Ofsted watch: Private provider straight in at grade four

A private provider has earned the ignominious honour this week of being rated ‘inadequate’ at its first ever inspection.

And two “new” apprenticeships providers have fared little better, with both found to be making “insufficient progress” in at least one area, according in monitoring visit reports published this week.

The Terri Brooke School of Nails and Beauty was given grade four across the board in a report published June 15 and based on an inspection carried out in mid-May.

The school offers loan-funded courses in hairdressing and beauty therapy at levels three and four, which inspectors found “do not meet hairdressing and beauty therapy employers’ needs and are at too high a level for most learners”.

“Too few” learners achieve their qualifications and leaders “do not accurately identify” this fact, nor that “teaching, learning and assessment are poor”.

Safeguarding processes were found to be “weak” and to “place learners at risk of harm”.

“Staff have not had adequate training in safeguarding and do not fully understand their responsibilities,” the report said.

Employer-provider Peacocks Stores Limited was found to be making ‘insufficient progress’ in two of the three areas under review, in a monitoring visit report published June 15 and based on a visit in early May.

Leaders at the provider, which trains its own apprentices in retail standards from level two to four, were found to be “too slow to respond to significant weaknesses” in both planning and delivery of apprentice’ training.

Managers were “too slow” to put in place end point assessment arrangements for some apprentices.

“Arrangements to monitor the quality of the teaching, learning and assessment provided” by “subcontractor partners” were also lacking.

Furthermore, “too many store managers and apprentices do not fully understand the requirements of the apprenticeship programmes,” the report said.

Watertrain, a private provider in Warrington, has been making “insufficient progress” in two of the three headline fields in a report published June 13 and based on an inspection in mid-April.

As previously reported by FE Week, the provider, which has delivered apprenticeships as a subcontractor for 10 years, is disputing the findings of the report.

It’s been ‘good’ news for other independent training providers this week, with all other published reports returning grade twos.

The Skills Network Limited was rated ‘good’ across the board in a report published June 11 and based on an inspection in early May.

“Most learners” at the provider, which offers loan-funded distance-learning courses for adults, “develop new skills and knowledge that enhance their current work roles and future employability”, thanks to “highly experienced” tutors.

“Directors, leaders and managers have very high expectations of staff, who as a result deliver effective teaching, learning and assessment,” the report said.

Hill Holt Wood boosted its grade from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ in a report published June 14 and based on an inspection in early May.

Trustees at the provider, which offers a range of courses for people with disabilities, or social or learning needs, are “passionate about the value of education in combating disadvantage and raising the aspirations of young people at risk from social exclusion”.

Staff create a “safe, nurturing environment” for learners that enables them to “make significant gains in their personal development, work-readiness and capacity to improve their life chances”, the report said.

As previously reported by FE Week, Redbridge Institute of Adult Education became the first local authority provider to be rated ‘outstanding’ since 2015 this week.

Its report, published June 12 and based on an inspection in early May, returned grade ones across the board.

Colleges fared less well this week, with two published reports delivering grade three verdicts.

Leaders and staff at Oaklands College “do not have high enough expectations of their learners”, according to a report published June 11 and based on an inspection in late April.

Governors at the college, which was previously rated ‘good’, lacked a “robust enough understanding of the quality of provision” which meant they “provide too little challenge of leaders”.

Furthermore, “leaders do not use their performance management processes well enough to identify underperformance swiftly and tackle it”.

Senior leaders at South Staffordshire College were criticised for failing to rectify the “weaknesses identified at the previous inspection”, in a report published June 13 and based on an inspection in mid-May.

The quality of teaching, learning and assessment “have not improved” since the last inspection, which also resulted in a ‘requires improvement’ rating.

Attendance at the college remains “too low”, particularly in English and maths, while the proportion of learners completing a work placement is “too low”.

Three further providers held onto their grade two ratings following short inspections this week: Bedfordshire and Luton Education Business Partnership, John Leggott Sixth Form College, and Yorkshire Training Partnership Ltd.

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Oaklands College 24/04/2018 11/06/2018 3 2
South Staffordshire College 15/05/2018 13/06/2018 3 3

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Hill Holt Wood 15/05/2018 14/06/2018 2 3
The Terri Brooke School of Nails and Beauty 15/05/2018 15/06/2018 4 –
The Skills Network Limited 01/05/2018 11/06/2018 2 –
Watertrain Ltd 18/04/2018 13/06/2018 M M

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Redbridge Institute of Adult Education 01/05/2018 12/06/2018 1 2

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Peacocks Stores Ltd 09/05/2018 15/06/2018 M M

 

Short inspections (remains grade 2) Inspected Published
Bedfordshire and Luton Education Business Partnership 01/05/2018 15/06/2018
John Leggott Sixth Form College 08/05/2018 14/06/2018
Yorkshire Training Partnership Ltd 15/05/2018 14/06/2018

Essex council protests college merger with London group

A council in Essex has come out firmly against merger plans for its financially stricken local college, fearing it will lose its community focus if it joins a giant college group.

London-based New City College is preparing to merge with the financially stricken Epping Forest College from August 1, after the latter was placed in administered status in March last year. 

Derek Macnab, the acting-chief executive of Epping Forest district council, fears that local focus and Essex identity will be lost if the merger goes through.

“The council understands the national policy drive to move to larger institutions which are more financially resilient but believes that fiscal opportunism must be balanced against the need to retain a college for Epping Forest, rather than a campus in Epping Forest,” he wrote in a letter.

Should the plans be finalised during a consultation launched last month, the college, rated at grade three by Ofsted-College, will become the fourth member of the rapidly expanding college group, alongside Hackney Community College, Tower Hamlets College and Redbridge College.

The group is also in discussions with Havering College and Havering Sixth-Form College about further link-ups early next year.

The district, “while closely connected to the Capital, is not in London” and “residents generally identify themselves with Essex”, Mr Macnab believes.

“The council’s key priority has always been a local college that is focused on meeting the needs of local learners, local businesses and its local community through the provision of outstanding skills and education and lifelong learning opportunities for the local people.”

The college has improved on a former ‘inadequate’ across-the-board rating in November 2016, after which  theFE commissioner Richard Atkins and his team visited in January last year.

It was shortly placed into ‘administered’ status as a result of “emerging financial challenges” and “serious governance problems”.

This was followed by a structure and prospects appraisal “owing to the significant instability still facing the college”.

According to the college’s 2016/17 accounts, the process concluded with a firm recommendation for the college to merge as “its prospect as an independent corporation was not sustainable”.

“The council is concerned that the significant land assets of Epping Forest College are not liquidated in a way that disadvantages local communities and learners, in order to finance and underpin the expansion plans of New City College in London,” Mr Macnab continued.

He lamented that the proposal document “presents a merger with New City College as the single option for the way forward”.

He believes that a college “serving a similar community and business base” such as Herts Regional College would be “preferable”.

The speed at which the merger is progressing had “caused grave concern and consternation”, he added.

“For many interested parties, one month is too short a period to become aware of the consultation proposal document, obtain information, share and discuss it with members, committees, managers etc and then construct and agree a response.”

A spokesperson for New City College and Epping Forest College said they “will be responding to Derek Macnab; a meeting is arranged for next week to discuss his concerns.”

Seven-day strike at Hull College called off

Seven days of strikes at Hull College, due to start on Monday, have been called off after the threat of compulsory redundancies was lifted.

Staff had been set to walk out again for five days starting June 18, and again on June 26 and 27 in a bitter row over plans to cut hundreds of jobs.

A joint statement from college management and the University and College Union however confirms that “through best endeavours and joint working” the planned restructure of the college is set to go ahead “without the need for compulsory redundancy”.

“We mutually recognise that the past few years have been very challenging for staff and students at Hull College Group and we share the joint ambition to bring about positive changes to ensure we continue to be vibrant and exciting places to learn and a good place to work,” it said.

“Hull College Group is very sad that we cannot take all our staff with us as we rebuild and refresh and we remain focused on delivering the vital role our colleges play in providing skills and education to our local communities.”

Julie Kelley, UCU regional official, said: “I am pleased that, following positive talks, we have been able to secure an agreement with the college management to work together to avoid compulsory redundancies.

“We will continue to engage constructively with the college with the aim of minimising the impact of the restructure on staff and students.”

Earlier this year Hull College announced plans to slash the equivalent of 231 full-time positions – a move that would cut the workforce by a third, according the union.

The restructure is needed for the college to balance the books.

FE Week reported last month that the college received a £54 million bailout from the government, while the college’s long-delayed 2015/16 accounts, published last week, revealed it generated a deficit of £12.8 million that year.

Union members have already been out on the pickets.

They were joined on May 18 by local MP Emma Hardy, who is also a member of the influential commons education committee.

The bitter dispute began in early March when plans for the job cuts were first announced.

In a statement posted on the college’s website, its chief executive Michelle Swithenbank said the redundancies were part of a restructure being put forward in an effort to balance the books.

The college has held a notice of concern for financial health since November 2016.

A report from the FE commissioner in early 2017 warned that the college’s finances remained “precarious”.

In April, 170 out of 214 – or 70 per cent – of UCU members at the college voted for strike action, before unanimously backing a vote of no-confidence in their boss the following day.

 

Atkins: Struggling colleges will still need stopgap funds

Colleges that get into financial difficulty will still need funding to “oil the wheels” once the bailout tap has been turned off, the FE commissioner has said in an exclusive interview with FE Week.

Struggling colleges currently have access to the restructuring facility and exceptional financial support (EFS), but these will each be withdrawn later in the year.

There will be new arrangements for troubled colleges, but it’s not clear if these will be backed with cash.

“I don’t know how the sector will manage without any restructuring funds of any kind,” said Richard Atkins.

Because colleges will “occasionally get into difficulty”, he insisted they will need “some sort of funding to oil the wheels in these situations” to ensure stability and protect learners.

“I would have thought that something will need to be put in place, and I know there are people in the Department for Education looking at that at the moment,” he said.

The DfE will pull the plug on EFS once the insolvency regime is introduced later this year.

It expects “all colleges to be working to make sure they get on a financially sustainable footing by the end of this financial year” while funds from the restructuring facility are still available.

But new arrangements will be put in place, a spokesperson said. These will be “centred round the new insolvency regime”, and full details “will be announced in due course”.

The new regime, which will allow colleges to go bust for the first time, will be introduced later this year, although no firm date has yet been announced.

EFS, which can come in the form of a grant or a loan, is available to colleges that are “encountering financial, or cashflow, difficulties that put the continuation of provision at risk”.

The restructuring facility, administered by the transaction unit, was originally designed to help colleges implement area review changes but is increasingly being used to support colleges in dire financial straits.

The application deadline for the restructuring facility is September – although colleges will have until March next year to spend the cash. 

When the restructuring facility was first announced in 2016, the then-skills minister Nick Boles told colleges they would be “basically on your own” once the fund had been used up, without the “same level of ad hoc support” they had previously had access to.

FE Week has reported on a number of high-profile cases of colleges receiving multimillion-pound bailouts from the restructuring facility.

These include Hull College, which reportedly received £54 million from the fund earlier this year.

Lambeth College’s 2016/17 accounts revealed that it expected to receive £25 million from the facility, £8 million of which would go to repaying the exceptional financial support it had received up until that point.

Struggling Telford College of Arts and Technology received £21 million for its merger with New College Telford, which went through in December – a sum that came in the form of a grant, according to its accounts.

And Stoke-on-Trent College’s accounts show it was awaiting the outcome of a £21.9 million application to the fund.

But not every college has been successful in their bids to the facility.

An FE commissioner report into Kirklees College, published in March but based on an intervention last October, revealed the college had pinned its hopes of financial redemption on receiving “substantial” money from the fund.

But this request was turned down, forcing it to request a “substantial” amount of EFS as it battled high levels of long-term debt and minimal cash reserves.

FE Week reported in February that 12 struggling colleges had received a combined total of almost £12 million in EFS payments in one month alone.

This included two payments of £1.5 million each to Bradford College, which is now subject to intervention by Mr Atkins.

His report determined that the college’s dire financial position had come as a surprise to its governors, who were only made aware of management concerns around finance in June last year.

The big interview: NCG chair Peter Lauener

NCG has been in the headlines lately, what with the visits from Ofsted, its falling achievement rates, mass redundancies, strike action and the closure of the free school it sponsors. FE Week senior reporter Billy Camden sat down with the group’s new chair, once the ESFA’s chief executive, Peter Lauener to discuss why he took the job, potential future expansion, and those falling standards.

 

Why did you take the role?

“I think the NCG model is very interesting. It has grown now to six colleges and two training providers (see map) after recently bringing on Carlisle College and Lewisham Southwark College, which was a big, big change.

“It changed from something that felt manageable in the old system into something that needed a new way of managing.

“There was opportunity for a different approach that said ‘we can operate more sufficiently across a large group and we can do that to save money which can be ploughed back in to improving front-line services’.

“We wanted to be tight nationally on finance, with autonomy locally on quality and the curriculum offer. I found this model intrinsically interesting and I liked the idea of it being fairly new and there was an opportunity to help formulate things.

“We think the model has saved around £2 million in the network of colleges, through savings on back office work.”

 

 

Standards have dropped across the group over recent years. Has leadership taken its eye off of frontline learning to focus on expansion?

“In some cases standards are slipping because of the changes in apprenticeships that have affected all parts of the sector.

“There have also been restructures at Newcastle College where we had to reduce the size because learner numbers were falling. It takes a while to get things back in focus but we think we’ve laid the base for quite rapid improvement over the next couple of years.

“The expansion has happened and we now have a sizeable group. We need to realise our potential and shift focus to improving standards.

“There were significant financial problems in Carlisle and Lewisham Southwark College which our leadership had to focus on, and Newcastle was having redundancies.

“So it was not that people weren’t looking at the quality, but inevitably there are other problems that need to be sorted and you have to sort the financial issues to move forward.”

 

NCG is expected to receive a ‘requires improvement’ rating from Ofsted in its upcoming report. What is the group doing to improve?

“The corporation feels it needs to do two things: a review of governance and a new drive on standards.

“We’re improving governance arrangements and how we put local and national views into effect. We want people to share expertise and experience across the group from Lewisham to Carlisle.

“We are also clear that standards are not where we want them to be and I would be surprised if the Ofsted inspection doesn’t confirm that.

“The important thing is we want them to improve and we have a lot of the right building blocks in place after restructuring and are expecting standards to improve rapidly. That is going to be our driving focus over the next several years.

“This is about our journey back to ‘outstanding’.”

 

Does NCG have any expansion plans?

“There is no point growing if we are not delivering on standards so we need to improve those first.

“I wouldn’t say we are too large but we are at a level where we have no plans to grow until we have gone through this next phase and consolidate the structures, and make sure governance is really working and address the standards.

“The group has had approaches from other colleges but we have not encouraged them.”

 

Ofsted is expected to criticise NCG’s leadership in its report. Do you have confidence in group chief executive Joe Docherty?

“I think Joe is a first-rate chief executive, and he has done an excellent job over the last couple of years. I am absolutely confident he is the right person to realise the potential of the organisation that he has helped to shape.

“Any restructuring is difficult and it is not a surprise that some people are not happy with it.

“I am confident Joe has the ambition, the nous, and the commitment.”

DfE estimates colleges with financial warnings will nearly triple to 100

The number of colleges with financial warnings will nearly triple to 100 over the next 10 years, the government has estimated.

The Department for Education revealed the figure in its response to its insolvency regime consultation today, in which it urges all colleges with financial troubles to “fully familiarise themselves with the [new] insolvency procedures”.

There are currently 37 colleges with a published notice to improve for financial health.

The DfE estimates using “today’s assumptions” that over the first 10 years of the insolvency regime an additional 63 colleges “could meet the current triggers for a notice”.

“In the subsequent six years an additional 51 colleges may become in scope for intervention (using inadequate as a proxy as per current modelling assumptions). An additional 12 colleges may become in scope of a notice over the following three years (estimated based on current assumptions). Therefore a total of 100 colleges is estimated to be the ‘most likely’ / central scenario.”

These colleges would need to “ensure they were familiar with the insolvency regime procedures”, specifically they would need to know the “details of the regulations”.

The department is expected to pull the plug on exceptional financial support for colleges once the insolvency regime is introduced later this year, and it expects “all colleges to be working to make sure they get on a financially sustainable footing by the end of this financial year” while funds from the restructuring facility are still available.

But new arrangements will be put in place, a spokesperson said, which will be “centred round the new insolvency regime”.

In an exclusive interview with FE Week, the FE commissioner Richard Atkins said that colleges will continue to “occasionally get into difficulty”, and therefore they will need “some sort of funding to oil the wheels in these situations” to ensure stability and protect learners.

“I would have thought that something will need to be put in place, and I know there are people in the Department for Education looking at that at the moment,” he said.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, pointed out that the DfE’s 100 figure may be “misleading and is certainly not intended to imply that 100 colleges are at risk of insolvency”.

He said the regime being introduced in itself is “not a bad thing”, but “the problem is that it is likely to come into effect at an historic low point in college funding”.

“The Children’s Commissioner just this week pointed out that 16- to 18 funding in 2019-20 will be at the same level in real terms as 30 years ago.

“That lack of funding has made running a college harder than ever, just at a time when colleges want to provide a full and rich curriculum and support for young people and adults.”

An eight-week consultation on the regime was launched in December and sought views from staff at general FE colleges, sixth-form colleges, local authorities, financial institutions and others from across FE, as well as insolvency practitioners.

“We recognise that some colleges may face financial difficulties in the future and we cannot rule out the possibility, however small, that a college could become insolvent,” skills minister Anne Milton wrote in the foreword.

“We therefore introduced primary legislation in the Technical and Further Education Act 2017 to create an insolvency regime for further education and sixth-form colleges.”

Scenarios requiring insolvency arrangements are expected only to be “rare”, and will only apply where colleges are in “severe financial difficulties and there is no alternative viable solution for managing the college out of that situation”.

Today’s consultation only received 30 formal responses. Additional comments were “recorded from discussions at a number of events and forums during the consultation period”.

The secondary legislation on the regime will be introduced “when the parliamentary timetable allows, and our current intention remains that the insolvency regime will be in force in late 2018”.

The London skills strategy is a devolution game-changer

Dr Sue Pember hails Sadiq Khan’s bold and far-reaching new skills and adult education plan for the capital

The launch of the mayor’s ‘Skills for Londoners’ strategy is an exciting new development. It is a momentous opportunity for the capital, and it will better meet the needs of Londoners and its economy.

Last week the mayor Sadiq Khan set out his vision and priorities to achieve a “city for all Londoners, to ensure everyone has the opportunity to succeed in a fair, inclusive society and thriving economy”. This is a game-changer: unlike previous strategies it successfully brings together the needs of Londoners and of business.

The strategy is not only an exemplar for the other mayoral combined authorities but also for the government. It fills the void created by the government, which has a piecemeal approach to skills and adult education policy. This document seeks to create a more strategic, city-wide approach, working collaboratively with learners, individuals, employers, providers, boroughs and many other stakeholders.

The present national skills landscape is complex and there are competing priorities and new, disjointed initiatives. The strategy makes sense of this for London, sets the landscape for devolution of funding and explains how Mr Khan will prioritise the £311 million of devolved funding which will be invested annually in the capital’s learners.

The inclusive, constructive processes the mayor used to create this strategy also set it apart and should be a yardstick for progressive policymaking. The GLA asked, listened and acted. The strategy was enhanced by the consultation process and, although at times frustrating, the final policy has been constructed around learners’ needs.

Devolution will put the mayor firmly in the driving seat in terms of supporting adults aged 19 and more to access the skills they need to thrive. This will ensure investment is better directed, and the commitment to the skills Londoners need the most, including literacy, numeracy, digital and ESOL, is commendable. London has a highly qualified workforce but at the same time it has vast numbers with poor basic skills who need support.

The strategy recognises the important role of community learning in education and wider support, particularly for hard-to-reach and disadvantaged groups.

Devolution will enable City Hall to deliver social as well as economic impact, and it will enable the mayor to support his aspiration for greater social mobility, which – along with inclusion and diversity – is at the heart of this strategy.

There are many practical and implementation decisions to be made. For example who pays for the students who want leave the area? The GLA, like all the other MCAs, is developing an underpinning framework. Such frameworks will describe how MCAs will work with their providers.

I hope they choose a trusted-provider model in which learners’ requirements are agreed jointly, and solutions and programmes are developed together. I believe these decisions will be made with the same diligence used in writing the strategy.

However, I urge these new administrators of public funds to look at the best and worst of past systems. We must not succumb to the notion that commissioning by tendering works. Recent events have demonstrated that fixating on process rather than on partnership does not create community-led solutions. Using the language and methods of 1980s-style privatisation and outsourcing will not work in the post-Brexit world.

The mayor has already announced that it will be the living wage rather than the minimum wage will determine who gets free courses in London. This is fantastic but comes at a cost, and the budget is limited. If the mayor wants to keep participation at current levels, there needs to be more funding.

The big challenge for MCAs is the next spending review and their collective ability to persuade the Treasury to restore the 40 per cent of funding lost through successive austerity measures.
This is a new world and I am greatly looking forward to it, but need to be brave and patient to bring it to fruition.

Dr Sue Pember, Managing director, Holex

AELP leaps to defence of level two apprenticeships

Low-level apprenticeships should not be rubbished by “commentators and policy makers”, the Association of Employment and Learning Providers has claimed in a new report.

The body wants ministers to use government spending and post-18 education reviews as an opportunity to “reverse the sharp fall in level two apprenticeships since May 2017”.

The apprenticeship levy is encouraging large employers to “prioritise higher and degree-level apprenticeships over intermediate levels”, it claims in a paper that hits out at people who believe level two is “not a proper apprenticeship”.

AELP’s boss Mark Dawe (pictured above left) said it is “extraordinary” how many government figures “don’t appreciate how significant level two attainment is for both the economy and the large proportion of young people who leave school without it”.

“The knowledge, skills and behaviours defined at level two are some of the most transformational in the apprenticeship suite of standards,” the paper states, and these are “vital starting points for the young, the inexperienced and the disadvantaged”.

AELP’s report takes aim at, among others, Tom Richmond (pictured above right), a former senior advisor to two skills ministers who now works for the Reform think-tank, who has been highly critical of many level two apprenticeships.

“If all apprenticeships are high-quality at level two, then we would expect to see the numbers increase, because it would be a genuinely attractive option for young people,” said the former advisor to Nick Boles and Matt Hancock.

“It is disappointing to see AELP refuse to acknowledge that some level two ‘apprenticeships’ are nothing more than low-skill, low-wage roles that have been rebadged as an apprenticeship to attract government funding.”

Reform strongly supports more apprenticeships in the service sector, but “too many level two programmes fall well short of international standards and simply would not be recognised as apprenticeships in other countries because they offer so little training”.

AELP believes government intervention is necessary because “the market alone will not incentivise” a reversal.

The proportion of level two apprenticeship starts has fallen below 50 per cent for the first time, according to exclusive FE Week analysis. It has dropped from a high of 65 per cent in 2013/14 (see table). The proportion of apprentices aged 25 has fallen below 30 per cent, from a high of 42 per cent last year.

Mr Dawe’s counterpart at Association of Colleges, David Hughes, said the AELP paper had asked “searching questions” about level two apprenticeships and agreed “there are some sectors where numbers have dropped significantly”.

“We have urged the government to refocus attention on its own definition of an apprenticeship as being for new job entrants,” he said.

Mr Hughes has previously suggested that apprenticeships should start at level three

“Where young people start a level two apprenticeship, the aim should be to get them to level three at the minimum,” he said.

“Level two apprenticeships are helping people to train and progress in their careers,” said apprenticeships minister Anne Milton. “In fact, we have seen nearly 174,000 starts on apprenticeships at levels two and three in first half of 2017/18.”

She wants to “improve the quality of apprenticeships across the board”, by replacing old-style frameworks with new employer-led standards “from level two right up to degree or masters level”.

The Institute for Apprenticeships also weighed in, and claimed it supports “the development of all high-quality apprenticeships at levels two to eight”.

“The Institute sees high-quality apprenticeships as crucial routes in helping young people reach their potential, providing excellent career development, as well as retraining opportunities later in life,” it said in a statement.

Now the National Audit Office is sniffing around T-levels

T-levels will be watched for “potential for losses and fruitless payments” according to the comptroller-general at the National Audit Office.

Sir Amyas Morse has turned his eye towards the new post-16 technical qualifications after a rare ministerial direction published last month.

The education secretary Damian Hinds last month refused to delay the initial 2020 rollout of the upcoming technical qualifications despite a request from his permanent secretary, Jonathan Slater.

The NAO is automatically informed of all ministerial directions, and it advises the chair of Public Accounts Committee on whether action is necessary.

Sir Amyas wrote to PAC chair Meg Hillier on June 7, and she has told FE Week her committee is planning on grilling Mr Slater about the issue in two weeks’ time.

In his letter, the comptroller-general said he had “no concerns at present” that the department is using public funds “irregularly” in delivering T-levels.

Meg Hillier

But he will “monitor future spending and consider the potential for losses and fruitless payments arising from T-levels as part of my audits of the department”.

“I have asked my staff to discuss with department officials the reasons for the permanent secretary seeking the ministerial direction, and the plans and risk management arrangements in place to introduce T-levels from 2020,” he added.

“I will then be in a position to decide whether I should undertake any further work on this now.”

Sir Amyas also informed Ms Hillier that should she “wish to ask Jonathan Slater about this matter, he will next appear before the committee on 25 June to give evidence on Ofsted’s inspection of schools”.

Ms Hillier confirmed she would be present to quiz him, in his role as the DfE’s most senior civil servant.

“There are certainly a lot of concerns over the viability and potential for value for money of T-levels,” she said. “They are a nice idea with young people in industry from the beginning, like a super-duper apprenticeship with more education than work, but it is going to be practically quite challenging.”

She added that there is currently no planned PAC inquiry into T-levels but that could change “depending on what the permanent secretary says”.

Ministerial directions are formal instructions from ministers telling their department to proceed with a spending proposal, despite an objection from their permanent secretary.

The DfE published Mr Hinds’ direction on May 24.

“As things stand today, it will clearly be very challenging to ensure that the first three T-levels are ready to be taught from 2020 and beyond to a consistently high standard,” wrote Mr Slater a week before.

As the DfE’s accounting officer, he is required to “consider the regularity, propriety, value for money and feasibility of public spending”.

“If these were the only considerations, you are aware that I would advise deferring the start date to 2021 in order to mitigate the feasibility and consequential value for money risks.”

Despite these concerns, Mr Hinds insisted he would be sticking to the 2020 start date for the first three T-levels, claiming that none of the advice he had received “has indicated that teaching from 2020 cannot be achieved”.

T-levels have been designed as match for A-levels.

They were originally intended to begin in 2019, but in July last year the skills minister Anne Milton announced they had been put back to 2020.

A subsequent announcement in October revealed that pathways in just three subject areas would go live in the first year, with the remaining subject routes launched by 2022.

But the full roll-out of T-levels has now been delayed until September 2023 after concerns were raised about the planned pace of the scheme, particularly by the Confederation of British Industry.