all the appropriate adjustments to the kitchens that Louis needs to allow him to safely and successfully commence his course” were in place before he could be accepted onto the course.

To date, the college hasn’t yet offered Louis a place, and has said it hoped to make a decision by the end of the week.

It also denied that the alleged comments were made by the course leader.

The college had attempted to make contact with Louis’ mum, but had been unable to speak to her and she had not responded to messages asking her to make contact, a spokesperson said.

“To date the college has not received a complaint from either Louis or Mrs Makepeace about the interview process.”

 

 

Ofqual ‘closely monitoring’ investigation by awarding organisation into ‘copy and paste’ assessments exposed by Ofsted

Ofqual is “closely monitoring” an investigation being carried out by Training Qualifications UK into allegations of ‘copy and paste’ assessments, FE Week can reveal.

Earlier this week the exams regulator said it was “looking into” concerns identified by Ofsted during a recent inspection of Northern Construction Training and Regeneration.

The inspectorate’s report said it had found evidence of assessment practice in its retail provision that was “not consistently appropriate” – including identical word-processed text in six out of 19 sample portfolios it checked.

Ofqual has now confirmed that TQUK had alerted it to “an investigation it is carrying out into suspected malpractice” at NCTR.

“We are closely monitoring TQUK’s investigation,” a spokesperson said.

Andrew Walker, managing director at TQUK, told FE Week that NCTR was approved to offer its retail qualifications and that it was the awarding body affected.

“The centre is currently subject to an ongoing investigation.  I am unable to comment further at this time,” he said.

NCTR’s Ofsted report, which rated it grade four overall, highlighted concerns over “poor assessment practice” in its retail provision.

“Within one sample of 19 portfolios made available by managers, inspectors found that six contained identical word-processed text in assessed work, which had been subject to internal quality assurance checks and had been formally accredited,” the report said.

“Consequently, assessed and formally accredited work cannot be reliably attributed to individual learners, some of whom have received qualification certificates.”
NCTR, which hadn’t previously been inspected, had non-levy apprenticeship contracts worth £1,007,046 in 2017/18, the vast majority of which was for 16- to 18-year-old apprentices.

In addition, it had an advanced learner loan facility worth £2.5 million.

At the time of inspection the provider had 423 adult learners on programme, and 75 apprentices.

Last week’s inspection report rated it ‘inadequate’ overall but grade two for its apprenticeship provision.

According to ESFA rules, this means it is likely to have its contracts pulled but it should keep its place on the register of apprenticeship providers.

However, neither the provider nor ESFA has yet confirmed that this will happen.

A spokesperson for the Department for Education said it was “currently assessing Ofsted’s findings” and would be contacting NCTR “to set out the action we will be taking in due course”.

“We will always take action to protect apprentices if a training provider is not fit for purpose.”

IfA funding band review: Healthcare standard set for 67 per cent funding increase

A healthcare apprenticeship standard is set to have its funding band increased by a massive 67 per cent following the Institute for Apprenticeships’ rate review.

The level three senior healthcare support worker will have its maximum funding cap increased from £3,000 to £5,000, according to Jane Hadfield, national senior programme manager for apprenticeships at Health Education England and Kay Fawcett, a registered nurse and consultant, the co-chairs of the employer group that developed it.

The pair also told FE Week that the rate for the level five healthcare assistant practitioner standard is set to stay the same, at £12,000.

“We are keen to recognise the input of our Trailblazer employers and apprenticeship providers for their ongoing support, in achieving this recommendation,” Ms Hadfield and Ms Fawcett said in a joint statement.

Both standards were developed by a wide number of organisations including NHS trusts, the Royal College of Nursing and the Ministry of Defence.

The level three standard, approved for delivery in October 2016, is designed to train apprentices to “help registered practitioners deliver healthcare services”.

It had 1,820 starts in the first nine months of 2017/18, making it the 21st most popular apprenticeship standard.

A senior healthcare support worker will “provide high quality, compassionate healthcare, following standards, policies or protocols”.

This could include assisting with clinical or therapeutic tasks, helping with a patient’s overall comfort and responding to signs of discomfort.

Meanwhile, an assistant practitioner works “at a level above that of healthcare support workers” and has a “more in-depth understanding about factors that influence health and ill-health”.

The standard was approved in May 2016, and it had 1,160 starts between August 2017 and April 2018, making it the 26th most popular standard.

It can be used as a stepping stone towards becoming a registered practitioner, with the apprenticeship providing credit in some higher education programmes “aligned to professional registration”.

The IfA’s funding band review, launched in May, was intended to “help make sure that employers can access high quality apprenticeships and that funding bands represent good value for money for employers and government”.

It covers 31 standards – including some of the most popular.

Analysis at the time the review was launched found that the 31 represented 64 per cent of all starts on standards for the first half of 2017/18 (45,900 out of 71,720).

The healthcare standards are the first that FE Week is aware of not to have had their funding bands cut following the review.

The level two hair professional standard is set to be cut by 22 per cent, from £9,000 to £7,000.

Three management standards – including the level three team leader/ supervisor, responsible for the highest number of starts of any standard – will be reduced by between 10 and 22 per cent.

The level two customer service practitioner standard is facing a 13 per cent reduction, from £4,000 to £3,500, and the level two retailer standard will have its funding cap reduced from £5,000 to £4,000.

Each of these proposals is subject to potential appeal by the employer groups behind them, and final approval by the education secretary, Damian Hinds.

Writing for FE Week, the IfA’s chief executive Sir Gerry Berragan insisted that the “collaborative approach” it had taken with the reviews was working.

Some of the reviews had resulted in recommendation that the bands “stay the same, some increase, and some decrease”, he said.

The IfA has also refused FE Week’s request for a full list of its recommendations, insisting it would be “premature” to do so.

AoC funding plea rejected by letter ending with minister scribbling a promise to continue ‘lobbying’

The skills minister offered a handwritten promise to the Association of Colleges that her “lobbying for FE continues” when delivering the news that there is no cash to fund a college staff pay rise.

Anne Milton, who says she “constantly” fights the Treasury for more money, appeared sympathetic to the AoC’s case when responding to its boss’ plea to match the recent school teacher award of a 3.5 per cent salary increase.

In her reply to David Hughes’ request, she explained that the Department for Education does not set the pay for teachers in colleges, but does set the levels of funding for FE.

“We want to make sure that there is an effective funding system for FE which can support sustainable, high quality education,” she said.

“We are considering this as part of the upcoming spending review, scheduled to take place in 2019.”

Ms Milton then added a handwritten note at the bottom of the letter which reads: “My lobbying for FE continues!”

The DfE has since got in touch with FE Week to reaffirm their commitment to the sector, whilst repeating that they are reviewing FE funding.

“Further education is a very important part of the education sector offering invaluable opportunities to people of all ages,” a spokesperson said.

“We have transformed technical education to put it on a par with the best systems in the world, with our new T-levels to be backed by an extra £500 million a year.

“In addition we have protected the base rate of funding for 16-19 year olds and maintained the level of the adult education budget since 2015-16.”

She added: “This is why the minister made clear that whilst it is for individual colleges to set pay for their staff we are currently looking at funding for the sector, including the need to recruit and retain effective teachers.”

In March the skills minister revealed that the DfE had started an FE funding and “sustainability” review, which looks into how the current system meets the costs of high-quality provision.

But earlier this month it was reported that the sector could in fact be in for another round of cuts, after the chancellor told ministries without protected budgets to find savings.

Ms Milton told the education select committee in July that she “constantly” fights the Treasury for more funding, but before she can request an amount her sustainability review needs to be completed.

With the spending review fast approaching and scheduled to take place in early 2019 the minister will need to get a move on to persuade the Chancellor to give more, not less, cash.

You can read Ms Milton’s full letter to Mr Hughes here.