Pupil premium plus post-16 pilot reduces ‘cliff edge’ of support, report finds

Local authorities involved in a pilot supporting looked-after teenagers and care leavers have told the government the programme has reduced “the potential cliff edge” of support when they leave school, strengthening calls for funding beyond March 2025.

An evaluation of the first year of the pupil premium plus post-16 scheme, published on Friday, showed councils were spotting “signs” of increased engagement and more awareness of education, employment or training (EET) options amongst disadvantaged over-16s.

Funding for the programme, which was extended to 153 local authorities this May in receipt of nearly £14 million, ends at the end of next March.

Local council representatives have called for “certainty” over future funding after the report outlined positive outcomes in young people in the long-term such as improved attendance, retention in post-16 settings and an increase in young people choosing EET options.

The research evaluated and surveyed three cohorts of local authorities which obtained access to the funding when the government expanded.

Cohort one comprised of 30 local authorities that received the pilot funding in 2021/22, the second group entailed 28 councils receiving funding in 2022/23, and a subsequent 94 local authorities funded in 2023/24. 

Call for certainty

The post-16 pupil premium plus trial was launched in 2021, calling for local authorities to appoint “virtual school heads”, to work with colleges, training providers and social workers to improve outcomes for looked-after children and care leavers aged between 16 and 18.

The original £3 million pilot ran from October 2021 to March 2022 with an allocation of £900 per pupil – less than half the £2,345 per pupil for those on the pre-16 scheme. Under 16s are currently funded £2,570 per child in care.

A report last year evaluating the six-month pilot – phase one – called for a long-term evaluation of the scheme, an extension to apply to all local authorities and an extension of funding to over 18s and provision beyond FE colleges.

The Department for Education subsequently expanded funding to a further 28 councils in autumn 2022 and to all English local authorities the year after. The scope of the programme was also extended to all looked-after children and care leavers in 2023/24, not just those in general FE colleges.

A further extension was announced this May, awarding a total of 153 authorities with allocations for 2024/25. The extension provided £13.84 million for the period running from April 2024 to March 2025. Per child funding for this financial year is not detailed.

Last year, DfE applied a 15 per cap to 58 local authorities already in receipt of funding, meaning their funding would not drop by more than 15 per cent compared to the last year. For 2024/25, DfE removed the cap and “all allocations will be calculated using the same formula.”

The Local Government Association, representing local authorities, urged the government in its Autumn budget for more certainty on funding.

In its budget submission to the Treasury, it called for “certainty over children’s and young people’s funding streams due to end in March 2025 to protect services ahead of the Spending Review.”

Perceived barriers

Following a survey of 120 “virtual school heads” (81 per cent response rate), 85 per cent across all three cohorts had used, or planned to use the funding to “enhance or expand” on an existing offer for disadvantaged teens.

In the early days of the pilot, the report found most virtual school heads had prioritised money to increase staffing capacity “particularly in post-16 settings”.

After the first year, most councils had delivered or planned to deliver training for college staff and then social workers. This included educating on trauma and attachment, role specific training, and information about the post-16 education landscape and transitions.

They also used the money for careers guidance, course equipment, workwear and also theatre trips and sports to bridge the “opportunity gap” between vulnerable teens and their peers.

Participants praised the scheme for creating good engagement with post-16 providers but found the main perceived barriers to be the turnover of social workers, not receiving student data from education providers and low engagement from the students.

Some virtual school heads added that they saw an increase in engagement from students since receiving funding, which the report suggested may become “less of a barrier over time”.

Pupil premium ‘massive help’ to FE

The report concluded that the programme was viewed “very positively” by virtual school heads and is seen as “as reducing the potential cliff edge in terms of support for young people when they reach 16”.

One post-16 lead from the first cohort to receive pilot funding said: “Obviously in a secondary school, they get the pupil premium plus as a matter of course, plus any other funding, and then suddenly it all just goes. So, I think it’s been a massive, massive help to FE, to have that allocation of money to support the learner in whichever direction they want to go to.”

The report outlined a table of short-term, interim and long-term outcomes for each of the three cohorts allowing for the lag in funding for each group of councils.

It found that by now, all three cohorts have an “improved understanding of the post-16 landscape by virtual schools/children’s social care.”

In the interim, by the end of the 2024/25 year, all participating councils would have “tailored interventions in place to support attendance”.

Long-term outcomes for young people – expected by the end of 2025/26 for the first two groups of funding recipients and the end of 2026/27 for cohort three – included improved attendance, increased engagement, retention in post-16 and more agency and voice in the decisions made.

172 college leaders make collective investment plea to chancellor

More than 170 college leaders have urged the chancellor to stump up the cash to tackle the FE teacher recruitment crisis ahead of this month’s budget.

The leaders, who represent an estimated 1.6 million students across England, have made three pleas in a new letter to Rachel Reeves.

They highlight the injustice of schools being offered £1.2 billion to help fund a 5.5 per cent pay rise for their teachers while colleges received nothing, the rapid growth in 16 to 18 students that is further stretching their resources, and repeat their request of government to offer colleges the VAT reimbursement that schools benefit from.

The letter said: “The staffing challenge facing colleges is stark. After a decade of cuts under the previous government, college lecturer pay lags far behind school teacher pay – over £9,000 on average – and even further to industry. This directly hampers the supply of new workers in key skills shortage sectors, including construction, engineering and health and social care, and stifles economic growth. 

“The decision to award school teaching staff a 5.5 per cent pay award for 2024-25 and not make funding available for colleges to be able to do the same will sadly see this challenge only deepen, unless action is taken.”

The Association of Colleges estimates that it would cost the government £250 million to match the school pay award.

Leaders who signed the letter assert that without more lecturers, skill shortages “will remain, making it unlikely that the government will be able to fully deliver a number of manifesto commitments, including the 1.5 million new homes, the transition to net zero, a reformed NHS and the productivity gains needed to secure strong economic growth”.

Andrew Green, chief executive of Chichester College Group, said: “Year on year, colleges are finding it harder to fill vacancies in teaching roles. The decision to award school teaching staff a 5.5 per cent pay award, without making funding available to colleges to do the same, has made that worse.

“The FE sector has suffered neglect for more than a decade and we need the new government to turn that tide.”

Today’s letter also asked the chancellor to recognise that the “growing cohort of 16-year-olds means that colleges are educating and training ever greater numbers”. 

While predicted school pupil numbers are forecast to fall over the next four years, the number of 16- to- 18-year-olds is set to rise by 118,000. 

In the 2023/24 academic year, 39 per cent of college leaders told their membership body they had seen a growth of 10 per cent or more in young people coming to their college. And while enrolment is still underway for 2024/25, leaders are reporting larger numbers than ever, according to the AoC.

The letter said the growth “requires both a commitment to fund in-year growth to meet demographic growth for 2025-26, as well as capital investment to deliver the extra space and equipment needed”. 

On VAT, the signatories said the imminent extension of VAT to independent schools offers the “perfect opportunity to put right the injustice of colleges having no VAT relief despite their strong social inclusion and public service roles”.

Colleges spend an estimated £210 million a year on VAT – around 3 per cent of income – that they cannot reclaim, unlike schools and academies where VAT is reimbursed. This is despite colleges being reclassified as public sector bodies in 2022.

Sam Parrett, chief executive of London South East Colleges, said the decision to grant the FE sector a VAT exemption is “long-overdue and very much needed”. 

She added: “For our college alone, this exemption would have been worth around £3 million last year – funds that would enable us to continue investing in our estate and capital programmes. This is essential as we strive to ensure our high-quality provision can meet local, regional and national skills needs and support people of all ages into successful careers.”

Reeves will deliver her first budget on October 30.

WorldSkills UK national finals will move to Wales in 2025

The WorldSkills UK national finals will be hosted in South Wales next year.

Venues across South Wales will run the annual competition from November 25 to 28, 2025.

WorldSkills UK has partnered with its Welsh counterpart, Inspiring Skills Excellence in Wales, to make the move happen for the first time.

Young skilled professionals and apprentices from Wales have been a big part of the champions sent to compete internationally. In the most recent Team UK cohort, three WorldSkills competitors hailed from the nation.

Plumber Ruben Duggan, from Caerphilly, won silver at WorldSkills Lyon last month and Ruby Pile, a student at Cardiff and Vale College, won ‘Best in Nation’ for restaurant service. Oscar McNaughton from University of Wales Trinity St David competed in additive manufacturing.

The Greater Manchester Colleges Group, which hosted the national finals in 2023 and 2024, will hand over the baton at a medal ceremony this November celebrating this year’s national champions.

The 2024 WorldSkills national finals take place from November 19 to 22 in venues across Greater Manchester.

Ben Blackledge, chief executive of WorldSkills UK, said: “It will be fantastic to bring the WorldSkills UK National Finals to South Wales next year.

“Our skills competitions programmes are central to driving excellence in technical education, helping learners demonstrate their readiness for high skilled jobs in sectors vital for the UK economy.  Working with our partners in Wales we will celebrate the UK’s best young technicians and draw attention to the role that world-class skills play in our economy.”   

Mike James, WorldSkills UK trustee and chief executive of Cardiff and Vale College Group, said hosting the national finals is a “brilliant opportunity not only for Wales, but for the whole of the UK to come together and shine a spotlight on skills excellence”.

He added: “We look forward to showcasing the excellent facilities we have here in Wales and welcoming students and apprentices from across the UK.”

Paul Evans, skills ambassador for Wales and project director of inspiring skills excellence said: “We are beyond delighted to bring the WorldSkills UK national finals to Wales in 2025.

“We know from our strong participation in Wales that competition activity offers life changing opportunities to young people. It brings a competitive edge to employers and broadens knowledge and expertise across the education and training sector.  We’re looking forward to celebrating technical skills and welcoming the best from across the UK to an exceptional event.”

40 extra hours policy ‘helpful’ for 3 in 5 colleges, report suggests

Sixty-one per cent of colleges found providing students with 40 additional learning hours “helpful” with education recovery following Covid – but researchers say there is no way of accurately measuring compliance with the policy.

An evaluation, published late last week, also revealed the biggest constraints to the scheme included a lack of staff resource and physical space.

Commissioned by the government, the Institute for Employment Studies and BMG Research surveyed 308 college and sixth form educators as well as almost 800 students between May and July 2023 on their perceptions of the extra 40 hours of learning policy.

A feasibility for impact study was also released on Friday which used data from the National Pupil Database (NPD) and the Individualised Learner Record (ILR) to further analyse its impact.

Here’s what you need to know.

Recap: Minimum planned hours rose to 580

In 2022, the Department for Education committed £800 million across the next three academic years to fund 40 additional learning hours to 16- to 19-year-olds as part of a post-Covid recovery plan to compensate for lost time in education.

This typically meant that minimum hour requirements for funding was increased from 540 to 580 for students in funding bands 5 to 9 (and lower bandings on a pro-rata basis). 

In its guidance, the government suggested institutions prioritise maths and English for struggling learners as well as supporting them with mental health, wellbeing or study skills.

The funding rate per 16 to 19 student in 2022 was £4,188 and has risen each year, partly to reflect the 40 additional hours policy. The rate currently sits at £4,843.

How the funding was used

Out of the total 308 institutions that replied to the survey, 73 were from post-16 colleges.

More than four in five (82 per cent) of FE providers used funding for activities related to qualifications, compared to 59 per cent of schools.

Instead, nearly three-quarters (74 per cent) of schools used the funding for support with study skills, while 55 per cent of post-16 institutions had provision for teaching learning techniques.

Additionally, only 31 per cent out of all responders provided maths teaching and over a quarter (26 per cent) used the additional hours for English teaching.

Nearly a third (32 per cent) said they used the funding to provide study skills for support learners with high needs, a further 29 per cent provided wellbeing/mental health support and a quarter supported them for employability skills/work placements and personal and social development time.

‘Often constrained’ by staff resources

The report found providers were “often constrained” by timetabling and staff resources to carry out academic activities.

Nearly half of respondents (45 per cent) said internal availability and financial pressures had made additional hours delivery more challenging. 

Over four in ten (42 per cent) said finding space for delivery was an issue and some providers complained that the funding did not take this into account.

Meanwhile, 31 per cent said they struggled with student engagement. “Many faced initial challenges including student resistance to additions to their timetable, but these were usually resolved over time as learners became used to the change and saw the value of the provision,” the report added. For those using the additional hours for maths and English teaching, 37 per cent said recruiting additional staff was a problem.

‘Not possible’ to attribute policy to outcomes

Three in five (61 per cent) of all institutions surveyed said additional hours were helpful with education recovery following the disruption of the pandemic, while a third (33 per cent) said the policy was unhelpful.

FE learners were more likely (24 per cent) than those in school sixth forms (9 per cent) to say that the support had made no difference.

Most education providers claimed the additional hours had a positive impact on student outcomes. Sixty-eight per cent said they recorded positive outcomes in progress, attainment (61 per cent), engagement (59 per cent) and mental health/wellbeing (55 per cent).

Almost nine in 10 (89 per cent) providing English teaching with additional hours said it was positive on student outcomes. Eighty-eight per cent said as such for maths teaching.

However, the feasibility study said it was “problematic” to conclude that there was a causal effect of the changed funding and additional hours on outcomes.

“It will not be possible to attribute the effect specifically to the policy so is a step down from assigning causality,” the report said.

Compliance unknown

When the policy was announced in 2022 the government said it would “monitor” providers’ implementation of the 40 additional hours.

Friday’s report noted how the additional hours feasibility for impact study suggested that “many institutions were not delivering an average of 40 additional hours per student at an institution level”.

According to data from the NPD and ILR on provider level average planned hours provided by the Department for Education, there was a “mean increase of 43 hours across band 5 students from 2020/21 to 2022/23, with 55 per cent of providers seeing average planned hours increase by at least 40, and 79 per cent seeing some increase in hours”.

However, 1 per cent saw no change in average planned hours and 20 per cent saw planned hours fall.

The report claimed this does not necessarily indicate non-compliance with the policy, as the “policy allowed for flexibilities which enabled institutions to be compliant without reaching an average increase of 40 additional hours”.

For example, some colleges and sixth forms used the funding to “enhance their general provision, rather than delivering discrete activities”, which made it “difficult to record how they were using the hours”.

In addition, those institutions already delivering more than 580 hours prior to the extra hours policy “found it difficult to deliver an additional 40 hours due to constraints around timetabling, space and internal resources”.

The diversity of delivery methods and contexts “makes it hard to identify compliance with the policy, and an impact evaluation has not been recommended for this reason”, the report said.

Future funding questions

Most institutions that were case studied said they wanted to continue the 40 extra hours as they felt “the activities met the essential needs of learners”.

But “most” said that without the current level of funding, provision would cease.

Julian Gravatt, deputy chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “There won’t be information on any part of government funding until the budget but it’s not surprising that colleges assume this money will continue in 2025-26 because they are already providing information and advice to the current cohort of year 11 students about next year’s options.”

Funding for 16 to 19 education from April 2025 onwards is being currently considered as part of the government’s spending review.

OfS dishes out further £14m for level 6 degree apprenticeships expansion

Thirty-three universities and colleges will share the final tranche of a £40 million pot to grow level 6 degree apprenticeships in England.

The Office for Students has announced the results of the third wave of funding from the scheme.

Today’s 33 winners will share £14 million, the same amount that was handed to 32 recipients in wave two. There were 51 winners in wave one, who shared £12 million.

The funding is used to expand level 6 apprenticeships in providers already delivering the provision, as well as providers looking to add the offer to their roster for the first time.

Projects funded through the scheme have to increase the number of students on level 6 degree apprenticeships and “increase equality of opportunity for students into and during” the programme, the OfS said.

Most (18) recipients in today’s announcements did not win funding in previous rounds.

Click here to view the full list of successful providers

Of the newly announced £14 million, £3,381,000 has been awarded to a collaborative bid from Middlesex University, Birmingham City University, Oxford Brookes University, University of Hertfordshire, Kingston University, University of Brighton and University of Greenwich to form the “healthcare education consortium”.

The consortium plans to increase apprentice starts, reduce duplication, and pool resources to create a coordinated strategy for local, regional, and national apprenticeship provision, working in partnership with NHS Trusts and Integrated Care Boards.

Elsewhere, Bournemouth University has been awarded £465,501 to support the development and introduction of five new degree apprenticeship programmes for delivery in September 2025: accounting finance manager, biomedical scientist, digital marketer, midwife and social worker.

Nottingham College will use £157,697 to launch two new degree apprenticeship programmes: product design and development engineer, and manufacturing engineer. 

The OfS said the college’s funding proposal “builds on current provision to create clear progression pathways and a comprehensive skills ladder in engineering”, adding that it will also “contribute to developing an outreach programme targeting disadvantaged areas of Nottingham, with a focus on engaging young people from low socioeconomic backgrounds, ethnic minorities, and women”.

John Blake, director for fair access and participation at the OfS, said: “Since we launched this degree apprenticeships fund last year, I have been continually impressed with the range, scope and ambition of the bids we have received – and this round of bids has been no different. I have been particularly pleased to see how universities and colleges have prioritised recruiting and supporting students from all backgrounds, and the successful bids have all demonstrated real commitment to addressing and removing barriers for students to succeed.”

Skills minister Jacqui Smith said: “This government’s mission is to break down barriers to opportunity, which is why we are funding the expansion of level 6 degree apprenticeships so people who might not otherwise get a university degree have a route into rewarding careers.

“We will work closely with Skills England and the OfS to ensure these level 6 apprenticeships provide good value for money and drive economic growth.”

Today’s announcement comes a week after the government revealed plans to restrict employers’ ability to use their apprenticeship levy contributions on level 7 apprenticeships due to affordability concerns.

Phillipson tells school pay review body to consider FE impact

The education secretary has told the School Teachers’ Review Body to consider the impact its pay recommendations will have on the FE workforce for the first time.

Bridget Phillipson has also asked for recommendations on 2025 school teacher pay “at the earliest point”, as the new government seeks to move the process earlier in the year.

Under the previous government, annual remit letters from the education secretary to the STRB have told the body to “have regard” of multiple wider issues, including “evidence of the wider state of the labour market in England”.

In what appears to be a first, Phillipson has altered this part of the letter to say: “Evidence of the wider state of the labour market, including the impact of recommendations on the further education teaching workforce in England.”

It comes amid sector outcry following chancellor Rachel Reeves’ decision to pump an additional £1.2 billion into schools and school sixth forms to help fund a 5.5 per cent pay rise this year while offering nothing to FE colleges.

The Department for Education previously blamed the “very challenging fiscal context” and the fact that FE does not have its own pay review body for the snub.

The further education namecheck in the STRB letter comes a week after skills minister Jacqui Smith told the Labour party conference that the DfE has made the case “strongly” to Treasury for more investment to fund college teacher pay rises ahead of next month’s budget.

College teachers are paid around over £9,000 less than school teachers on average. This gap is even wider when compared to industry workers.

DfE to ‘fully reset’ STRB timeline for 2026

The annual pay-setting process for school teachers had slipped later and later in the year, with final announcements usually coming in July after schools had already had to set draft budgets for the next year.

Last year, for example, the education secretary Gillian Keegan sent her remit letter to the STRB just a few days before Christmas, and then the Department for Education was late in submitting its evidence.

The election further kicked the decision down the road, and a 5.5 pay rise recommendation was eventually accepted by the new government on July 29.

College teacher pay has been impacted by the delays in recent years. The Association of Colleges makes a pay recommendation each year which colleges use as a benchmark in their negotiations with unions that represent their staff. The membership body has delayed making a pay recommendation until the STRB offer was made public in the past two years.

In Phillipson’s STRB remit letter for 2025, published today, she said it was the “government’s intention” to announce the upcoming school pay awards “as close to the start of the financial year of April as possible”.

However, she said it was “unfortunate that, given the knock-on effects from the previous government’s delays to the previous round, it is unlikely that the pay award will be announced before maintained schools should be setting their budgets”.

“But by bringing the pay round forwards this year, we can more fully reset the timeline in 2026-27. 

“To this end, I would be grateful if you can deliver recommendations to the government on the 2025/26 pay award for school teachers and leaders at the earliest point that allows you to give due consideration to the relevant evidence.”

To support this, she said the government would publish its written evidence “as soon as possible after the spending review is finalised and financial year 2025-26 budgets are set on 30 October, including budgets relating to pay.

“I recognise that changing the timeline from recent years will present challenges for the STRB, but I am sure you also share the government’s belief in the importance of returning to more timely annual pay processes, so I hope you will understand the necessity of doing so.”

Warning over ‘£22bn spending pressure’

The education secretary also warned the upcoming spending review “comes against the backdrop of the challenging financial position this government has inherited, including a £22 billion pressure against the spending plans set out for departments at spring budget 2024.

“My department will continue to strive to deliver a mission-led approach to ensuring our vital public services are equipped to deliver the high quality on which we rely, whilst providing value for money for taxpayers.

Just over half of T Level students satisfied with course, DfE survey reveals

Student satisfaction on T Levels has taken a dip and levels of compliance with off-the-job training among apprentices has risen but remains low.

The findings were revealed in a series of Department for Education reports published on Friday afternoon.

Here’s what we learned from the DfE’s technical education learner survey and its survey of apprentices, both conducted in 2023.

Low T Level satisfaction

The technical education report, written by NatCen Social Research and NFER, looks at how T Levels were experienced by students who started in 2021, compared to A-levels and other level 3 technical courses.

Only 57 per cent of T Level students reported feeling satisfied, 14 percentage points lower than the first wave of students who started in 2020 and completed surveys last year.

Elsewhere, 76 per cent of level 3 technical students and 72 per cent of A level students, who were also surveyed for comparison, said they were satisfied with their course.

However, T Level satisfaction “varied significantly” between course, with about eight in ten education and early years students feeling satisfied, while only four in ten health and science learners felt the same.

Digital learners’ satisfaction dropped 20 percentage points to 51 per cent in a year.

Students were most satisfied with teachers’ knowledge, the skills covered and the standard of teaching.

They were least happy with the programme’s management, the way students are assessed, preparation for future study and level of employer contact.

Lack of study materials

Learners in health and science, a newly introduced route for 2021, reported a lack of study materials as a key barrier to their learning.

“This may reflect difficulties with core assessments on this route, which Ofqual found were not fit for purpose, leading to regrading of first year T Level results for these learners,” the report said.

Next steps

T Level students’ most common next steps were a degree or apprenticeship, while only 17 per cent said they wanted to move straight into paid work.

Despite the career-focused design of the course, 69 per cent of T Level learners felt the course had allowed them to progress to what they wanted to do, compared to 82 per cent of A-level students and 74 per cent of level 3 technical learners. 

T Level transition

Satisfaction levels of learners on the T Level Transition Programme, a one-year post-GCSE course to prepare for T Levels, were at 71 per cent, similar to the previous year.

However, learners’ enthusiasm for progressing on to a T Level fell during the year, with 66 per cent planning to study “another course” or look for an apprenticeship.

Students reported gaining the skills and knowledge they needed, but only about half felt prepared for T Levels, despite this being a “key aim” of the course.

At the start of the transition programme, 42 per cent of learners intended to progress onto a T Level, however, by the end of the course, this had reduced to 33 per cent, the report revealed. The most common reason for not continuing onto a T Level was preferring to study another course.

Apprentice satisfaction high

The survey of apprentices, reported by IFF Research, ran 4,919 interviews with current or completed apprentices, alongside 500 interviews with non-completers, between July and September 2023.

Satisfaction with apprenticeships is increasing slightly year on year, hitting 87 per cent for learners in 2023.

Most apprentices were still in work after completing, and 68 per cent were still employed by the same organisation.

The report found that 97 per cent of completers reported a positive impact on their job or career, such as a promotion or pay rise.

But ‘badly run’ training most common reason for drop-outs

Researchers spoke to 506 non-completers to find out the most common reason for not staying the course of their programme, amid the government’s efforts to tackle the fact that around half of apprentices drop out every year.

Two-thirds (65 per cent) of non-completers left their apprenticeship within the first 12 months. On average, those who dopped out did nine months of their apprenticeship before leaving.

Overall, the most common factors contributing to non-completers leaving were the apprenticeship being “badly run or poorly organised” (49 per cent, up from 41 per cent in 2021), training not being as good as they had hoped (46 per cent) and not enough time for learning or training (43 per cent), according to the report.

A third (36 per cent) of non-completers said that personal or domestic factors made it difficult to complete the apprenticeship, with the most common issues in this area including were caring responsibilities (11 per cent), mental health issues (8 per cent), personal, family or relationship issues (7 per cent) and physical health issues (not related to COVID-19) (7 per cent).

Researchers said that once “contributing reasons” for leaving were established, non-completers were asked to name their single main reason for leaving their apprenticeship. The most common was receiving a better job offer (16 per cent), followed by not getting on with the apprenticeship employer (11 per cent) and not having enough time for learning or training (10 per cent).

Delays to EPAs

New to the learner survey for 2023, apprentices that had completed apprenticeship standards were asked whether they encountered any delays to end-point assessments (EPAs).

Two-thirds (64 per cent) said their EPAs took place on time, with a third (34 per cent) reporting a delay. Half of those reporting a delay (17 per cent overall) said the delay lasted for three months or longer.

Construction (50 per cent) and engineering (46 per cent) apprentices were most likely to have faced delays, with two-fifths (39 per cent) of construction apprentices reporting a delay that lasted for three months or longer.

Off-the-job compliance

Apprentices reported that about one fifth of their time was spent on off the job training (21 per cent up from 19 per cent in 2021).

Three fifths (60 per cent) reported that their hours were compliant with apprenticeship requirements, an increased on the 46 per cent reported in 2021.

Sectors such as education, health and retail continue to report the lowest compliance levels, while ICT and construction continue to report the highest.

Brokers fail to raise SME awareness or starts in DfE apprenticeship pilot

The government has been told to explore alternative ways of engaging small and medium employers (SMEs) in apprenticeships after a multi-million-pound brokerage “pathfinder” failed to raise awareness or boost starts.

An evaluation report for the Department for Education’s “SME apprenticeship brokerage” pilot was published on Friday and outlined “significant barriers” including strict eligibility criteria and administrative struggles.

The DfE set aside £2.5 million in 2022 to fund the trial which involved brokers providing SMEs with support to set up apprenticeship service accounts, selecting the appropriate training provider and apprenticeship standard, and recruiting the candidate for the role.

The pathfinder operated in four areas in the north of England where apprenticeship starts have declined substantially in recent years and to support the government’s “levelling up” agenda: Greater Manchester and East Lancashire, Merseyside and Northwest Lancashire, West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire, and the North East.

Researchers at Alma Economics found that SMEs who had apprenticeship starts through the pilot were “happy with their experience and were satisfied with the support the broker and the training provider had provided”.

However, take-up of the brokerage offer was “lower than anticipated”, the report said without providing any figures.

Payment problems

Payment for brokers was dependent on evidenced outcomes with SMEs at three stages. A 25 per cent payment was made when the broker engaged with an eligible employer. Upon completion of onboarding, where the SME was “equipped with the knowledge and support needed to make an informed decision about recruitment”, a further 50 per cent payment was made. A final 25 per cent payment was made when the SME recruited their first apprentice. 

The report said brokers noted that not having an upfront marketing budget “limits their ability to raise awareness of the pathfinder, and accurately target eligible employers”.

It added: “Most brokers and training providers felt that levels of engagement with SME Brokerage Pathfinder were lower than expected and attributed this slow start to engagement with needing time to make local connections, and to understand the nuances of the sectors involved.”

Interested SMEs not eligible

Eligibility criteria for the pathfinder “resulted in interested businesses not being eligible”, researchers also found.

Brokers mentioned having to turn down businesses based on not having been trading for a minimum of 12 months, having had an apprentice in the last two years, or being outside of the geographic scope of the pilot.

Starts ‘much’ lower than projected

Researchers said SMEs who got involved in the pathfinder “valued support in choosing the right apprenticeship qualification and getting assistance registering with the apprenticeship service”.

But overall the trial has faced “significant challenges, including the number of starts being much lower than projected, meaning alternatives should be explored”.

The DfE refused to release the projected or actual starts numbers for the project.

Other barriers included concern from brokers around entry points as set by training providers “leading to delayed starts and not being compatible with the schedules of employers”.

A lack of suitable candidates was “identified as a potential barrier to starts, with challenges in finding the right person to take on the apprenticeship”.

SMEs also struggled with the administration associated with starting an apprentice, including registration for the apprenticeship service account. This was especially the case for micro-organisations where all staff members are multi- functional, and there is no dedicated administrative or HR staff to handle onboarding requests”. 

Researchers made a series of recommendations including the need for changes to the payment model and eligibility criteria. But ultimately the DfE was told to “explore alternative models of support for similar programmes in the future”.

SEND pilot flexibilities rolled out

The DfE also released the evaluation report for its apprentices with SEND pilot on Friday. 

Following the success of this trial, the government now allows all providers to use a flexibility that allows apprentices with learning difficulties but without a pre-existing education health and care plan (EHCP) or statement of learning difficulties assessment (LDA) to work towards a lower level of functional skills.

FE Week first reported on this move in March. You can read the full evaluation report here.

How we’ll go about reforming the level 3 landscape

One of the real joys of my new ministerial role is that I can build on my previous experience as a minister at DfE when I worked on 14-19 education and on my own career in schools and colleges teaching vocational qualifications alongside A levels. 

I passionately believe that we need a system that meets the needs of every single learner and of employers, that provides high-quality routes where excellent technical and vocational education can stand alongside academic.    

I know from meeting many of you working in FE in recent weeks that there’s already so much to be proud of, but there is so much more that I want us to do together. There is a consensus among those of you to whom I have spoken that the qualifications landscape has got to get better. None of us want to see poor-quality qualifications or inferior outcomes for learners. 

We’ve already started to make progress, setting up Professor Becky Francis’s curriculum and assessment review which I hope many of you will contribute to.   

We have also taken immediate steps to pause the removal of public funding from qualifications that was due to take place on 31 July 2024, and we have launched a focused review of qualifications reform. 

The review will consider whether we should remove funding from these qualifications and other qualifications due to be defunded in 2025. I know some have argued that we should just shelve this work, but I’m not willing to go slow on the work to improve our qualifications or to leave uncertainty hanging over the system.   

I’d like to take this opportunity to share more about how this review will work.   

Principles   

It will focus on the objectives I set out above.   

We remain committed to T Levels and their place as an excellent offer for young people. It’s been a pleasure meeting students and providers who have benefited from this ambitious new qualification.

I am pleased that we’ve been able to commit to rolling out new T Levels, but we also need to look at how delivery of current ones can be improved so as many young people as possible have the opportunity to enrol and succeed on one.  

As part of a wider offer for young people I recognise that we need to retain other qualifications alongside T Levels and A levels.

Where the review identifies the balance of learner and employer needs within a sector requires level 3 qualifications other than T Levels and A levels, we will maintain the relevant qualifications. This may well be in areas that overlap with T Levels, which is a change from the approach taken by the last government.  

The quality of qualifications needs to continue to improve, so where we decide to keep qualifications we will continue to work with you to reform them to improve outcomes.   

As part of the review, we will also identify qualifications with low or no enrolments. When resources are tight, I don’t think it’s right to retain public funding for qualifications that aren’t attracting learners unless there are very special circumstances relating to them. So funding will continue to be removed for these qualifications in line with the already published dates.  

What next?   

I will be overseeing the review and will continue to engage on what we need to do to build better outcomes for all students. We will work with the sector to gather views as we take decisions on the best way forward. 

As promised in July, we will communicate the outcome of the review before the end of the year.   

This is an exciting time for further education because we have a real chance to reshape the landscape so that it creates opportunities for everyone. I am confident that this sensible and measured approach will help us build on the common ground that so many of us share.