A training provider in Somerset that found itself at the sharp end of the adult education budget debacle has unsurprisingly won a special procurement worth £2.6 million to deliver “community learning services”.

The Education and Skills Funding Agency launched a tender specifically for the area in May following a campaign by Somerset Skills and Learning, which rallied local MPs for more funding after it faced losing 97 per cent of its AEB.

A government update published today said the winning organisation of the procurement has now been confirmed, and SS&L told FE Week it was the provider to come out on top.

However, the ESFA has since revealed that SS&L was the only bidder in the tender, despite it being a “transparent and fair process”.

The past year has been extremely traumatic, with the loss of over 150 valued staff members, but we kept our resolve

“We are absolutely delighted to have been successful in the recent tender for community learning provision in Somerset,” said chief executive Susie Simon-Norris.

“This funding was cut completely in August 2017 and we have worked tirelessly to get this money back to Somerset where it belongs, and back to SS&L. 

“We are very proud of the work that we do with a range of partners in Somerset, supporting those most in need, and we are now looking forward to working with these partners in 2018-19.   

“The past year has been extremely traumatic, with the loss of over 150 valued staff members, but we kept our resolve and were determined not to give up.”

But today’s news won’t sit well with everyone in the sector.

Demands for fairness and reform to the procurement process were made in May, prompted by the apparent special treatment for Somerset.

Robert Halfon, chair of the influential education select committee, said: “This does open a potential Pandora’s box in procurement, in that there are other procurement injustices in other parts of the country.”

Mark Dawe, boss of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, added that “whatever has been done for Somerset should be available to all AEB providers”.

“We need to see fairness and transparency,” he demanded.

Community learning consists of courses that are typically “unaccredited and can be undertaken for their own sake or as a step towards other learning/training”, usually funded through the AEB.

It’s believed to be the first time that the ESFA has run a procurement process specifically for this type of provision.

It was on offer only to a provider with a turnover of at least £2 million per year for the past three years “in order to ensure the provider is able to deliver the required volume of services”.

This limited the number of providers eligible to bid for the contract, and it has now come to light that SS&L was the only provider to take part in the procurement.

“The ESFA conducted a transparent and fair process and the Invitation to Tender document was open to all providers who were able to demonstrate they could meet the specific service requirements in Somerset,” a Department for Education spokesperson said.

We are absolutely delighted to have been successful in the recent tender

SS&L has battled for more cash since last year’s AEB tender fiasco, which saw independent training providers bid for a share of just £110 million for adult education.

Its initial allocation of £111,000 represented just three per cent of the £3.4 million it received in 2016-17. 

Following a campaign to lobby MPs and ministers, the ESFA made a partial U-turn on funding for providers that saw SS&L receive 75 per cent of its previous allocation on a “transitional basis”.

Nonetheless, it was still forced to close centres and make redundancies. 

FE Week reported in January that representatives from the provider were set to meet with ESFA officials to argue the case for more cash, claiming that Somerset was the only county in England not to get a major grant in the tender process.

Originally funded through Somerset county council, in 2015 SS&L was encouraged by the government to transition to a private provider. Had it stayed part of the council, it would not have been forced to take part in this bidding round, as local authorities are outside the public procurement regulations.

Photo caption: From left: David Warburton, MP for Somerton and Frome, James Heappey, MP for Wells, Anne Milton, apprenticeships and skills minister, Rebecca Pow, MP for Taunton Deane, and Marcus Fysh, MP for Yeovil

The skills minister is expecting a “slow take-up” when T-levels are launched, and admitted that as a parent she would tell her children to “leave it a year” before studying a brand new qualification.

Anne Milton left one member of the commons education committee “staggered” by her comments on the post-16 technical qualifications during an accountability hearing this morning.

Lucy Powell, the MP for Manchester Central, quizzed the minister on the tight timescale for rolling out the first three T-levels by 2020.

“The specifications [for the first three] won’t be ready until the spring, which is around six months before they’re actually being taught,” she said.

If somebody said to me your children can do this new qualification I would say ‘leave it a year’

“As a parent I wouldn’t understand why anyone in the autumn before would choose to do those T-levels. I don’t think that is a realistic timeframe, do you?”

Ms Milton admitted that the qualifications will be “landing on very fertile ground” and while she “doesn’t underestimate the challenge”, the 2020 timetable is “possible”.

“Parents have got to buy into this for their young people,” she said.

“The job of persuading parents to take on a new qualification is always quite tough and we know not huge numbers will do it in the first instance.”

Ms Milton then admitted: “I’m a parent of four children; if somebody said to me your children can do this new qualification, I would say ‘leave it a year’.

“Instinctively that is what parents will do.”

Her honesty left James Frith, the MP for Bury North, “staggered”.

“I find your comments there quite remarkable that you envisage a moment where you yourself consider what is best for your children and you would say ‘leave it there’ in regard to the qualifications that you are responsible for delivering and launching,” he said.

“Why shouldn’t every other parent of the children considering what they should do next also say ‘leave it here’ when the minister responsible for launching them [T-levels] doesn’t think they would be right for your children?”

Ms Milton attempted to backtrack.

“I probably made the mistake in using my own personal experience to emphasise the point that all parents are always wary of new qualifications,” she said.

“I know that take-up will be low in the first years. It was probably a mistake to use my own personal experiences but I do know we have to do a very good job of making sure parents and the providers understand these are a qualification like no other that has been done.

“It will take a while to convince both young people and their parents that actually these are a cut above.”

For the minister responsible for the launch to also say ‘leave it here’, I am staggered by that

The minister added that there would be a low take-up of T-levels whatever year they were started.

“If you took five years putting these in place there would always be a low take-up for a new qualification inevitably; it would never be great,” she said.

“Parents are naturally and understandably cautious.”

Mr Frith concluded by saying: “For the minister responsible for the launch to also say ‘leave it here’, I am staggered by that.”

Gordon Marsden, Labour’s shadow skills minister, said he was astounded by Ms Milton’s revelation.

“It’s astounding that the minister doesn’t have confidence in her own government’s flagship education policy,” he said.

“It is not acceptable for there to be one rule for the government, and another for everyone else.”

University and College Union general secretary Sally Hunt was also shocked.

“When the minister in charge of T-levels has said she wouldn’t want her own children taking one up in their first year, and the department’s permanent secretary has publicly called for their delay, it is probably time for the government to take stock,” she said.

Ofqual’s recent four-week consultation on T-levels, which was branded “ridiculous” by Meg Hillier, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, was also brought up by Ms Powell as an example of tight timescales for delivering on the 2020 timetable.

Ms Milton said she thinks it is an “ambitious” deadline, but added: “I don’t think it is too short”.

Today’s debate about T-levels timescales follows a rare ministerial direction from the education secretary in May, when Damian Hinds refused his own permanent secretary’s request to delay the initial rollout of T-levels until 2021.

Battle lines have officially been drawn by the Federation of Awarding Bodies, after it outlined its intention to launch a judicial review of the government’s T-level implementation plans.

The legal action began with a letter sent to the Department for Education and the Institute for Apprenticeships yesterday setting out FAB’s grounds, following a unanimous decision by the federation’s board.

FE Week understands the judicial review will challenge on three areas: irrational (timescales), unreasonable (lack of proper engagement on the single provider model) and unfair (has a disproportionate impact on the awarding sector).

It comes after FAB chief executive Tom Bewick first revealed to FE Week that the organisation was considering a legal challenge following market engagement events with the DfE last month, which left awarding organisations (AOs) fuming.

It is highly regrettable that we feel the need to take these steps

“It is highly regrettable that we feel the need to take these steps. It seems the government is simply not willing to listen to a chorus of concerns about its T-level implementation plans,” said Paul Eeles, the chair of the FAB board.

“FAB is advancing several grounds of legal challenge to the approach being taken by the DfE (and IfA) to the ‘wave 1’ T-level procurement process.

“The rationale for the timescales being pursued by the DfE (and IfA) does not add up. It is unclear whether these bodies even have the powers they need to act as they intend.

“Further, the ongoing uncertainty around numerous matters that are essential to bid preparation will make it impossible for some AOs to participate in the procurement process, will dissuade other AOs from participating, and will significantly disadvantage those AOs that do decide to participate.

“The single-provider model has, moreover, been adopted without proper stakeholder engagement, regardless of the duties owed by the DfE (and IfA), and irrespective of the serious implications for the sector.”

Mr Eeles continued: “Ultimately, our concerns come down to the future job prospects of the 30,000 learners who will be invited to enrol in the first wave of the T-level programme.

“We can’t afford a rushed process that could result in a whole generation of people being let down in the same way that those who took 14-19 diplomas were prior to 2010.

“Of course we are four-square behind the government in wanting to introduce a genuinely world-class technical qualification. But the desire to meet a politically driven timescale of September 2020 should not come at the expense of the capacity of the education and awarding system to respond adequately.”

The proposed legal action comes after AOs wanting to deliver the new qualifications were left enraged at “market engagement” events last month, over the commercial terms to which they will have to agree.

They believe, among other things, that their ownership of the content they will have developed will be limited.

We can’t afford a rushed process that could result in a whole generation of people being let down

“Other proposed aspects of the ‘wave 1’ procurement process (including around co-branding and intellectual property rights) remain unresolved and may well give rise to further concerns,” Mr Eeles said today.

“These are being kept under review.”

The debate over rushed timescales has raged on in recent weeks.

Ofqual’s four-week consultation on T-levels at the end of term was branded “ridiculous” by Meg Hillier, chair of the Public Accounts Committee.

She added that Ofqual’s short-turnaround consultation proves there is a “rush to deliver a government policy, regardless of whether it works, and that is not sensible”.

And just yesterday skills minister Anne Milton made the national papers after admitting that as a parent she would tell her children to “leave it a year” before studying a brand new qualification like T-levels.

It all follows a rare ministerial direction from the education secretary in May, when Damian Hinds refused his own permanent secretary’s request to delay the initial rollout of T-levels until 2021.

Mr Eeles said his organisation “stands ready to engage in constructive talks with the government about ways it could improve its T-level implementation plans”.

The letter is the first step in the judicial review process. The government will typically now have 14 days to respond.

A feisty commons education select committee meeting, held this morning, saw Anne Milton quizzed on a number of pressing FE topics.

The skills minister offered a few outlandish opinions while updating MPs on her progress in areas such as funding and subcontracting.

FE Week has the main findings:

 

1. Milton may ask colleges to justify discrepancies in leader and staff pay

 

The University and College Union is currently battling with the Association of Colleges to increase staff pay – but is coming up against roadblocks.

Ms Milton said this row was not for her to “personally decide” but she admitted the “discrepancy” between staff and leaders’ pay is “quite uncomfortable”.

She would “look to do a similar thing” in colleges as was done at schools, where the government is asking academy trust chief executives to justify excessive pay.

“One wants to give people rewards for a complex job but it needs to be proportionate when money is tight,” she said.

“If your salary is way in excess of the workforce, who haven’t had a pay rise in quite some time, you need to ask yourself as a principal what that says about how you value your workforce.”

 

2. She is “constantly” fighting Treasury for more funding – but she’s unsure how much to ask for

 

The skills minister admitted that FE funding has “fallen against other sectors”, and that is why her department is reviewing its “sustainability” – the outcome of which will inform the amount requested from the Exchequer.

“It is incumbent of the minister in this role, and I take it very seriously on all occasions, to point out that if we want a workforce with the skills we need then we need to give it the attention it needs,” she said.

“Those discussions [for more funding] are ongoing with the Treasury at the moment about how much we need. Our sustainability programme on FE is going to inform the figures that we put to Treasury.”

The outcome date for the sustainability review is not yet known.

 

3. The minister is hesitant to introduce a cap on management fees

 

Ms Milton admitted subcontracting is in her list of “top six issues” that she is dealing with after being read out the FE Week analysis that showed that last year more than 10 providers charged average management fees of more than 30 per cent.

Asked if she would introduce a management fee cap, she said, “I hesitate, because how would you assess what that limit should be and for what?”.

“You would have to categorise all of the different levels of work the prime contractor did and put a price on that. That would not be that easy because the sector is so variable.

“I don’t know whether there should be a limit or that all subcontracted contracts should be looked at, where there will be a level above which you might investigate further.”

 

4. Still no movement on subsidised apprentice travel

 

In their 2017 party manifesto, the Conservatives committed to cutting travel costs for apprentices.

Ms Milton had previously told the committee she expected to come back with “good news” on this issue.

Her expectation did not become reality.

“I wish I had good news,” she said. “This is in the hands of the Department for Transport. I have met the minister responsible and they have done their first stage of work and are now doing their second stage and will report later this year.

“I don’t know when the government will make an announcement on it.”

Ian Mearns, the MP for Gateshead, was “really disappointed in this answer”.

“Unless there is intervention from the DfE to make sure students can get to their work placements or colleges, those students will not be able to access the tuition they so desperately need,” he said.

 

5. Milton STILL hasn’t met with the IfA’s apprentice panel

 

In May, Ms Milton admitted she had not met with the Institute for Apprenticeships’ panel of apprentices more than 12 months after it was established.

Asked if she has finally met them, the minister said: “No, but I think I have a date in my diary.”

She added that she meets “hundreds” of other apprentices and there is “nothing quite as powerful as the experience of someone who has done it”.

 

6. She’s open to introducing more “flexibilities” in the levy

 

The minister said she is currently going through the apprenticeship levy “sector by sector to see what changes would make it more usable for employers”.

She said her department has introduced “some flexibilities” – such as allowing employers to transfer 10 per cent of their levy funds to multiple businesses – and she will “continue to introduce some [flexibilities] if they help ensure that the levy is spent on the purpose for which it was intended”.

 

7. 147 former Carillion apprentices are expected to be “lost” from the skills system

 

A total of 1,148 apprentice bricklayers, carpenters and builders suddenly found themselves out of work when the outsourcing giant Carillion went into liquidation in January.

Ms Milton told the committee that 147 of those trainees are currently “disengaged” with finding new work or training “despite numerous target attempts”.

“There will have to be a point where we no longer target them because you can’t go on,” she said.

“I don’t think we’ve met that point yet but we will have to. It is very disappointing and demonstrates the tragedy for learners when a company like Carillion goes under, because we have lost some young people and we can’t afford to lose anybody.”

 

8. “Leave it a year” before starting T-levels

 

In probably her most shocking statement, Ms Milton said she wouldn’t encourage her children to study the new T-level qualifications in their first year.

“I’m a parent of four children. If somebody said to me your children can do this new qualification, I would say ‘leave it a year’,” she said.

You can read the full article here.

The recent sale of Learndirect Apprenticeships Ltd is causing some of its large levy-paying customers to take their business elsewhere, FE Week has learned.

William Hill, the world’s biggest bookmaker, has signalled its intention to look for alternative providers to train their apprentices.

It is understood that the betting company may transfer its business to PeoplePlus Group, the firm that recently had a purchase offer for Learndirect rejected before poaching 22 of its staff.

Lloyds Banking, which owns Learndirect’s former owners Lloyds Development Capital, may also be moving away from LDA after it put its business out to tender.

The news follows a whirlwind series of events in which Learndirect and LDA were sold to Dimensions Training Solutions – a training provider that is part of new owner Wayne Janse van Rensburg’s other business, Stonebridge College Group – just days after a deal with PeoplePlus fell through in June.

In light of the recent sale of LDA Ltd, we are currently reviewing our relationship with them

“In light of the recent sale of LDA Ltd, we are currently reviewing our relationship with them as one of our apprenticeship training providers,” said a William Hill spokesperson.

“Our commitment to apprenticeships continues and we are focused on ensuring the best possible learning experience for our colleagues.”

Lloyds Banking currently has 1,100 learners on apprenticeship programmes with LDA. The group confirmed these apprentices will continue to be trained by the provider until their programme is complete.

But its contract comes to an end in December, and its future business has now been put out to tender.

However, LDA has been invited to tender along with four other unnamed training providers.

“As our existing contract with LDA comes to an end in December 2018 we have recently commenced the tendering exercise for the delivery of these apprenticeship programmes from 2019,” a Lloyds Banking spokesperson said.

“The successful bidder will begin delivering apprenticeship programmes for new learners from January 2019.”

It will be a kick in the teeth to LDA if it fails to win the contract, given that it was effectively owned by Lloyds Banking until just a few weeks ago.

Mr Janse van Rensburg accepts that some Learndirect employers may have been put off staying with the company and admitted that delivery hasn’t been the “best” it could have been. However, he is urging them to stay put by reassuring them that the “ship is steady”.

“I acknowledge that our employers were rattled by the news [of the sale],” he told FE Week.

I acknowledge that our employers were rattled by the news

“Part of what I have been doing is going to see our employers large and small to re-engage with them, communicating what has happened and reassuring them that the ship is steady.”

“If I’m honest I’m not entirely sure we were providing the service to the best of our abilities previously anyway,” he added.

“It is my job now to work tirelessly to convince these employers that under my stewardship they will receive a level of satisfactory service that both they and their apprentices require.”

He also thinks decisions to take business away from LDA were “notwithstanding the changes that have happened” – referring to the news that following Mr Janse van Rensburg’s acquisition, 22 Learndirect staff, including its managing director and three other senior executives, resigned to work for PeoplePlus.

Speaking specifically about the situation with Lloyds, the new owner said it was always known that their apprenticeships business would be put out to tender.

“We’re putting a bid in and hope to win it,” he said. “I think we have a very good relationship with Lloyds and have provided great results.”

But in terms of William Hill he is “unaware” of what conversations have been had.

Two other large employers who together make up half of all LDA business – Marks & Spencer and the Co-op – have, however, given Mr Janse van Rensburg some good news by committing to continuing working with the provider.

“We have an award-winning apprentice programme and we remain focused on delivering to our 734 apprentices alongside our current partner LDA,” a Co-op spokesperson said.

M&S added that it is continuing to work with LDA, but that it reviews all contract relationships as per its normal working practice.