Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Ofsted: Apprenticeships are beginning to look like Train to Gain

The quality of apprenticeships is in decline, Ofsted has said, and the programmes are starting to resemble the doomed Train to Gain initiative from the mid 00s.

The inspectorate’s deputy director for FE and skills told MPs on the commons education select committee earlier this week that around half of inspections carried out so far this year have resulted in ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’ ratings for apprenticeships.

Paul Joyce (pictured above) reiterated concern about the “very mixed picture of quality” at the Skills and Education Group’s conference, where he warned that the inspectorate is beginning to find traits of previous failed programmes creeping back in to delivery.

We want to avoid a Train to Gain-type programme being badged as an apprenticeship

“We are concerned and want to avoid a Train to Gain-type programme being badged as an apprenticeship,” he told delegates.

“We are finding that providers are struggling with the implementation of some of these reformed programmes. There are examples where off-the-job training is still not demanding enough.”

Ofsted is “particularly concerned” where it is starting to find “some issues where very little off-the-job training is taking place”, particularly with apprentices that are enrolled on programmes for the “older age demographic”.

Train to Gain was launched in 2006 to encourage employers to deliver vocational training to adult workers.

However, the business minister at the time, John Hayes, said the flagship training service was a “deadweight cost” that had no future because it gave money to highly profitable employers to train their staff when they were already willing to pick up the bill.

It was scrapped in 2010.

Mr Joyce said apprenticeships “must develop new and substantial skills and knowledge” in order for them to identify as an actual apprenticeship programme.

“If they are not and if providers aren’t enabling that to happen, then their apprenticeship programme is unlikely to be graded ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’,” he added.

FE Week’s analysis of the figures shows that the apprenticeship provision grade profile improved at the end of 2017, where 59 per cent of inspected providers were rated grade one or two for apprenticeships.

However, this dropped by three percentage points between January and May this year.

“It is a very mixed picture what we are seeing in terms of the implementation of the apprenticeship reforms and their impact on quality,” Mr Joyce told the committee.

“The quality we are generally seeing is certainly not a universally positive picture.”

During the hearing it came to light that there is much confusion over who is accountable for quality in apprenticeships, whether it is Ofsted or the ESFA.

MPs on the committee said the ESFA had recently “undermined” the inspectorate by allowing a provider described as “not fit for purpose” to continue training apprentices.

Skills minister Anne Milton admitted there is a lack of clarity over the accountability system which needs to be fixed.

Archbishop of Canterbury visits FE students

The archbishop of Canterbury has visited students at North Warwickshire and South Leicestershire College’s Nuneaton campus.

The Most Reverend Justin Welby, who married Prince Harry and Meghan Markle this weekend, visited the college as part of a four-day trip around Coventry and Warwickshire, and confessed to students he was “quite nervous” about his role in the wedding.

As well as finding out about learners’ experiences of college, the archbishop was privy to practical demonstrations in carpentry, hairdressing and catering, and even received a massage from a beauty therapy student.

“His visit was a fantastic opportunity for our students to showcase their talents, and to tell their stories to the archbishop,” said Marion Plant, the principal and chief executive of the college. “We hope that his visit has helped him to understand how well students at all levels can develop with the support of a strong college community. He certainly left us with a sense of deep encouragement and support.”

Devolution means cutting courses to pay for more pen-pushers

There’s a degree of inevitability about watching local government top-slicing FE funding as part of the devolution agenda.

The DfE’s “protection” of the adult education budget at £1.5 billion per year will end when the mayoral combined authorities get their hands on the money from August 2019.

We now know the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, plans to raid this budget for adult courses to fund dozens of new, highly-paid Greater London Authority policy officers, at a cost of over £3 million per year.

Raids like this on the education budget are inevitable and likely to rise because, to put it plainly, the DfE is removing the ring-fence.

The GLA blames the DfE for forcing it to dip into the education budget, and the DfE sheepishly admits it will do nothing to stop the mayor.

The skills minister should step in and only agree devolution deals which include a clause which enforces the ringfence and forbids any raid on the adult education budget.

Failing that, the mayor will have to answer to the London electorate on why he’s cutting investment in adult education.

More support for disadvantaged apprentices is needed

With the latest figures on apprenticeship starts published today, its easy to get pulled into the debate about whether or not government will hit its three million target, and indeed whether or not it matters.

The Learning and Work Institute has welcomed efforts to expand apprenticeships, but we’re clear that as numbers increase, it is vital that each apprenticeship is high-quality with genuine outcomes, and that no one who is able to undertake an apprenticeships is prevented from doing so. Put simply, our mantra is quality and access.

As today’s levy stats show, funding is key to both of these.

And this applies as much to the wider funding and support model, as it does to the use of the levy. If we want more people of all backgrounds to succeed through an apprenticeship, then we need to ensure that funding models are fit for purpose, and that providers and employers understand how funding can be accessed and used to provide support to all who need it.

If we want more people of all backgrounds to succeed through an apprenticeship, then we need to ensure that funding models are fit for purpose

We were delighted therefore to be asked by the Department for Education to explore the effectiveness of funding to support apprentices with a learning difficulty or disability and/or apprentices from a disadvantaged background – research which has been published today alongside the government’s apprenticeship funding policy.

In May 2017, the new apprenticeships funding model introduced additional support for apprentices with learning difficulties and disabilities, including payments of £1,000 per year for providers and employers working with 19- to 24-year old care leavers or those with an education health and care plan (EHCP), alongside additional learning support, excess learning support and exceptional learning support funds. Disadvantage uplift payments within frameworks were continued as a transitional measure, with a commitment to review support for apprentices from disadvantaged areas in due course.

Our research looked in particular at how support needs are defined, identified and met – and how effective current funding arrangements in ensuring that this happens.

Across the board, providers and employers recognised that some apprentices need additional support to help them access and progress in their apprenticeship. They agreed that this is broadly consistent with the areas where additional funding is made available. However providers also argued that support funding should be more widely available – in particular to cover apprentices who have learning support needs but don’t have an EHCP and those with a range of social and safeguarding needs, perhaps as a result of poor mental health, caring responsibilities, being homeless, or facing financial hardship.

While additional learning support (ALS) and the disadvantage uplift were shown to be well known and used by providers, awareness and understanding of other forms of support were much lower – with very few having claimed funding for 19- to 24-year-olds with EHCPs and care leavers.

In explaining this difference, providers point to a lack of clarity around eligibility and process for claiming ALS as potentially off-putting, suggesting that this has encouraged risk aversion, leading some to only claim for a small proportion for the support they provide.

In contrast, providers were much more positive about the disadvantage uplift, recognising both the stability and flexibility that this provides them with, enabling them to plan provision on a longer term basis.

We are therefore pleased that the funding guidance published today, informed by our research, has confirmed the continuation of the disadvantage uplift and includes a commitment to make the funding rules more clear.

We are also delighted that care leavers will now also receive a £1,000 bursary when they begin their apprenticeships, in recognition of the heightened financial pressures that these young people can face in living independently.

All of this is a great start, though we believe much more still needs to be done. And of course none of this will make any difference unless apprentices and their providers are aware of the changes and confident that they can use these funds to provide support for all who need it, making a positive difference to their apprenticeship experience.

Fiona Aldridge is assistant director for research and development at the Learning and Work Institute

Care leavers earn £1,000 apprenticeship bursary

Young care leavers starting an apprenticeship from August will receive a one-off bursary of £1,000.

It’s one of a number of “minor adjustments” to guidance on apprenticeship funding from August 1, announced by the Department for Education on Thursday.

Other changes include a doubling in the number of funding bands from 15 to 30, and the retention of extra cash payments to providers training the youngest and most disadvantaged apprentices.

“At this time, we have looked to prioritise stability for the market, and these are minor adjustments to support employers, providers and apprentices,” the document said.

The one-off £1,000 payment for care leavers aged 16 to 24 is intended to help them with the “extra barriers” they face in the transition to the world of work.

The cash, which will come from the DfE’s existing apprenticeships budget, will be paid “once to each care leaver in the eligible age range” via their training provider.

Matthew Reed, the chief executive of The Children’s Society, has long urged the government to introduce a similar bursary.

“Care leavers have told us how they have struggled to make ends meet and pay the bills after taking up an apprenticeship on low rates of pay when they cannot rely on additional support from parents such as being able to continue living in the family home,” he said.

“We hope this grant will make apprenticeships a more viable option for young people looking to find work after leaving care and help set them on the path to a brighter future.”

The 20-per-cent uplift for 16- to 18-year-old apprentices on frameworks, and additional payments for those in disadvantaged areas, first introduced in 2016 as a transitional measure, will continue for at least another year, the new guidance revealed.

“We have seen starts on standards grow, which are generally funded at higher rates, but we know that many providers are still delivering substantial numbers of frameworks, including to 16- to 18-year-olds,” it said.

“It is important that apprentices are still able to undertake these frameworks until the relevant standards are available.”

“As such, we will be continuing to provide a payment equivalent to 20 per cent of the funding band maximum to providers training 16- to 18-year-olds on frameworks, and additional payments to providers training individuals from disadvantaged areas on frameworks.”

There will be 30 funding bands in place from August – up from the current 15.

The upper limit of those bands will range from £1,500 to £27,000, with the expectation that employers will negotiate with providers over price.

“All existing apprenticeship frameworks and standards will be placed into a band within the new structure that has the same upper limit as under the 15 funding band structure,” it said.

The new guidance follows the DfE’s announcement in February that it would review the funding band structure, because employers did not “feel able” to negotiate with providers on price.

Movers and Shakers: Edition 245

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

David Gartland, Principal, Abbeygate Sixth Form College

Start date: September 2018
Previous job: Principal, Lowestoft Sixth-Form College
Interesting fact: David is a keen Newcastle United supporter.

____________________________________________

Tim Hulme, Executive director resources and organisational development, East Sussex College Group

Start date: May 2018
Previous job: Interim chief executive, Rye Academy Trust
Interesting fact: Tim once scored two goals in the FA Cup for Crawley Town during a second-round tie in the 1991-92 season.

____________________________________________

Rebecca Conroy, Principal, Eastbourne and Lewes Professional and Technical College

Start date: May 2018
Previous job: Vice-principal, Greater Brighton Metropolitan College
Interesting fact: Rebecca is a trained harpist and has performed widely as a soloist and in orchestras.

____________________________________________

Tom Arrand, Principal, Padworth College

Start date: September 2018
Previous job: Acting head, Monmouth School for Girls
Interesting fact: Outside of work, Tom loves the great outdoors, music and sport and is a keen photographer.

____________________________________________

Steve Barker, Sales director, SEETEC

Start date: February 2018
Previous job: Director, People Plus
Interesting fact: Steve is a descendant of Charles Dickens.

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

ESFA switches from intervention to prevention

The Education and Skills Funding Agency is switching its strategy from intervention to prevention, ahead of the introduction of the FE insolvency regime later this year.

The change has been revealed in series of job adverts for members of a new provider market oversight team at the agency, out today.

“The prevention strategy seeks to improve on the intervention model by identifying and preventing problems before they occur,” the adverts said.

Benefits of the new strategy include “the larger range of options available the earlier a problem is identified and the lower cost to the taxpayer, which is particularly important given the forthcoming FE insolvency regime”.

The insolvency regime, introduced as part of the Technical and Further Education Act in 2017, is expected to take effect towards the end of this year.

It will mean colleges will be allowed to go bust, although the government has said it expects this to only happen in rare occasions where a college is in “severe financial difficulties and there is no alternative viable solution for managing the college out of that situation”.

At the same time, exceptional financial support payments from the ESFA to colleges in dire financial straits will be phased out.

The ESFA’s current strategy focuses on intervening at providers where it has “evidence of under-performance”.

Triggers for the agency to take action include a provider receiving overall grade four rating from Ofsted, falling below national minimum standards, or being rated ‘inadequate’ for financial health or control.

It also has an early intervention approach, through which it supports colleges at risk of triggering formal intervention.

That approach is intended to work alongside the FE commissioner’s expanded role, which now includes more work with colleges at risk of failing, through measures such as diagnostic assessments and the strategic college improvement fund.

The provider market oversight team was formed on April 1 through the merger of two separate teams, the provider risk and assurance team and the transaction unit, according to published minutes of an ESFA management board meeting on March 29.

It’s led by Matthew Atkinson, who was formerly in charge of the transaction unit, and is described in the job adverts as having 120 members of staff.

The transaction unit handles applications to the restructuring facility, which is funding available for colleges to implement post-area review changes.

Roles being advertised in the new team include deputy director, delivery manager – restructuring facility post completion and monitoring and restructuring specialist.

20% funding uplift for 16-to-18 apprentices stays another year

Extra payments to providers training the youngest and most disadvantaged apprentices will remain in place from August, the Department for Education has confirmed.

The 20-per-cent uplift for 16- to 18-year-old apprentices on frameworks, with additional cash for those in disadvantaged areas, were introduced in 2016 as a transitional measure.

Today’s announcement confirms they will remain in place for another year.

“It is important that apprentices are still able to undertake these frameworks until the relevant standards are available.”

“As such, we will be continuing to provide a payment equivalent to 20 per cent of the funding-band maximum to providers training 16- to 18-year-olds on frameworks, and additional payments to providers training individuals from disadvantaged areas on frameworks.”

The uplift was the result of FE Week’s successful #SaveOurApprenticeships campaign, which exposed damaging cuts to apprenticeship funding.

Our analysis of proposed changes to the funding system from May 2017, when the levy reforms came into effect, exposed potential cuts of up to 30 per cent for 16 to 18-year-olds on some popular frameworks – rising to 50 per cent in the most deprived areas.

The campaign was backed by more than 50 MPs and provoked a national outcry, after which the-then skills minister Robert Halfon introduced the uplift.

“Since announcing the proposals for apprenticeship funding, we have listened hard to all the feedback we have received to ensure people can gain the skills they need now and for the future,” he said at the time.

There will be 30 funding bands in place from August – up from the current 15.

The upper limit will range from £1,500 to £27,000, with the expectation that employers will negotiate with providers over price.

“All existing apprenticeship frameworks and standards will be placed into a band within the new structure that has the same upper limit as under the 15 funding band structure,” it said.

The DfE announced in February that it would review the funding-band structure, because employers did not “feel able” to negotiate with providers on price.

HE has a HESA – why can’t FE have a FESA?

A “data deficit” is responsible for the persistent failure of UK skills policy, explains Andy Norman, who wants to establish a new FE statistics agency

While it may seem like the skills discourse is reaching a political crescendo, appreciation of its importance is really nothing new.

Researchers and politicians alike have waxed lyrical about the need to build an effective skills system for well over a century. Translating this into improved outcomes for learners, businesses and the wider economy, however, has too often been beyond the power of public policy.

Near-continuous policy attention and reform has yielded few noticeable gains in recent performance, and there must be something fundamental missing.

The first report from the Centre for Progressive Policy – entitled ‘The data deficit: Why a lack of information undermines the UK skill system’ – argues that the root cause of this persistent policy failure is the lack of information on a range of aspects of the post-16 education system, from course quality to expected salaries. This data deficit prevents optimal decision-making, leaving learners, providers and policymakers in the dark.

Take employment outcomes as one example. In terms of higher education graduates, we have a pretty good idea of what they are doing after they graduate.

We have no systematic understanding of which FE courses lead to relevant employment, and which don’t

Detailed destinations data in the form of employment outcomes is available via the ‘Destination of leavers from higher education’ (DLHE) survey. We can gain a good understanding of which jobs graduates are doing six months later, right down to the lowest level of occupation classifications.

No such data exists for further education.

Essentially, we have no systematic understanding of which FE courses lead to relevant employment, and which don’t.

This matters for a whole host of reasons. It means policymakers struggle to understand which courses they should be incentivising and investing in. It means prospective learners choose courses based on hunches rather than reliable employment prospects. It means careers advisors lack the information they need to effectively guide their clients.

Improvements are being made – principally via the longitudinal educational outcomes dataset – and our understanding of what FE graduates are earning is improving. However, without combining this with detailed occupational employment data we are none the wiser about why earnings differ.

For example, are sports and fitness graduates earning less because they don’t find relevant jobs, or because they find relevant jobs which happen to pay badly? Do engineering technician graduates earn a lot because they move straight into relevant employment, or do these courses provide strong transferable skills that allow people to move into lucrative non-engineering roles? We just don’t know. And if we don’t know, you can be sure that the average 16-year-old thinking about what to do after their GCSEs doesn’t either.

The data deficit also includes basic earnings information for 16-to 18-year-olds completing technical courses. The DfE hopes to publish information about this group’s pathway out of school and into the labour market in the future.

However, compared to the level of detail already available for HE, these patchy, piecemeal efforts are clearly inadequate. HE data is currently collected, processed and published by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). HESA was established after the Further and Higher Education Act 1992 identified a “need for a more aligned and coordinated approach to higher education statistics and information”.

Such a need now exists in FE and so perhaps the time has come for the establishment of a Further Education Statistics Authority, or “FESA”. This is something that the Centre for Progressive Policy wants to take forward in the next few months, so please do get in touch if this is of interest.

We should not pretend that improving the quality of the data available is the panacea to all the country’s skills problems. Yet it is difficult to see how systemic improvements can be made while decent data remains so scarce. A well-resourced FESA could be the catalyst for building the successful system this country so desperately needs.

Andy Norman is a Research Analyst at the Centre for Progressive Policy