Milton ‘the fixer’: I just want to make it all work

It was exactly a year ago that we labelled the new skills minister Anne Milton “the fixer”, after she said in her speech to the AELP annual conference that she was motivated “to make it work” rather than introduce “new, bright ideas”.

So a year on and just a few days before she delivers her 2018 AELP speech, I am keen to find out what she thinks still needs fixing.

“I still stand by what I said then. I don’t really want to change anything, I just want to make it all work,” she tells me.

 

  1. The 10-per-cent co-investment

 

With a stumbling start to the apprenticeship reforms, it seems demand from small employers has taken a dive and needs fixing. Is there any truth to the suggestion that the mandatory fees introduced last May might be reversed? In other words, will she be scrapping the 10-per-cent co-investment, something AELP hopes will be announced at the conference next week?

“Well, we are keeping an open mind on anything around, in the overall of apprenticeships,” she is quick to say.

“There’s a good body of evidence out there that a contribution from somebody is important, because it requires their buy-in to what they’re getting into. Sometimes if you get something for free, on the training side of it you don’t have quite such a buy-in. So I make no promises. We’re looking at everything.”

I agree that a fee contribution is important, but I press again on whether the rumours are true and that it could be scrapped, even temporarily.

“It’s not about whether the co-investment is working”, she says. “It’s about whether that 10 per cent is a barrier. People are sending me some of their evidence. We’re looking at it.

“I think there are bigger issues for smaller businesses. I think sometimes just taking on apprentice in the first place, irrespective of the 10 per cent, feels like quite a big step for business, particularly in quite uncertain times for small business. No discussions with Treasury looking at it, holding roundtables, doing exactly what I’ve done with the larger levy-payers. You know, getting them round a table, finding out exactly what’s going on.”

So I’m left with the impression that fixing SME participation is needed, and scrapping the co-investment requirement could well be in the mix, but if any change were imminent, the minister was careful not to give that away.

 

  1. T-level implementation

 

The T-level reforms steam ahead to a 2020 roll-out, against the advice of the lead civil servant at the Department for Education. The AoC is confident that colleges are ready for wave one but its chief executive worries about delays from legal challenges during the tenders for awarding organisation licences.

“No, I’m not worried. And I’m not somebody who worries,” she is quick to fire back. “If something could go wrong, then my aim is to put in place adequate mitigation to make sure it doesn’t go wrong, and so I don’t worry. I think the DfE is doing a lot of work. I know they had some meetings with the awarding organisations and we’re listening to them and hearing what will make this work better for them.” 

And on widespread concerns over the T-level work-placement being mandatory, is there any consideration to avoid young people having a barrier in specific locations where there’s no placement? 

“No,” she insists, firmly. “It is absolutely crucial. The T-level is all about the industry placement as well as the qualification.”

 

  1. Adult education budget devolution

 

I’m keen to find out why the DfE is allowing the mayor of London to top-slice of £3 million to pay for new staff after he was denied an administration budget from the DfE. Surely she should be limiting raids on budgets like this, as it’s all being devolved?

“There are a lot of other sides to devolution and I’m actually quite in favour of this being devolved,” she says. “It will be for the mayoral authorities to work out how best they spend their funding.

“So if you devolve, you devolve. You need to talk to the Greater London Authority. It’s the upside and downside of devolution. But what I think is quite important is that you have somebody accountable for this. You have the mayor’s office. If you don’t feel that the GLA or any other of the combined authorities are spending their AEB well or if they’re taking too much of it up in admin, then you need to ask them.”

On any devolution of the AEB to other local commissioning areas, the minister makes it clear that there is “no further devolution for the moment. We’ll see how this goes. It will be very interesting to see if anything emerges from those combined areas that represents really good practice.”

 

  1. College finances and mergers

 

“A shame,” is how the minister describes FE Week’s constant references to the £700 million college restructuring fund as bailouts. “It is meant to be money to help colleges merge, get back on their feet.”

“It’s a very, very rigorous process, in which I’m closely involved actually. The FE colleges are a really important part of our mix and what we need to do, and that budget was not about bailing anybody out. It was about making sure FE colleges are sustainable and will last for the future. They’re very important parts of the education mix, so a bailout it is not.”

I end by asking about mergers and the growth of mega-colleges. What lessons are being taken from Learndirect and warnings about organisations that become too big to fail?

“Too big to fail is not an invalid point,” the minister says. “I’m very mindful of colleges being too big to fail. I think we need to watch it.

“I have to say the scrutiny and oversight on colleges at the moment is probably more intense than it has ever been, particularly bearing in mind that it is a sector that is actually independent of government. And I’m seeing some really good results emerging, but you are right to highlight the point that when any sort of group, be it independent training providers or FE colleges, gets very big, we need to have more oversight on the possible risks that emerge. There are always opportunities when something is big, because of overhead costs, but we also have to be aware of the risks as well.”

 

And finally, it’s one of the best jobs in government

 

As we wrap up what has been a pretty technical and wide-ranging interview in just 20 minutes, the minister offers me a headline.

“Do you want a headline for your article?” she asks. “It’s that I have one of the best jobs in government. I spend my life meeting enthusiastic young and older people, brilliant independent training providers, fantastic colleges. All of the things I deal with are levers of social change, and I see the young people that have benefited from the social change that they can bring about in their own lives. I just needed to say that. I didn’t say that when I was at the Department of Health.” 

ESFA apprenticeship service wins Digital Leaders Award

The Education and Skills Funding Agency’s apprenticeship service has been named as the top public service digital innovation.

The service, launched in February 2017, was named ‘Digital public service innovation of the year’ at the Digital Leaders Awards 2018, last night.

It beat other public sector organisations including the NHS and the DWP to the award, which recognises a service that has shown an innovative approach during the last year, and which has had measurable impact and outcomes.

Eileen Milner, ESFA’s chief executive, said she was “delighted” to win the award, which “recognises the hard work and determination of the apprenticeship service team, in putting the users (employers), for the first time, at the heart of our digital-led delivery”.

Over the last year over 13,000 employers have used the service, and it has supported half a million apprenticeship candidates and over 1.6 million applications, she said.

“We continue to evolve and develop the service as we learn from users, adding new features to enhance the service experience,” she added.

“It’s a real privilege to have won this award, getting recognition for the work that has gone into launching and developing the service.”

The awards, which were first launched in 2013, celebrate digital leaders across different sectors. Each year 10 favourites are shortlisted across 10 categories, to create a list of 100 digital leaders. This list is then put to the public vote, with the award judges selecting a winner from the top three in each category.

NHS apprenticeships fall by more than a third

The number of people starting an apprenticeship with the NHS has fallen by more than third over the last two years, FE Week can reveal.

Expanding the amount of NHS apprentices has been a top priority for the health secretary Jeremy Hunt (pictured above), since he pledged in 2016 to create a further 100,000 starts in the sector by 2020.

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

It had to achieve 27,500 starts in 2017/18 alone to meet this target.

But things have not gone to plan, with just 12,611 apprenticeship starts last year – 36 per cent down on the 19,820 in 2015/16.

Robert Halfon

The new figure equates to just one per cent of the NHS’ 1,205,814 workforce – meaning it fell way short the government’s public-sector target.

Robert Halfon, the chair of the Commons education committee, which held a recent hearing on the topic, said the government “urgently needs to do more to boost the number of healthcare apprentices at all levels if we are to tackle the skills shortage in the NHS”.

“I’ve spoken in Parliament of the need to expand the number of nursing apprenticeships and the education committee will examine this issue with the Department for Education and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC),” he added.

NHS apprenticeship starts have been in steep decline over the past three years.

The 19,820 achieved in 2015/16 fell by more than a fifth to 15,532 in 2016/17. Its 2017/18 figure of 12,611 represents a 19-per-cent fall on the previous year.

A spokesperson for Health Education England (HEE) said the drop is “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 DHSC said it is working directly with employers to make sure the NHS is in the best position to meet the public-sector target, but did not acknowledge Mr Hunt’s 100,000 starts pledge.

HEE is “leading the development” of a number of new health-related apprenticeship standards. As of May, 21 new standards are ready for delivery and a further 29 are in development.

One example of an NHS apprenticeship is the associate ambulance practitioner standard, which involves “responding to 999 and urgent calls, and providing emergency care for people as part of an ambulance crew”.

The government hopes degree apprenticeships will help nursing shortages across the country. It wants more trainees to enter the profession, as they receive wages while they train rather than having to pay towards the traditional degree route.

Without the flexibility in the levy, to be blunt, we are not going to get there

FE Week reported earlier this year that the majority of NHS trusts in England plan to spend their apprenticeship levy cash within the allotted timeframe – even though most have been frustrated by the policy’s “inflexibility”.

But NHS leaders have since warned its starts target will be missed without urgent reform.

“Without the flexibility in the levy, to be blunt, we are not going to get there,” Danny Mortimer, the chief executive of NHS Employers, told the Commons education committee.

He said the NHS needs longer than the standard two years to use up the £200 million apprenticeship levy payments it is shelling out annually.

Apprenticeships are a “very expensive way of training a nurse” and current Department for Education policy does not “accept the difference between a nursing degree apprenticeship and other degree apprenticeships”.

Nursing degree apprenticeships cost an additional £35,000 or £40,000 per student every year over their four-year duration.

The government’s 2.3-per-cent apprenticeships target applies public bodies with 250 or more employees and covers the period April 1 to March 31 each year.

It’s an average target across the years 2017/18 to 2020/21 to “give flexibility to organisations to manage peaks and troughs in recruitment”.

The FE commissioner is wrong: We should keep PROCAT open

The first college incorporated in years has been told to merge to survive. This is the wrong decision, according to its erstwhile principal Neil Bates.

The government continues with its much-needed reforms of technical education and skills at pace. In recent weeks, we have had the announcement of the 16 successful stage one bidders for the £140 million Institutes of Technology and the 52 T-level early adopters, a list which includes a surprisingly large number of schools, sixth forms and faith schools alongside further education colleges. The reforms are driving meaningful structural changes to the educational landscape.

The government wants a world-class education and skills system, but the evidence suggests that transforming technical education is going to be a long slog, not least because our regulatory and compliance system promotes sameness and suffocates innovation.

The recent difficulties at Prospects College of Advanced Technology (PROCAT), which I led for 30 years until I retired in 2017, are a prime example of how hard it is to change the system. 

Born out of the 1964 Industrial Training Act, the original college was one of 150 group training associations owned and run by employers. Sadly, today only around 30 GTAs survive as independent institutions. In 2014, in a landmark development, PROCAT incorporated and became the first new FE college in England since the 1992 Act. That tells you something about the rigidity of our skills system.

PROCAT was established as a new model within the sector. A college of advanced technology specialising in STEM subjects, it was governed in partnership with employers, equipped with the latest technology including digital technology, simulators and robots, and had three times more apprentices than full time students and a strong commercial income.

There to meet the local, regional and national needs of key sectors such as advanced manufacturing, defence, aviation and rail, the college helped shape the template for the new Institutes of Technology.

When I retired last year, PROCAT was the largest rail engineering apprenticeship provider in the UK. It had over 1,000 apprentices, the majority aged 16 to 19 and studying at level three or higher. We had managed to transform the curriculum from mainly level one and two provision, to having three quarters of provision at levels three to six, including new degree apprenticeships.

PROCAT is a victim of the very change it sought to promote

Hundreds of young people started their careers on higher-level STEM apprenticeships at global companies such as Atkins, Thales and Honeywell. Anyone visiting the college could not help but be impressed by the environment, which replicated a modern workplace.

The fact that the FE commissioner has concluded that the college is too small to survive independently, and so is now being driven into merger with South Essex College of Further and Higher Education, illustrates all too clearly the fault lines which remain in our skills system. It also has serious implications for the new institutes of technology, whose mission and specification are remarkably like PROCAT’s.

In many respects, PROCAT is a victim of the very change it sought to promote. The imposition of a badly thought-out levy on large employers has hugely disrupted apprenticeship recruitment. Pressure to move to new apprenticeship frameworks by slashing funding for the old standards has created change overload on an already stretched workforce. Raising the bar on entry to level three (A-level equivalent) study programmes exposed the reality in schools that they are largely ignoring the Baker Clause, a legal entitlement.

On top of this external turbulence is the almost impossible task of recruiting and properly remunerating expert technical teachers in what the FE commissioner calls “a vibrant south-east employment market” and you have the perfect storm.

If the technical education reforms are going to be a success, we need many more colleges like PROCAT – not fewer. There is no reason why a specialist college with a turnover of circa £10 million cannot survive and thrive.

What is needed is policy stability, modest amounts of capital investment to keep pace with changes to technology and sufficient funding to allow for this.

Federation of Awarding Bodies gets the lawyers in over T-levels

The Federation of Awarding Bodies is gearing up for possible legal action over T-levels following the start of a controversial tender process, FE Week can reveal.

The government launched its hunt for awarding organisations to deliver the new qualifications with two “market engagement” events earlier this month.

But AOs have been left fuming 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.

Tom Bewick, FAB’s chief executive, said the terms as they stand are “flawed” and suggest a “wholescale nationalisation of the technical qualifications industry in this country”.

Federation lawyers are currently checking the terms, Mr Bewick said, and they are considering launching legal action to try to get them changed. He has also requested an urgent meeting with Institute for Apprenticeships’ boss Sir Gerry Berragan to discuss the concerns.

“If the government is procuring the expertise of the awarding and assessment sector then it needs to recognise the integrity of the business models, the brand and in some cases the heritage of these organisations,” he said.

Association of Colleges’ boss David Hughes is worried that any legal challenge to the T-level procurement process could cause unwanted delay to rolling out the new qualifications.

But skills minister Anne Milton isn’t troubled.

“If something could go wrong, then my aim is to put in place adequate mitigation to make sure it doesn’t go wrong, and so I don’t worry,” she told FE Week.

The battleground for awarding bodies concerns just five paragraphs in the draft key commercial principles for T-levels.

These state that the IfA will own the intellectual property in any materials, which will be licenced back to the AO for the duration of their contract.

They also ban AOs from reusing any of the content without “prior written approval” and from using any of their own branding.

The FAB insists these rules set “disproportionate limits” on the intellectual property and ownership of content, and “completely undermine the integrity” of AOs’ business models “in terms of the investment and innovation associated with developing qualifications”.

Its lawyers are reviewing whether the terms comply with public-sector procurement regulations, and if state aid rules apply.

They will also consider taking out an injunction to halt the procurement process if the FAB feels the government isn’t sufficiently engaging on the terms.

Any final decision on legal action would be taken after two roundtable events with awarding bodies early next month, Mr Bewick said.

This is not the first bone of contention to arise during the procurement process.

The government is sticking with its plan to have just one awarding body per T-level, as recommended in the Sainsbury review of post-16 skills, despite concerns being raised across the sector.

Research conducted by Frontier Economics on behalf of the DfE and published last July concluded that limiting access to a single AO may create a “risk of system failure” in both the short- and long-term.

It warned that if a single AO fails, it may be that no alternative can step in.

Then in February, Ofqual, the body that regulates qualifications in England, said it had “advised on the risks related to the single-provider model”.

Ms Milton told FE Week that sticking to a single AO is the “right way to introduce T-levels. I think it’s simple, straightforward, and clear”.

Public Accounts Committee wants more DfE action on bad apprenticeships

The Department for Education must “weed out” poor apprenticeship provision, the Public Accounts Committee has said.

A new report by the group of influential MPs also presses the department to look into whether financial incentives for teacher training deliver value for money, and to increase the number of women studying science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) subjects.

The government has “allowed poor-quality provision – especially in apprenticeships – to continue for too long without being addressed”, it warned.

While Ofsted has an important role to play in “assessing the quality of apprenticeship programmes being delivered by individual providers”, the DfE must ensure it has “systems in place to identify poor quality provision in a timely way, and take appropriate action”.

“Poor-quality apprenticeships must be weeded out and there is still much work required to address the striking gender imbalance in STEM apprenticeships,” said PAC chair Meg Hillier (pictured above).

FE Week exclusively revealed last month that Ofsted will get the final say over apprenticeship quality at new providers, after ministers and officials admitted during education committee hearings to confusion about who had ultimate responsibility for policing quality.

One new provider, Key6 Group, was initially stopped from recruiting new apprentices after its provision was branded “not fit for purpose” by Ofsted in a report published four months ago, the first in a new wave of early monitoring visits that are supposed to be keeping a careful eye on newcomers to the apprenticeship market.

But that ban was lifted just two months later by the DfE, after Key6 Group provided it with a “robust improvement plan”, which appeared to undermine the work done by Ofsted.

Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said the PAC was “absolutely right to identify Ofsted as the chief custodian of quality for the apprenticeships programme”.

“Responsibility for quality has been become a very complex area under the reforms and clarity is urgently needed to ensure that the right providers are and remain on the register while the poor ones are turfed off it,” he said.

Today’s report, called Delivering STEM skills for the economy, also claimed that the DfE “cannot say” whether people given cash incentives to train as teachers in STEM subjects are “remaining in the profession”.

It urged the department to “identify as soon as possible” whether such payments “have delivered value for money”.

On Wednesday, the Taking Teaching Further programme was launched, offering up to £20,000 per provider to train up to five industry professionals to teach T-levels.

The £5 million pot is being managed by the Education and Training Foundation on behalf of the DfE.

PAC members also asked the government to introduce targets to boost the number of girls and women in STEM learning programmes including apprenticeships.

The report said that just eight per cent of STEM apprenticeship starts are by women.

The government is “making insufficient progress in addressing the gender imbalance in many areas of STEM learning and work”, it said.

The committee examined the apprenticeships programme in late 2016, and “recommended that DfE should set up performance measures for the programme that included whether it is delivering improved access to under-represented groups across all occupations”.

“The DfE did not introduce a target relating to female apprentices, because it was satisfied with the fact that women made up over 50 per cent of apprenticeship starts overall,” it added. “But only eight per cent of STEM apprenticeship starts are undertaken by women.”

An Ofsted spokesperson said it welcomed the report “highlighting the need for good-quality STEM provisions and note the recommendations with interest”.

The DfE has been approached for comment.

Ofsted will keep its four-point grading system – for now

Ofsted will stick to its current four-point grading system in its new inspection framework – putting an end to rumours that it would opt for a simpler pass-or-fail system.

Instead, the status quo will remain in its 2019 framework, its chief inspector announced in a speech at the Festival of Education at Wellington College.

Options will be kept “under review” looking further ahead, Amanda Spielman said.

She is working with the Department for Education to “see the removal of the ‘outstanding’ exemption”, which currently allows education providers to go more than a decade without inspection.

We’ve concluded that it is right to maintain the current grading system in the new framework

Before her appointment in 2016, Ms Spielman (pictured) said she was uncomfortable about some of the effects on the education system of the ‘outstanding’ grade, and claimed Ofsted under her watch would have “discussions” about scrapping it.

Rumours have been flying around in recent months that all four of the grades used by Ofsted – ‘outstanding’, ‘good’, ‘requires improvement’ and ‘inadequate’ – might all be on borrowed time.

“I know that there are some who would like Ofsted to abandon grades altogether or to move to a pass/fail model,” Ms Spielman told the audience.

“For me, that is a decision which must squarely be decided on the basis of whether the current grading system meets our mission of being a force for improvement.

“We will keep this under regular review. But we’ve concluded, on balance, that it is right to maintain the current grading system in the new framework and that is the basis of the discussion I’m having with ministers now as we engage with them on the new framework as a whole.

“First, our teacher polling conducted by YouGov indicates that the profession prefers a four-point grading system to a pass/fail one.

“Many teachers have told us directly that a pass/fail would make the system even more high-stakes – it would de facto turn ‘requires improvement’ into a ‘fail’.

“Secondly, parents tell us that they want to keep the current grading system. They like the clarity of four grades in helping them to make informed choices.”

Ms Spielman said that when it comes to the ‘outstanding’ grade in particular, a number of education leaders have “persuasively lobbied me, and others, to keep it”.

I would like to see the removal of the ‘outstanding’ exemption

By losing ‘outstanding’, they said, “we’d send the wrong message about aspiration and excellence in the system”.

There have been strong demands for changes to Ofsted’s ‘outstanding’ exemption for years. They started when FE Week revealed in November 2016 that two colleges in England had both gone more than 10 years without a full inspection.

Our sister paper FE Week then revealed in 2017 that more than 100 schools had similarly been left alone for over a decade – a number which has now risen to nearly 300.

The exemption was introduced by Michael Gove in 2011 as a way to devote more of inspectors’ time to failing institutions and “free” top-rated providers from the burden of Ofsted.

But Ms Spielman is on a mission to scrap it.

“If we are to keep the grading system, I have to be sure that people can have confidence in grades,” she said. “That is why I would like to see the removal of the ‘outstanding’ exemption.

“There is no doubt that the long gap since inspection has undermined parental confidence. From our perspective, it also means our inspectors are getting to see fewer examples of ‘outstanding’ practice.”

She was however “pleased to say” that Ofsted is “engaging constructively” with the DfE on this issue and “hopes to say more in the future”.

Ex-schools minister proposes DfE shake-up to stop schools and HE favouritism

Education ministers’ portfolios need a major shake-up if the historic favouritism shown to schools and universities is to change, according to a former schools minister.

David Laws, who served as schools minister under Michael Gove and Nicky Morgan between 2012 and 2015, believes the current approach is “corrosive of good policy”.

In an exclusive interview with FE Week, the man who now chairs the Education Policy Institute wants ministers to be responsible for individual policy areas such as curriculum development and capital funding across the education spectrum, rather than for specific areas and age groups.

There should then be a separate minister to oversee post-18 education, which would “join up” FE and HE.

There is strong logic in things being joined up throughout a student’s journey

Mr Laws believes this would give FE “enhanced clout and ministerial focus” and stop the DfE giving more esteem to universities.

“There is strong logic in things being joined up throughout a student’s journey so that the same curriculum and accountability system is being developed as you come into education to right through it,” he said.

“That doesn’t happen in the DfE because they are responsible for age phases. We also have a situation where for historic reasons schools and HE are seen to be the exciting and interesting thing.”

As a consequence of this “unfairness”, ministers who are selected for those jobs often have more “profile and rank” than those covering FE.

The education secretary regularly gives more support to schools and HE as a result.

Under its current structure, the DfE is overseen by one education secretary, who then has a minister for schools, one for FE, another for HE, and another for the early years.

Mr Laws believes this drives unhealthy competition between the FE and HE ministers, creating “bad outcomes and missed opportunities” and a “much underfunded FE sector”.

“When I was in the DfE I was responsible for all capital funding. We had a very good schools budget for capital in this time but basically nothing for early-years education and considerably less per head for post-16 and FE,” he continued.

FE would come out of it with enhanced clout and enhanced ministerial focus

“We also had one protected regime for funding in schools up to the age of 16, but bizarrely not beyond the age of 16. I think some of these anomalies would be less likely if the whole thing was under one minister.”

His solution involves “the ministerial responsibilities underneath the education secretary being based on subjects and age rather than simply phases”.

“A curriculum and assessment minister should reach from age three to 18; another should be dedicated to accountability through that range, and a minister should look after revenue and capital funding so you don’t privilege one setting against another.”

But “given the scale of the job” it doesn’t make sense to continue that age range beyond compulsory education at 18.

“If we are ever to break down the divide between FE and the rest of the education system in terms of funding and status, then having one minister responsible, and viewing these as simply respectable education routes and not split up, is something I think is long overdue,” he said.

“I think FE would come out of it with enhanced clout and enhanced ministerial focus even though some parts of the college sector would find themselves having ministerial oversight from a different person up to the age of 18 and then post-18.”

Movers and Shakers: Edition 249

Your weekly guide to who’s new and who’s leaving

 

Mandeep Gill, Principal, Newham Sixth-Form College

Start date: August 2018

Previous job: Vice-principal, Suffolk New College

Interesting fact: Mandeep has been in love for a lifetime: he met his wife when he was just five years old.

Eddie Playfair, Senior policy manager, the Association of Colleges

Start date: September 2018

Previous job: Principal, Newham Sixth-Form College

Interesting fact: Eddie is an avid music lover, and plays the clarinet and piano.

Dawn Whitemore, Principal, Brooksby Melton College

Start date: May 2018

Previous job: Principal, New College Nottingham

Interesting fact: Dawn’s leadership approach ensures that the learner experience is always at the heart of decision-making.

Ashley Barnes, Deputy CEO, Vocational Training Charitable Trust (VTCT)

Start date: May 2018

Previous job: Chief academic officer, VTCT

Interesting fact: Ashley is also a chartered and state registered physiotherapist.

Carina Fagan, Chief academic officer, Vocational Training Charitable Trust (VTCT)

Start date: May 2018

Previous job: Executive director of awarding, VTCT

Interesting fact: Colin Farrell was Carina’s line dancing teacher in school.

 

 

If you want to let us know of any new faces at the top of your college, training provider or awarding organisation please let us know by emailing news@feweek.co.uk