Degree apprenticeships a ‘concern’, says skills minister

The skills minister has highlighted the “risks” associated with degree apprenticeships after her predecessor evangelised about how they are his “two favourite words”.

Anne Milton and Robert Halfon engaged in a heated exchange about the high level qualifications during a fringe event at the Conservative party conference.

Mr Halfon, now chair of the education select committee, said there needs to be a “radical change at the Institute for Apprenticeships and a lot more funding” going into degree apprenticeships, which are seen as being central to the government’s plans to put technical education on a par with academic education.

His remark follow comments by IfA chief Sir Gerry Berragan who previously told the committee he was “agnostic” about the qualifications.

The danger is the word degree is linked to universities

Ms Milton jumped to the defence of “poor old Gerry” and said he was “not agnostic” about them, but she and he think “we need to be careful we don’t crowd out levels 2, 3, 4 and 5”.

FE Week’s editor Nick Linford interviewed the skills minister after the showdown and quizzed her on her concerns.

“I think there are risks around degree apprenticeships,” she said.

“One is that all that’s happening is that people who would have gone through a traditional full-time degree are doing a degree apprenticeship.

“That’s great, possibly for the productivity of the country, because you get your degree and you’re working at the same time.

“But actually the whole idea of apprenticeships is that it gives people an opportunity that you wouldn’t otherwise have.”

She added that the “danger” is that the word degree is “linked to universities and one of the problems that I have is struggling to get the word further education out in the public domain”.

“Because the conversation in the mainstream media is about degrees and universities, everyone talks about degrees and universities,” Ms Milton continued.

“Parents think that’s the only option for their children, and so you can end up unwittingly reinforcing the fact that it’s got to be a degree.

“In fact 50 per cent of people don’t go to university, currently. So what’s happening to those 50 per cent? A lot of them had a bad experience at school.

“So FE plays a crucial part. What matters is getting the pathway for people to do even a level one.

“I was talking to the principal from an FE college in Birmingham today, and they’ve just had a graduation ceremony and I think she said 100 students graduated in the ICC.

“Of those students graduating were people who came to them to do level 2 qualifications who never thought in a million years they would do a degree.

“And I don’t want the conversation about degrees to crowd out.”

Asked if degree apprenticeships were in danger of taking the rungs out of Mr Halfon’s ladder of opportunity, she replied: “Or to take the paving stones out on my path.

“The point is that it mustn’t crowd it out. We mustn’t see, because in some jobs level 4 and 5 is absolutely fine.

“And you can go on and get to quite a senior level even run the company without having a degree. Look at me, I don’t have a degree. I got to be minister of state for skills and apprenticeships.”

IfA loses funding rate review battle but uncertainty drags on

An employer group that won an appeal over the Institute for Apprenticeships’ handling of funding rate recommendations is still waiting for a final decision, FE Week can reveal.

We reported in May that the education and training trailblazer group had rejected the IfA’s recommendations for the three FE teaching standards it is developing.

The group lodged an appeal against the IfA’s process, and was told in July that it had succeeded – leading to the original recommendations, which ranged from £5,000 to £9,000, being binned by the appeal panel.

This meant the three standards were sent back to the IfA’s route panel to have new funding bands assigned to them, which should have happened at a meeting on September 13.

Instead, the panel deferred its decision, according to Jo North, chair of the trailblazer group.

She told FE Week that the group hasn’t been told the reason for this delay, only that the panel needed to carry out “further work with training providers to inform the funding band recommendations”.

According to a letter sent by the IfA to Ms North, dated July 5, the group appealed on four bases: failing to comply with agreed procedure; failing to take account of relevant information; making a decision based on a mistake of fact; and the institute exceeding its powers.

The appeal was turned down on three out of four of these points, but “the appeal panel considered it was, on balance, persuaded by some of your arguments” in relation to the first point.

These related to the “transition of the process from the Education and Skills Funding Agency to the institute” and the “request from the trailblazer group regarding their attendance at route panel”.

Ms North told FE Week she had asked three times to attend the meeting and “each time it had been declined saying there was enough expertise on the panel”.

Despite the ruling, she was also excluded from the September meeting – even though she said she was asked to be on standby.

The level five learning and skills teacher standard was first published in August 2015, while the level four assessor/coach and level three learning mentor standards were published in October the same year.

Ms North said the level five standard had actually been approved for delivery in March 2016, subject to a number of small changes, but because of a lack of communication between the ESFA and the IfA this was never published.

That miscommunication had cost “at least 2,500 starts”, Ms North said.

“We want some action. Everyone is wanting to deliver. My inbox is full every day of people wanting it,” she said.

An IfA spokesperson said it was “working to establish appropriate funding bands to support high quality delivery and provide value for money, and bring these standards through to delivery as quickly as possible”. 

“We are grateful to the education and training trailblazer group for all of their hard work so far. We are aware of their concerns, and are already in contact with them to get these resolved.”

Tory conference 2018: what was said about FE and skills?

Brexit is grabbing the headlines. But many debates at the Conservative Party conference concluded that lifelong learning and apprenticeships are central to life beyond March next year, says Stephen Evans

There are some great debates at party conferences if you know where to find them. They’re usually away from the main conference halls, though Damian Hinds’s announcement of new capital funding for T-levels was welcome.

At this year’s Conservative Party conference, there were two main themes at these debates. The first was about next steps on the apprenticeship levy. The chancellor announced that employers would be able to transfer 25 per cent of their levy funds to their supply chain, up from 10 per cent, and that its operation would be reviewed. Speaking to a number of employers and employers’ groups, the key message I picked up was that it needs to be simpler and more flexible, but please don’t rip it up and start again!

The latter point is really important. The levy is a good idea. It needs change, but to start from scratch now would be to repeat past mistakes. Further education is perhaps the most over-reformed sector, to within an inch of its life. What we need now are stability and evolution.

There were some good ideas for this evolution. These include making the standards process quicker and simpler (time for an “even faster and better” initiative from the Institute for Apprenticeships, perhaps?).

We also should benchmark standards against the best in the world, and we definitely need more action on access to apprenticeships. Learning and Work Institute research has shown systematic inequalities, including underrepresentation of people from BAME backgrounds and gender segregation. That’s why we’ve argued for an apprentice premium, targeting extra resources at under-represented groups like the pupil premium does in schools. But whatever the method, we need to turbocharge our efforts on fair access to apprenticeships.

To start from scratch now would be to repeat past mistakes

The second theme was a broader one about getting beyond Brexit and back to the prime minister’s commitment, on taking office, to tackle burning injustices. Living standards have flatlined and it’s clear some people and places feel left behind. The combination of an aging population and a new technological revolution risks worsening these inequalities, unless we act.

Most of the debates I attended argued that more lifelong learning should be part of the answer, but things got a bit vague when it came to how to do this. Apprenticeships, T-levels and the national retraining scheme were all mentioned. But I think we also need an overarching vision, a strategy for how these building blocks fit together.

The good news is that, between us, we’ve got lots of answers. It was great to see so many people from FE taking part in these debates, raising the sector’s profile and providing solutions.

Will all this result in greater investment in FE and lifelong learning? It’s too soon to tell – we’re higher up the political agenda, but it’s a long way to next year’s spending review.

The skills minister Anne Milton told our Festival of Learning reception earlier this year that it’s the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. To be as squeaky as possible I think we need to:

  • Continue raising our profile. Things like Colleges Week can help show the difference FE makes. But we also need to convince the treasury we’re a good investment.
  • Build a coalition of support. We need employers and leaders from other sectors to say how vital further education is. Sharing personal stories of the impact of learning, as we do through our Festival of Learning, can help.
  • Inspire employers and individuals to learn. This is not just about government. In our survey, the biggest reason individuals give for not learning, is not seeing the relevance. We also need to raise employer investment and engagement. There are lots of great examples of this – how do we scale them up?

Memories of conference debates soon fade; we need to keep the pressure on to win hearts and minds.

How will reducing low-skill foreign workers impact FE?

The UK has long relied on EU workers. Now employers must improve the training of homegrown staff, says Tom Richmond

“What we want to see is people here in the UK being trained to take on the jobs which are available” said the prime minister to Radio 4 listeners during the Conservative Party conference. With almost 1.3 million EU citizens currently employed in low-skill (e.g. cleaning) or lower-middle-skill roles (e.g. drivers), a new set of rules for who can enter the UK might force a major shift in employers’ thinking.

Achieving such a dramatic shift in employers’ attitudes will not happen overnight

Mrs May’s proposed approach is a sensible one. In our report Immigration After Brexit published earlier this year, Policy Exchange called for our immigration system to clamp down on low-skilled EU immigration (with some exceptions such as reintroducing the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme) but adopt a lighter-touch approach for students and professionals who wish to study and work in the UK. This was because we believe that the government must do more to encourage businesses to invest in their staff, particularly lower-skill roles, instead of simply allowing them to import workers from other countries. Since the mid-2000s businesses have too often cut their training budgets after gaining access to huge pools of migrant workers from Eastern Europe. This will no longer be tenable once the prime minister has implemented her new vision.

Several strands of government policy in recent years have attempted to encourage employers to engage with education and training in a more substantive way. For example, employers were asked to design new “apprenticeship standards” for their industry sectors. The new “T-levels” for 16 to 19-year-olds that the government wishes to introduce from 2020 are being overseen by panels of employers in each sector as well.

The apprenticeship levy for large employers that commenced in April 2017 was another clear signal from ministers that they wanted employers to invest more in their staff as part of the drive towards the target for three million apprenticeship starts between 2015 and 2020. Although the target has been frequently criticised (by me and many others) and the design and implementation of the levy have been far from perfect, the underlying goal of making employers pay closer attention to their recruitment and training strategies has only become more important following this country’s vote to leave the EU.

Mrs May’s proposed approach is a sensible one

Achieving such a dramatic shift in some employers’ attitudes will not happen overnight. The levy may have generated hundreds of millions to be spent on training but many low-skill roles that require minimal instruction are being routed through the government’s apprenticeship reforms. When standing at a hotel reception desk or serving customers in a coffee shop are labelled “apprenticeships” by employers, it seems that some businesses are still not taking their responsibilities seriously.

The fact that many employers are choosing to spend their levy money on providing management-training courses (including MBAs) for experienced members of staff will also do little to improve the prospects of current and future employees at the other end of the labour market. What’s more, it remains unclear whether the levy has increased the amount of training provided by each employer or merely encouraged them to rebadge their existing training schemes as “apprenticeships”.

Needless to say, any employer that has continued to recruit UK workers as well as develop and train their employees has no reason to be concerned about a new immigration system. If we are serious about providing better job opportunities, improving our economic productivity and helping people of all ages to progress in their chosen career, an over-reliance on low-skill EU workers is unlikely to help.

Many organisations, both large and small, view investing in their staff as the right decision for their business, and they deserve praise for doing so. Any employer that has not yet shown this same commitment to training and professional development should heed the prime minister’s words sooner rather than later.

Does the IfA really believe in degree apprenticeship?

The IfA’s review of the DTSP will be a key test of whether it really listens to employers (and apprentices), says Mandy Crawford-Lee

The Institute for Apprenticeships (IfA) has started a review of existing standards on the digital route, which includes the flagship Digital Technology Solutions Professional (DTSP) degree apprenticeship.

To date the DTSP has been the most successful degree apprenticeship. It is used by employers that include Accenture, Capgemini, IBM, Lloyds Bank, Fujitsu and Quicksilva and it’s being offered by a growing number of leading institutions, including Aston University, BPP, the Open University, Manchester Metropolitan University, the University of Portsmouth and the University of Salford.

We’ve also seen some really new and innovative delivery partnerships that also involve colleges and independent training providers. Employers love it, as do individuals, and early evidence from the Department for Education’s Degree Apprenticeship Development Fund projects suggest it’s having a positive impact on attracting women into tech roles.

There’s one major negative: the twice-run Education and Skills Funding Agency procurement for non-levy-paying employers means a postcode lottery in the availability of DTSP provision for SMEs. But overall we’ve got the rare example of an English approach to vocational learning that’s applauded and, more importantly, is working for employers and fulfilling the objectives of the apprenticeship programme.

So in terms of the IfA review, if it’s meeting a major skills need, is supported by employers and is starting to make an impact on widening participation and access, then given a bit of updating this should be a formality, shouldn’t it?

Unfortunately, no. The problem is the IfA’s so-called “faster and better” approach to approving apprenticeship standards and assessment plans introduced earlier this year, with negligible consultation. And, more specifically, its mandatory qualification rule.

A trailblazer can only specify a mandatory qualification in an apprenticeship standard, including a degree, if it’s a requirement of a professional body, regulator or used in hard-sifting for job interviews.

This will be a key test of whether it believes in degree apprenticeships

The DTSP meets none of these requirements. If the IfA applies its mandatory qualifications rule to the DTSP, the degree will be removed and the IfA will scuttle its own flagship apprenticeship standard.

This would be a tragedy. The trailblazer, large employers and SMEs have all emphasised the importance of the degree in the apprenticeship and its role in opening up a new talent pipeline to senior level digital occupations. Every DTSP degree apprentice I’ve met says the degree is essential to the credibility and standing of the apprenticeship and is a, if not the, key reason why they chose the apprenticeship route.

To resolve this “problem” UVAC has proposed to the Office for Students (OfS, the higher education regulator), the DfE and the IfA that for the institute’s mandatory qualification, the following criterion be introduced:

“Employers through the trailblazer process can also specify a mandatory degree in an apprenticeship where they can demonstrate its inclusion will support social mobility and is in the interests of employers in the sector (eg, the degree ‘professionalises’ an occupation, helps attract new talent, raises performance standards for the occupation).”

Given the OfS’s role in protecting the student interest, and the importance to a student of a degree in terms of national and international recognition, transferability and the breadth of skills developed, OfS supports our proposal. Not to put too fine a point on it, the IfA’s mandatory qualification rule when applied in higher education runs counter to the student interest – it is OfS’s role to protect this “interest”. I also suspect the DfE will want to ensure the future success of the DTSP. But the decision will rest with the IfA.

The IfA’s approach to the review of the DTSP will be a key test of whether it believes in degree apprenticeships, whether it really listens to employers, if it wants to transform apprenticeship in England into an aspirational choice and if it’s committed to ensuring we have an employer-led apprenticeship programme that delivers the skills needed by the UK economy. We would support leaving this one to carry on as it is without tinkering and, instead, concentrate review resources on standards that are less successful at delivering core objectives.

Dame Asha WILL stay on the IfA board despite West Notts resignation

Dame Asha Khemka remains a “valued” Institute for Apprenticeships board member and will not be leaving the role, despite her resignation from West Nottinghamshire College earlier this week.

FE Week reported yesterday that the institute had refused to say if it still backed Dame Asha, more than 48 hours after news broke of her departure from WNC.

This morning a spokesperson finally confirmed that “Dame Asha Khemka remains a valued member of the IfA board”, even though she is no longer a serving principal.

Dame Asha, who led WNC from 2006, stepped down from the top job on Monday following a “special meeting of the board of governors” held “in light of the current challenges faced by the college”.

It was forced to go to the Education and Skills Funding Agency in July for a £2.1 million bailout, just 48 hours before it would have run out of cash.

Dame Asha was one of two college principals appointed to the IfA’s board in January 2017.

She is also a member of the Cabinet Office’s education honours committee, which is responsible for reviewing honours nominations for people involved in education.

This is a fixed-term position, and the Cabinet Office confirmed on Tuesday that she will remain in post until her contract expires.

Dame Asha was one of the most highly-paid principals in the FE sector, with a remuneration package worth £262,000 in 2016/17.

She receives £15,000 a year for her role on the IfA board. Following her appointment last year, a spokesperson for WNC refused to say whether Dame Asha would keep the money herself or give it to the college.

 

IfA silent on support for board member Dame Asha following resignation

The Institute for Apprenticeships has refused to say if it is backing its board member Dame Asha Khemka, after she resigned from West Nottinghamshire College on Monday.  

The former principal was one of just two FE college leaders appointed to the IfA’s board in January last year.

FE Week reported on Monday that she had stepped down from the top job at WNC following a “special meeting of the board of governors” held “in light of the current challenges faced by the college”.

It was forced to go to the Education and Skills Funding Agency in July for a £2.1 million bailout, just 48 hours before it would have run out of cash.

Despite this, the IfA has so far remained silent about Dame Asha’s position on its board – despite numerous enquiries.

However, its website still lists her as one of 10 board members.

According to the job advert for the role, advertised by the former Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in June 2016, applicants should be “senior figures with expertise in business, employer representatives, academics, and other senior representatives with expertise in particular aspects of apprenticeships and skills”.

Dame Asha is also a member of the Cabinet Office’s education honours committee, which is responsible for reviewing honours nominations for people involved in education.

This is a fixed-term position, and the Cabinet Office has confirmed she will remain in post until her contract expires.

Dame Asha was one of the most highly-paid principals in the FE sector, with a remuneration package worth £262,000 in 2016/17.

In addition she received £15,000 a year for her role on the IfA board. Following her appointment last year, a spokesperson for WNC refused to say whether Dame Asha would keep the money herself or give it to the college.

The college has hit financial troubles in the past year.

Earlier this year WNC blamed changes in apprenticeship subcontracting rules, which reduced their income from management fees, for having to cut more than 100 jobs in an effort to make £2.7 million in savings.

Board minutes from April say the college was running low on reserves which were below the £9 million set in its banking covenants. 

The minutes also reveal the college’s worryingly low cash days – the number of days an organisation can continue to pay its operating expenses given the amount of cash available.

For colleges these are benchmarked by the FE Commissioner at 25 but they sat at just 11 for WNC, according to the minutes.

The college’s accounts for 2016/17 have yet to be published.

Crisis-hit 3aaa up for quick sale – with government support

Beleaguered apprenticeship giant Aspire Achieve Advance has put itself up for sale with the government’s backing.

The decision has been made following a suspension on its recruitment while an Education and Skills Funding Agency investigation is carried out into the company’s achievement rates.

It is the second government investigation into the provider in the last two years.

The company, commonly known as 3aaa, has hired accountancy firm BDO to seek potential bidders.


READ MORE: DfE’s damning ‘Project Vanilla’ investigation into 3aaa

An “investment opportunity” document, code named ‘Project Alphabet’, has been obtained by FE Week and notes the deadline for indicative offers is tomorrow at 5pm.

3aaa finalised a significant cash loan of around £5 million in April from Beechbrook Capital.

FE Week understands that one reason for the sale is because the terms of that loan have been broken and the lender wants to claim their money.

It is also understood that the ESFA is supportive of the sale on the basis that its co-founders, Peter Marples and Di McEvoy-Robinson (pictured), will not benefit from it financially.

FE Week approached Beechbrook and a spokesperson said the firm is not prepared to comment other than to say: “As a lender, we remain fully supportive of 3aaa and we wish to see the business continuing to deliver the excellent services it has done in the past.”

BDO’s investment opportunity document states: “Reason For Sale: The ESFA has placed a temporary block on new learners whilst an investigation is undertaken in to achievement rates, prompting the shareholders to seek an exit.

“The investigation relates to a period under the stewardship of the previous management team, which has now been removed from the business.

“A new management team is in-situ and the business is well positioned to deliver an improvement in business performance.

“Alphabet is in pro-active dialogue with the ESFA with a view to lifting the learner block in the shortest period possible.

“The ESFA’s priority is continuity of learning for learners.”

Alphabet is in pro-active dialogue with the ESFA with a view to lifting the learner block in the shortest period possible

The document says 3aaa is a “highly accredited and underlying robust business with new management in place focussed on driving material forecast growth driven by established, high margin, level 3 and 4 course delivery”.

It has an “experienced management team” and circa 500 “highly skilled employees” operating from its national network of training academies.

The document added: “Learners on programme are split across circa 1,700 active customers with circa 1,500 non levy clients and circa 165 levy customers.”

For the year ending 2019 its turnover is £26.6 million.

The ESFA’s current investigation into 3aaa was sparked earlier this year when a whistleblower approached the agency with new claims about its business.

Owing to this, Ofsted declared its latest inspection of the provider, which was expected to result in another ‘outstanding’ rating, as incomplete in June.

Mr Marples and Ms McEvoy-Robinson, who set up 3aaa in 2008, resigned from their roles as the company’s chief executive and main director respectively in September.

The provider was then suspended from recruiting apprentices, but FE Week later revealed that senior employees had been “instructed” to tell its staff to not date any paperwork for “planned enrolments”.

Last week FE Week revealed that 3aaa was subject to a separate government investigation in 2016 which found dozens of funding and success rate “overclaims”. Despite this, it was given a £7 million apprenticeships contract increase in that year.

3aaa had the largest allocation for non-levy apprenticeships last year at nearly £22 million. Its overall ESFA allocations totalled more than £31 million.

 

Decision on management apprenticeship funding bands delayed following employers’ appeal

Three controversial management standards are not among those to have their final funding bands confirmed by the Institute for Apprenticeships today, after the employer group behind them lodged an appeal.

Details of the funding bands for 12 of the 31 standards involved in the IfA’s review, which began in May, were published today following sign-off by the education secretary Damian Hinds.

These did not include the level six chartered manager degree apprenticeship, the level five operations departmental manager nor the level three team leader/ supervisor standard.

All three, which between them accounted for almost 20,000 starts in the first nine months of 2017/18, were set to have their funding rates slashed by between £500 and £5,000 following the review, as reported by FE Week in August.

However, the employer group behind them launched an appeal against the recommendations.

More than 150 employers, including retail giant Tesco, joined forces in late August to protest against the “extensive and highly-damaging cuts”.

The all signed an online appeal, led by the Chartered Management Institute, urging the IfA and the Department for Education to “undertake a full and transparent economic and social impact assessment” before making any final decision.

It’s unclear whether the appeal has been successful.

A spokesperson for the CMI told FE Week in late September that the employer group had formally appealed to the IfA against its recommendations, but was unable to say when a decision was expected.

FE Week has approached the CMI for an update.

According to documents seen by FE Week in August, the IfA’s recommendation for the chartered manager standard was to cut its funding from £27,000 to £22,000.

The level five operational/departmental manager standard is facing a cut from £9,000 to £7,000, while the level three team leader/ supervisor standard is set to be capped at £4,500 – down from £5,000.

The team leader/ supervisor standard is the most popular to date, with 12,080 starts in the first nine months of 2017/18, while the operational/ departmental manager is the fourth most popular with 5,530 starts over the same time period.

And there have been 1,750 starts on the level six standard, making it the most popular degree apprenticeship.

The funding band review was launched in May by the IfA at the request of the DfE.

Its aim is to “help make sure that employers can access high quality apprenticeships and that funding bands represent good value for money for employers and government”.

Any recommendations from the review are subject to possible appeal by the employer group followed by final sign-off by Mr Hinds.

Once confirmed any increases will take effect from October 6, while any decreases will come into effect from January 1.