Why is the sector celebrating greater dependence on the public purse?

In the past, the government paid 50 per cent of the costs towards the training of apprentices aged 19 and over.

This rose to 67 per cent during the trailblazer pilot, then it rose again to 90 per cent in May 2017 once the new system was rolled out across England.

Now, to stimulate more demand from smaller employers, it is to rise to 95 per cent, in a surprise policy change announced by the Treasury this week.

In practice, this means employers will be contributing just five per cent of the costs towards apprentices for all new and existing staff, at all levels from two to seven.

Mark Dawe, the chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers was “ecstatic” at the decision.

It certainly is a significant concession, although AELP had been campaigning for the complete scrapping of employer fees and only at level two and three.

My own view is that reducing employer fees just 18 months into the programme is a mistake for four reasons:

1. Most providers admit that the employer co-investment requirement isn’t the biggest problem holding back starts. When surveyed, just 14 per cent of delegates at the AELP autumn conference this week said it was the biggest problem, compared with 37 per cent for the off-the-job training requirement. And, where fees are found to be holding back starts, what evidence is there that halving a £500 fee to £250 would change employer behaviour?

2. Tinkering with the co-investment fee damages the benefits of stability in the system, something most in the sector claim to want. It sends the message that, if employers hold out a little longer, the government will simply drop the fee all together.

3. Shifting the funding balance further away from fees in this way makes providers more dependent on public money for survival. Surely no business would want more eggs in that basket at present? It’s also forcing providers to turn away income from fees to be replaced with government funds, something the National Audit Office calls “dead weight”.

4. Management courses for existing staff become even cheaper for employers. For example, an £18,000 MBA employer fee will fall from £1,800 to just £900. Nobody can explain to me why the public paying the remaining £17,100 is good value for money. If the ESFA wants to be sure a fee cut will stimulate demand, they should simply pilot it at the lower levels in sectors with a high proportion of small employers, such as hospitality and childcare. It would also be wise, as with most price cuts designed to stimulate sales, to call it a promotional offer that lasts for a limited period.

There are also critical details about the fee cut that have yet to be determined.

Such as when it would apply from and whether it would include levy-paying employers without funds in their account.

Employers should be willing to pay for high-quality training and history has shown that virtually giving it away has never ended well.

Ofsted boss backs calls for more 16-to-18 cash to combat falling standards

Ofsted’s chief inspector has offered her “strong view” that 16-to-18 funding should be increased in the forthcoming spending review, after inspections found a lack of cash has directly led to falling standards in FE.

Amanda Spielman (pictured) backed sector calls for more money in a letter to the Public Accounts Committee, dated October 30, which talked about what Ofsted considers to be “major risks” to the quality of education.

She said that while it “is true to say that spending per pupil in primary and secondary schools has increased significantly in real terms since the early 1990s”, the same is “not true for further education and skills spending”.

The chief inspector then reiterated her view that the “real-term cuts to FES funding are affecting the sustainability and quality of FES provision”, but for the first time said this was now “based on our inspection evidence”, and called on the government to take action.

“My strong view is that the government should use the forthcoming spending review to increase the base rate for 16 to 18 funding,” she concluded.

Ms Spielman’s remarks follow disappointment across the sector that this week’s Budget from chancellor Phillip Hammond offered no more funding for FE.

This was despite a national ‘Colleges Week’ campaign, which involved a march on parliament, and the launch of the ‘Raise the Rate’ campaign. Both called for an initial funding increase for sixth form education of £200 per student.

FE Week asked Ofsted for the evidence the chief inspector was referring to in her letter. The watchdog pointed us towards three reports – one from 2016, which rated the college as‘outstanding’, and two from 2015, where both providers were rated ‘good’.

All three spoke briefly about stretched resources, but none actually said quality had reduced because of funding issues.

“Individual inspection reports may not detail examples where quality has been directly affected by funding as that is not part of the framework,” a spokesperson said.

“However the chief inspector’s comments are based on the aggregation of our inspection evidence, our published reports and our insights.”

She added: “Many colleges are in a fragile financial situation, as reflected by the number that are currently in financial intervention or receiving exceptional financial support.

“Over time our evidence shows that many colleges have reduced the teaching time allocated to some programmes of study, reduced the number of teaching and/or support staff employed, reduced the number of courses offered and reduced the amount of enrichment or extracurricular activity provided. These measures all have an impact on the
provision offered.”

Ms Spielman has previously admitted that colleges “have the biggest funding challenge” and said that Ofsted has seen “disappointing outcomes” in FE.

During her speech at the launch of the Ofsted annual report in December 2017, she said that the “sector will continue to struggle” without an increase in the base rate funding for this age group.

The report showed that the overall ratings at general FE colleges plummeted for the third year running, and that just 69 per cent of them were rated ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ in 2017.

The sector can expect Ms Spielman to say more on the struggles that FE is facing because of a lack of funding in Ofsted’s forthcoming annual report for 2018, which is due out on December 4.

A report from the Institute of Fiscal Studies last month found government funding for 16-to 18-year-olds has been cut “much more sharply” than funding for pupils in pre-school, primary, secondary or higher education.

The base rate for all 16-18-year-old students has been cut twice since 2010 and frozen at £4,000 per student, per year since 2013.

The ‘Raise the Rate’ campaign, led by the Sixth Form Colleges Association, wants funding to increase to £4,760 per student in the spending review, which is taking place next year.

Principal steps down at college group to ‘expedite’ government bailout

The head of a college in severe financial trouble has resigned from his post with immediate effect to “expedite” its government bailout.

An email, seen by FE Week, was sent to staff at Cornwall College Group yesterday announcing that the board of governors had accepted the resignation of Raoul Humphreys (pictured).

It is understood that an all staff meeting will take place today.

The email, from chair of the board Ian Tunbridge, said Mr Humphreys has “led the college through a challenging time to a point where its finances are significantly improved”, and thanked him for his “unstinting commitment”.

It also included a message from Mr Humphreys, who has been at the college for 24 years and took over as principal and chief executive in April 2017, who said he was “proud of the contribution that I have made in leading the college’s recent financial recovery and getting close to finalising a re-financing package through the Fresh Start programme.

“To expedite this process, I have decided to step down with immediate effect to allow a new team to implement the next phase of the college’s development.”

Mr Humphreys took over the top job following the resignation of the former principal Amarjit Basi in July 2016. Mr Basi received a pay out of over £200,000 when he left his post, despite his premiership being plagued by troubles including financial warnings from the government and staff redundancies.

Cornwall College Group received £3.5 million in emergency government funding in December 2017, after it ended the year with £2.25 million less in the bank than planned, and ahead of an application to the restructuring facility. The year before, in 2016/17, it also received £4.5 million in exceptional financial support, although the board’s annual report in July 2017 said this was all paid back.

In March 2017, the area review report for the south west said: “With regard to financial sustainability, this college is not currently viable or resilient, with weak solvency and forecast operating deficits for the duration of the financial plan to 2019/20. The ‘fresh start’ approach will provide the means to support accelerated recovery and move gradually and securely towards the key benchmarks.”

The fresh start approach was recommended to a number of colleges after area reviews, or as a result of FE commissioner interventions. The process means that colleges must commit to significantly changing their business or operating model, and the process can include a change in senior leadership.

Mr Humphreys is the seventh in a series of high profile resignations across the college sector since September 25.

He follows out the door Birmingham Metropolitan College’s Andrew Cleaves, West Notts principal Dame Asha Khemka, NCG group’s Joe Docherty, RNN group’s John Connolly, principal of Peterborough Regional College Terry Jones, and Maria Thompson from Havering College at the end of September.

 

Head of post-18 review remains tight-lipped after budget offers no ‘little extras’ for FE

The chair of the government’s post-18 education review remained tight-lipped on whether it will result in more funding for the sector, after yesterday’s budget offered no “little extras” for FE.

Speaking at today’s Association of Employment and Learning Providers autumn conference in Manchester, Philip Augar (pictured) said his “first obligation is to report to the government” on any possible funding changes.

He was responding to a question from AELP boss Mark Dawe, who asked whether the review was looking at whether funding – whether in the form of levy cash or loans – should be available to all post-18 learners regardless of the route they take.

“I don’t really want to go to any detail about where any funding will be best placed,” Mr Augar said.

“If we do have anything to say on that probably the first person to know about that will be the government,” he added.

Mr Augar’s remarks follow disappointment across the sector that yesterday’s Budget, announced by chancellor Philip Hammond, offered no more funding for FE – particularly as he did offer schools £400 million for the “little extras”.

This was despite a national ‘Colleges Week’ campaign, which involved a march on parliament, and the launch of the ‘Raise the Rate campaign. Both called for an initial funding increase for sixth form education of £200 per student.

“The Treasury’s plans do not address the big challenges of falling investment, front-loaded spending and major skills shortages”, said David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges.

“We can only hope that Department for Education and Treasury address these in the 2019 spending review.”

“The chancellor has once again missed the opportunity to provide schools and colleges with the funding they need to continue delivering the high quality, internationally-competitive education our young people deserve,” said James Kewin, deputy chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges’ Association.

“Spending on further and adult education has already fallen by £3.3 billion in real terms,” said Gordon Marsden, shadow skills minister.

The budget has “made it clear that the prime minister’s promise to end austerity will not extend to colleges,” he added.

The post-18 review is expected to conclude and report back to the government in early 2019, Mr Augar told today’s conference.

The review panel is “looking to identify enablers that will help the system to adjust to the needs of the economy,” he said.

“We’re looking for drivers. We’re looking for levers. We’re looking for ways to ensure that funding is accurately provided.”

Any solution the review came up with was likely to be “blended”, both in terms of the type of learning and the type of provider.

“There is a room and a climate for all types of provider in the skills space – HE, FE, independent provider,” he said.

The review would be commenting on apprenticeships but in a way that would be “smoothing the flow and going with the grain”.

The “last thing” the apprenticeship system needed was “another review steaming in with another set of recommendations”, he said.

Damning Ofsted visit brands special needs charity’s apprenticeships ‘inadequate’

A charity which supports people with special needs has been rated ‘inadequate’ in every category in a damning Ofsted report, after inspectors found apprentices were not released from their job roles to complete training.

Creative Support has been heavily criticised by the inspectorate, which warned the provision offered by the nation-wide employer provider “does not meet the objectives or requirements of apprenticeships”.

The report said that since October 2016, when the charity began to offer adult care apprenticeships, approximately one third of apprentices have left the company without completing the programme and most make “slow” progress and do not “sufficiently” develop occupational skills.

Leaders have also “failed to ensure that service managers release apprentices from their job roles” for their off-the-job training during work time.

As it has been rated ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted, Creative Support will now be removed from the register of apprenticeship training providers and banned from delivering its own apprenticeships.

A spokesperson for the charity said it was “disappointed” by the outcome of its first Ofsted inspection, and that going forward it would be “working with carefully selected external agencies to deliver apprenticeships”.

She added: “We are currently reviewing the findings and we are in the process of putting an improvement plan in place.

“Our priority is to ensure that our current cohort of highly-valued apprentices have a positive experience for the duration of their programme and can demonstrate good learning outcomes.”

Creative Support, which offers a range of services including supported living, residential care and home support and operates across 65 local authorities, had 85 employees on its apprenticeship programmes when it was inspected on September 25.

The report, which was published today, said that “too often, apprentices do not have the English and maths skills needed to support them effectively in their job roles” and described assessors’ reviews of apprentices’ progress as “weak”.

“Assessors do not check sufficiently apprentices’ depth of understanding and knowledge,” the report said.

“When apprentices cannot answer questions well enough, assessors too quickly assume that this is due to apprentices’ anxiety rather than their limited understanding of the topic. Too few assessors have high expectations of apprentices’.”

It warned that “too many apprentices” were not on the appropriate level of programme, and “most” are “unclear” about when they are due to complete, and said the standard of apprentices’ work was “not good enough”, including some having an “inaccurate understanding of their responsibility for risk assessments in care settings.”

Most apprentices have already been working for several years in their jobs, and inspectors found that they do not develop enough new work-related behaviours from their training.

“At best, they deepen their existing knowledge and at worst they develop no new skills,” the report said.

Ofsted said the provider must “as a matter of urgency” implement effective governance arrangements to allow trustees to challenge and support leaders and managers.

They must also monitor and improve the quality of teaching and develop measures to “ensure the full commitment and effective support of service managers for their apprentices’ training”, including releasing them for off-the-job training during work time and attending progress review meetings.

However, the report praised staff for promoting a “strong ethos of treating individuals fairly and respecting differences”, safeguarding is effective and apprentices “benefit significantly” from a range of additional qualifications.

Ofsted criticised the planning of the curriculum as “inadequate” and said managers do not have a “reliable and accurate” understanding of apprentices’ progress, and many do not receive their full entitlements to off-the-job training.

Quality improvement procedures were described as “not effective” and self-assessment is “not accurate”. Trustees have received “insufficient information” to understand the quality of teaching provided and as a result have “failed to hold leaders and managers to account”.

NHS trusts urged to spend apprenticeship levy faster or risk losing their funds

Health Education England has written to NHS trusts encouraging them to use or transfer their apprenticeship levy funds after finding their annual £200 million pot is not being spent fast enough.

A joint letter from HEE’s chief executive Ian Cummings and NHS Improvement’s executive director of nursing Ruth May warned that a “large amount of NHS apprenticeship levy funding remains unspent” and reiterated the importance of the NHS making “full use of its levy funds” or risking losing them.

The letter, which was sent on October 23, asked every individual NHS trust to “confirm how much you expect to spend and what is likely to remain unspent”.

It also reminded recipients of the opportunity to transfer 10 per cent of the unspent money to other organisations – which will increase to 25 per cent in April 2019 – and warned that “in the event that the transfer opportunity is not used, this money will be transferred out of the NHS, which would be a disappointing outcome”.

The NHS has previously said it will struggle to spend the £200 million apprenticeship levy payments it is shelling out annually within the 24 month timeframe that the government has set for levy-payers.

The Royal College of Nursing has also warned before that the apprenticeship route is “both costly and less efficient to the healthcare system in growing local workforce” as it takes four years to complete, as opposed to a three year university course. 

The apprenticeships levy was launched for employers with a paybill of over £3 million in April last year. They have two years to spend their levy pot on apprenticeships training, which the government hoped would boost apprenticeship starts.

In June, FE Week reported that the number of people starting an apprenticeship with the NHS had fallen by more than a third over the last two years.

The NHS is subject to a public-sector apprenticeship target, and needs to ensure at least 2.3 per cent of its workforce starts an apprenticeship every year.

In 2017/18 alone it would have needed to achieve 27,500 starts to hit this target. Instead, the health service saw just 12,611 starts last year, down 36 per cent on the 19,820 in 2015/16 and equating to just one per cent of its workforce.

This was despite a pledge from former health secretary Jeremy Hunt in 2016 to create a further 100,000 starts in the sector by 2020.

At the time, a spokesperson for HEE said the drop was “as a result of NHS organisations taking the time to implement and adapt to the new apprenticeship reforms and systems introduced in May 2017”.

The letter said it “commends NHS employer organisations for the progress achieved to date towards delivery of the NHS apprenticeship target” and recognises that a “great deal of hard work has gone into developing apprenticeship programme offers within the NHS so far”.

It added: “A large amount of NHS apprenticeship levy funding remains unspent. It is important that the NHS makes full use of its levy funds to offer high quality apprenticeship programmes, develop the workforce skills mix and build a sustainable domestic workforce for the NHS.”

A spokesperson for HEE said information about how close the NHS is to achieving its apprenticeship target will be published next month, but some trusts will not spend their full levy pot even if they achieve the target. She added that HEE does not determine how much levy each trust should spend. 

Treasury backtrack on April apprenticeship fee cut start date

The Treasury has thrown the start date into doubt for when the 10-per-cent fee that small businesses pay when they take on apprentices will be halved.

Chancellor Philip Hammond announced yesterday during his Budget speech that SMEs will only have to contribute 5 per cent to the training of their apprentices, as part of further reforms to the levy.

Later, when asked by FE Week, a Treasury spokesperson said the policy change would be from April 2019. However, he has today said this was a “misunderstanding”.

“Further details will be set out soon, including dates,” he added.

It is understood that the start date for 5 per cent contributions will be decided on by the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

When FE Week reported that the change would come into effect from April, many in the sector raised concerns because it would encourage employers to delay starts.

The change follows Mr Hammond’s announcement at the Conservative Party Conference earlier this month that the annual apprenticeship levy transfer facility will rise from 10 to 25 per cent from April 2019.

He said he will also consult with businesses about further changes to the levy from 2020, following the slow take up and employer criticisms.

ESFA reveals plans for new tougher apprenticeship provider register

The Education and Skills Funding Agency has revealed plans to tighten up rules for training providers wanting to get onto its apprenticeships register and kick off those who aren’t delivering.

Keith Smith (pictured), the agency’s director of apprenticeships, told the AELP autumn conference today that the new beefed up Register of Apprenticeship Training Providers will open “within weeks, possibly sooner” and will then stay open indefinitely.

The thousands of training providers already on there will be asked to re-apply, in segments which will be “divided into groups” over the next 12 months. These groups will be focused on risk, with “high-risk” providers having to reapply first.

There is going to be a much stronger emphasis on quality

“We want to focus the re-application process on those providers that are potentially not delivering, and on those that we think will struggle to pass our new requirements,” he said.

New questions designed to “test a provider’s ability to deliver” high standards will also be introduced.

Mr Smith added that the agency is likely to introduce a rule that throws off providers who go 12 months with no delivery after joining the register.

There will also be greater scrutiny of providers getting on RoATP. Companies will have to have traded for 12 months at least in order to be eligible for application and provide a full set of accounts to be on the register.

The ESFA will look “very closely” at the registered address of the training provider to fish out whether it is actually a business address.

It will also look at the possibility of introducing a cap on how much apprenticeship funding a provider can earn.

“We’re going to test the idea of what we call recommended funding limits,” Mr Smith said.

“All providers on the register will have a financial cap and we will determine how much they are able to earn.” The agency thinks the caps could be good to “control, not just for quality reasons, the potential size and expansion” of providers.

The three provider routes – main, employer and supporting – will remain in place.

Mr Smith concluded: “There is going to be a much stronger emphasis on quality, on delivery models and much stronger emphasis on the type of business we have operating the money.

“We would like your views on whether these plans go too far or not far enough.”

Keith Smith’s RoATP slide at the AELP conference

The changes come after FE Week has reported extensively on the problems with the application process, and discovered, for example, one-man bands with no delivery experience being given access to millions of pounds of apprenticeships funding.

And earlier this month this newspaper discovered a loophole in RoATP after a broker advertised how companies can buy their way on to it for £50,000.

The register has been closed ever since the government shut it for review in October 2017, even though it was originally meant to open every quarter, leaving many providers wanting to get on there to deliver apprenticeships frustrated.

Ofsted slate wiped clean for grade four UTC joining MAT

A university technical college rated ‘inadequate’ earlier this year will have its Ofsted slate wiped clean as it joins a multi-academy trust under a new name this week.

Medway UTC, which received the lowest possible grade from the education watchdog in May, will join The Howard Academy Trust (THAT) on November 1 as Waterfront UTC.

It’s classed as a ‘fresh start’ for the UTC according to the Department for Education.

That means it’s treated as a new school by Ofsted: its previous inspection history will be wiped, and it will have a three-year respite from further inspections.

As previously reported by FE Week, Medway UTC was already in advanced talks with THAT about joining the multi-academy trust in May, when the education watchdog’s damning report was published.

Governors were accused of having “abrogated their responsibilities for maintaining a high standard of education in the school”, according to the report, which rated the school ‘inadequate’ across the board.

There was also a “culture of low expectation across the UTC” and A-level outcomes in 2017 were “poor”.

But inspectors noted that the school had started to make improvements following a recent change in leadership.

The move to become part of THAT is part of the UTC’s “ongoing development” which is “proving very successful following our recent published results that highlight the UTC’s significant improvement”, a spokesperson said this week.

The 14 to 19 technical institution’s new name was “chosen following a consultation with students, governors, employers and THAT”.

It’s not the only UTC to have changed its name and had its Ofsted grade wiped after joining a multi-academy trust.

FE week reported in May that Sir Charles Kao UTC was re-branding as the BMAT STEM Academy, after it joined the Burnt Mill Academy Trust.

As Sir Charles Kao it was rated ‘requires improvement’ in April 2017, but as BMAT STEM Academy it has yet to be inspected.

A further four UTCs have been through the same ‘fresh start’ process after joining a MAT: UTC Plymouth, rated grade four in April 2016; UTC Swindon, rated ‘inadequate’ in January 2017; Heathrow Aviation Engineering UTC, rated grade three in February 2017; and UTC@MediaCityUK, which was rated ‘requires improvement’ following inspection in July.

And Cambridge UTC became the Cambridge Academy for Science and Technology when it joined Parkside Federation Academies in November 2017 – a change that the principal claimed was because people didn’t “know what UTC Cambridge stood for”.

But because it wasn’t a ‘fresh start’, it held onto its grade two Ofsted rating.

Of the 33 UTCs to have been inspected by Ofsted so far and that are still open, 19 – or 58 per cent – were rated less than ‘good’ at their most recent inspection.

Ten of these were grade threes, and nine were grade fours.

A further 13 were rated ‘good’, and just one was rated ‘outstanding’.