Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

Sheffield College retains its grade three despite achievement-rate worries

Sheffield College has held onto its grade three rating following a recent Ofsted visit – despite concerns that falling standards could drag it down.

The huge college, which has suffered a string of leadership changes in recent months, was rated ‘requires improvement’ overall and in six headline measures in a report published this morning and based on an inspection in late January.

Poor achievement rates – which FE Week previously reported could have pulled the college down to a grade four – were among the main issues singled out in the report.

“The proportion of students on study programmes and adult learning programmes who achieve their qualifications is not high enough,” the report said.

In addition, students on English and maths courses are not making enough progress, while learners on level three programmes are “not rapid enough”.

“Too many students” fail to progress or complete their courses “because they do not attend lessons”, while “too many” adult learners and those on study programmes “do not arrive on time to their lessons”.

Teaching, learning and assessment at the college are “not of a consistently high standard”.

“Leaders recognise this in the college’s self-assessment report, but have been unable to secure improvements since the previous inspection”.

Governors, senior leaders and managers were criticised for being “slow to address many of the weaknesses identified at the previous inspection” and for having “insufficient focus on ensuring that students develop their English and mathematics skills” until recently.

Sheffield College lost its chief executive Paul Corcoran in November, and its governing body chair Richard Wright in January, after both stepped down with immediate effect.

Their departures came just months after Angela Foulkes took over as principal in June, replacing former principal Heather Smith who retired last summer after two years in charge.

Ms Foulkes is currently acting chief executive until a permanent replacement is found, while Seb Schmoller was appointed chair on January 18, shortly before the Ofsted visit.

“Following recent changes to personnel in the governing body and senior leadership team, they now have a good understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the college,” inspectors conceded.

And while the college received grade threes in six headline measures, it was rated ‘good’ for both apprenticeships and provision for learners with high needs.

“Ensuring students have a consistently good learning experience so they can fulfil their potential is my top priority. We are not complacent. The college is taking swift action with a comprehensive plan to address the points raised by Ofsted,” Ms Foulkes said.

“We are absolutely determined to support Angela Foulkes and the staff of the college to improve things quickly in the areas where Ofsted has rightly said we need to do better. Our students and the communities we serve deserve nothing less than this,” Mr Schmoller added.

Sheffield College was also rated ‘requires improvement’ almost exactly two years ago – down from grade two in 2013.

It had been feared that the college could fall to ‘inadequate’ due to its declining achievement rates – although the college itself had self-assessed as a grade three.

Its 2016/17 accounts, published in January, revealed its education and training achievement rates had dropped from 77.4 per cent in 2015/16, to 76.3 per cent.

Minutes from a board meeting in October revealed this fall to have come as a surprise to college leaders: the college was recently visited by the FE commissioner for a diagnostic assessment.

These are two-day visits to colleges at risk of failing – particularly those with multiple grade threes – to identify where they need to improve.

Barnfield College could lose its apprenticeships provision

Barnfield College has been rated grade four by Ofsted for apprenticeships, which means it will lose the right to offer them under updated government rules.

An inspection report out this morning rated it ‘requires improvement’ in all other headline fields, except for adult learning programmes and provision for people with high needs, where it was ‘good’.

But the lowest possible mark for apprenticeships carries serious implications.

Providers given a grade four are taken off of the government’s register of apprenticeship training providers and won’t be able to offer the training. The rules on this were only clarified by the Education and Skills Funding Agency in January.

“The provision for apprenticeships is ‘inadequate’ and has declined in quality for the last three years,” said the report.

A total of 260 apprentices were said to follow framework programmes in eight subject areas, of which just over half study at intermediate level. Just over a third of them are aged 16 to 18.

“Assessors do not carry out assessment of apprentices prior learning to determine their starting points accurately, and ensure that they make good progress. Too many apprentices are unclear about the progress that they are making or are capable of,” inspectors warned.

“Leaders do not plan and manage provision to meet fully the principles and requirements of apprenticeships.”

Apprentices’ attendance at off-the-job learning sessions is “erratic and low”, and they do not all spend the mandated 20 per cent of their time learning away from work.

“Managers and staff have not ensured that employers engage in all aspects of the training or help monitor apprentices’ progress and enable them to excel,” the report added.

While “a few” employers have a good understanding of apprenticeship programmes and support their apprentices “sufficiently”, inspectors warned that “too few” are involved fully in reviews of apprentices’ progress and setting “meaningful targets”.

This undermines apprentices’ motivation and holds learners back with progression.

Poor progress was found, for example, in efforts to improve English, maths and ICT skills.

“Apprentices have too few timetabled opportunities to improve these skills,” inspectors said.

There may yet be a lifeline for the college, however. In early February, St Helens College was also rated ‘inadequate’ for its apprenticeship provision, but it actually received special dispensation to remain on the register.

In the same week that new rules were published outlining when and how providers would be removed from the register, the DfE admitted that it was treated differently due to its merger with Knowsley Community College that completed in December.

Merged colleges are considered ungraded by Ofsted, and are eligible to apply to the register under exceptional circumstances.

The ESFA had previously said it would “exercise its right to terminate contracts where a provider is not meeting the standards expected” – and that any provider with a grade four would be “removed from the register in due course”.

And under the new rules published on January 30, an ‘inadequate’ provider should be given five days’ notice of their removal from the register. They must not take on any new apprentices, but any existing apprentices would be able to stay on only at the employers’ discretion.

“A provider with a grade four Ofsted rating is ineligible to apply to the register and it is right that a provider is removed if they are later assessed as inadequate,” a DfE spokesperson said.

Barnfield College has two campuses in north Luton. It taught around 3,700 learners last contract year.

Today’s Ofsted report did recognise some areas of encouragement.

“Leaders’ actions to improve teaching have resulted in demonstrable progress for some groups of learners as indicated by the increased achievement rates of study programme learners during the previous year,” it said.

“The majority of learners develop good practical vocational skills, particularly in workshop sessions.”

A college spokesperson stuck to the positives.

“The report highlights many areas of good practice and key strengths including effective safeguarding of students, demonstrable progress of learners indicated by increased achievement rates and good development of learners’ practical vocational skills,” she said. “This is particularly true around our high-needs and adult provisions, which have been graded as ‘good’. The college has developed a robust action plan to address the identified areas of improvement.”

How Bletchley Park IoT could host a new generation of computer wizards

A consortium lead by Milton Keynes College has bid for £18 million-worth of funding to launch an Institute of Technology at England’s famous wartime codebreaking centre, Bletchley Park.

The group, which includes as partners Microsoft, City & Guilds and the Bletchley Park Trust, has unveiled details of the proposed Institute of Digital Technology.

As many as 1,000 learners a year will be taught in fields such as network engineering, applications development, intelligent systems, games development and cybersecurity. The plan is to restore the site’s currently derelict Block D (pictured above), an area used during World War Two as an intelligence centre to crack Nazi codes and ciphers.

The government has set aside £170 million for new institutes of technology.

It would be a marvellous addition to Alan Turing’s legacy

“It’s central to the government’s proposals for institutes of technology for the curriculum to pinpoint and meet the needs of employers,” said Dr Julie Mills, the principal of Milton Keynes College.

“At the Institute of Digital Technology at Bletchley Park, those employers will be involved in actually designing the courses studied to make certain those needs are met and hopefully exceeded.”

A procurement process ran between December and March for providers to apply for a slice of the funding, and it is expected that around 10 IoTs will be created from it.

The consortium also involves KPMG, Cranfield University, Volkswagen Financial Services and Evidence Talks.

“It’s absolutely fitting that Block D should be brought back to life for a purpose which is both educational and meeting a technology-related need of such significance to the nation,” said Sir John Turing, the nephew of the famous wartime codebreaker Alan Turing, and a member of the board of the Bletchley Park Trust.

“It would be a marvellous addition to Alan Turing’s legacy if the proposed Institute of Digital Technology were to open here. It’s exciting to think just how inspired the people who come here to learn could be, knowing in whose footsteps they will be walking.”

Derrick McCourt, the general manager of the customer success unit at Microsoft UK, added that Bletchley Park is “synonymous with the security of this nation” and there is no more appropriate place to train the “next generation of cybersecurity experts who will protect the UK from the growing threat of cyberattacks”.

While the Department for Education now trawls through individual IoT bids, one official has claimed the project’s pot is too “modest” to have a significant impact on the skills system.

Speaking at a House of Lords economic committee hearing last month, the FE commissioner Richard Atkins said that while the concept of IoTs was a “very good idea”, the “amount of funding going into them is modest and therefore I am not sure it will transform the system”.

Institutes of technology were first mooted in the productivity plan in July 2015.

Even though the DfE has repeatedly said it plans to “establish high-quality and prestigious institutions”, the only money available is a relatively small three-year wave of capital funding mainly for existing colleges.

Julian Gravatt, the Association of Colleges’ deputy chief executive, agreed with Mr Atkins at the hearing that IoTs are a “good experiment”, but said he feared “too much pressure” had been heaped on them to “revolutionise the system”.

New 20% limit for management fees in best-practice guidance

The management fees charged by prime FE providers should not be more than 20 per cent of the programme funding – and will generally be much less – after big-hitting FE representative bodies struck an agreement.

The organisations putting their name to new best-practice guidance on relationships between primes and their subcontractors are the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, the adult community education and learning organisation Holex , and provider group Collab.

“New guidance has been largely prompted by the creation of new subcontracting relationships that have resulted from the ESFA procurement exercises for the adult education budget and non-levy apprenticeship funding,” said a spokesperson for all three.

“The three sector bodies are concerned about recurring reputational issues around top-slicing, with the perception that the management fee removes funds from learners.”

Some management fees have recently even reached 40 per cent, which was infamously how much was levied in some cases by Learndirect.

Lead providers often claim the fees are needed to cover administrative costs, but many in the sector, including the education committee chair Robert Halfon, believe that too much money is being diverted from frontline learning.

“Quite rightly, everyone involved wants to maximise the proportion of funding being spent directly on training the learner, to ensure that the quality of the training and the experience of the individual learner is not negatively impacted,” the new guidance says.

“The core fee charged by the prime provider for legitimate management overheads for quality and contractual compliance aspects should be between 0 to 20 per cent, depending on what is provided and the extent of what is provided.

“The expectation is that it is capped at no greater than 20 per cent and generally will be much less.”

“Our members are both primes and subcontractors, and this guidance starts to build a clear consensus of what is expected by each partner,” said Dr Sue Pember of Holex.

“It is vital that there is transparency over costs and the student experience is at the centre of the relationship.”

“Market operations over a number of years have shown that for the range of services which can be offered by lead providers to subcontractors, and therefore need to be taken into account here, the cost of delivery is about 20 per cent or less,” added AELP boss Mark Dawe.

“Good subcontracting is important to the sector, for example in how it supports smaller providers which have been badly hit recently and may need support from lead providers, so it’s important that it is done well.

“This is not about the government dictating what is good and bad practice, it is about the sector saying what is acceptable and what isn’t.”

“A prime-subcontractor relationship should be a tangible, healthy and collaborative partnership between the client, the prime provider and an eco-system of other suppliers focused on meeting the needs of the client – the employer,” said Ian Pretty, chief executive of the Collab Group.

HMRC has also launched an investigation into subcontracting that could result in tens of millions in fees and fines after it discovered many colleges and training providers are ignoring VAT rules on management fees.

The guidance also suggests that if a potential subcontractor is considered high risk, the prime should refrain from working with it at all rather than increasing the fee.

Another key recommendation is that “prime providers should continue to publish their fees and the rationale for them on their websites”, and “make available their rationale to their subcontractors”.

The government was accused in January of double standards on transparency, after it admitted it probably wouldn’t publish its long-delayed findings on subcontracting fees in time for parliamentary inquiry hearings.

The Education and Skills Funding Agency has taken over responsibility for publishing all subcontracting “management” fees.

But it “aims” to publish them by the end of March. These have not yet emerged, and even if they do, it will be four months after its own deadline.

Mr Halfon has told the DfE to redress this “deeply worrying” situation, and collect the data “immediately” so it “can be collated and we can see them”.

The DfE has been approached for comment.

Hull College Group to shed over 200 staff

Hull College Group is preparing to shed up to 231 full-time jobs in an effort to balance its books.

In a statement that appeared online yesterday, chief executive Michelle Swithenbank warned that “some difficult decisions have to be made” to regain stability amid longstanding financial troubles.

The FE commissioner reported in February last year that HCG’s finances remained precarious after the Skills Funding Agency had issued a notice of concern in November 2016.

“We need to change the way we do things which is why the Hull College Group team has been looking at new ways of working,” said Ms Swithenbank.

“As a result, a restructure is being put forward which involves a number of proposed redundancies.

“This potentially will affect up to 231 full-time equivalent posts across our sites in Goole, Harrogate and Hull, including HCUK Training.”

Anyone affected by redundancy will be offered “our full-support and guidance” throughout the process, she claimed, including interview training and counselling.

“We are also working with major stakeholders to look at redeployment opportunities for our staff,” she added.

“To strengthen and protect our unique Hull city centre, Goole and Harrogate resource, we are also making changes to our curriculum so it best meets the needs of our local communities.

“From September this year, we will offer an improved range of courses in both further and higher education, including a number of new foundation degrees.”

The FE commissioner’s report warned that HCG’s “operating performance, as measured by surplus/deficit after interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation costs has amounted to a cumulative deficit of around £10 million over the past four years”, while “a further deficit in excess of £1 million is forecast for the current year”.

The notice was issued because the SFA had rated the group ‘inadequate’ for financial health based on its 2016-to-2018 financial plan, and because it had requested exceptional financial support.

The then-senior leadership team had not addressed key issues, including the steady decline in financial performance and a loss of market share.

There was said to be concern at all levels of the organisation that it “lacks strategic vision and strong, resolute leadership and that this is frustrating and demotivating for staff”.

Jisc cuts leave colleges paying a high price for essential IT services

English colleges will have to pay Jisc for essential IT services from next year, due to a “significant” funding cut enacted by the Department for Education.

The changes, which were announced today but stem from the 2015 spending review, will mean colleges will more than likely be forced to spend at least £15,000 a year – and potentially as much as £100,000 – from August 2019 for services including access to the Janet network.

“The DfE have confirmed their intention to change how they intend to fund Jisc which will involve a significant funding reduction,” wrote Paul Feldman, Jisc’s chief executive, in an open letter to members.

The technology organisation will continue to receive some government money, but will “need to introduce a subscription for our general FE college members in England to enable all of our critical services, including the Janet network and all of the cybersecurity benefits to be retained”.

“The decision to introduce the mixed funding model has been requested by the DfE – they feel it will mean members continue to hold us to account, to contribute actively to our work and make sure we continue to provide best value,” he wrote.

David Hughes, the AoC chief executive, said he was “disappointed” by the decision.

“College budgets have been hit harder than any other part of the education system over the last eight years and we continue to fight for fair funding for colleges and for college students,” he said.

“This new cost for an essential service will be a real struggle for many colleges on top of other rising costs over recent years.”

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden urged the DfE to reverse the decision to cut Jisc’s funding, which he said had “all the hallmarks of a department scraping around trying to find candle end economies at the end of the financial year”.

He warned that the funding cut risked “significant damage to colleges’ ability to take up” essential IT services, including cyber security.

Subscriptions are likely to range from £15,000 a year for a medium-sized single-site college to over £100,000 for a large college group.

The “vast majority” of colleges are expected to have to pay less than £20,000, Mr Feldman said.

The change will bring colleges in line with HE institutes, which have paid Jisc subscription fees since 2012.

Mr Hughes said he had “made the case” to the DfE that universities are better funded and were therefore “able to better mitigate increased costs”.

“Unfortunately, that case resulted only in a one-year delay in implementing the new fees,” he said.

Today’s announcement only affects general FE colleges in England, and Jisc is still waiting to hear about its funding for sixth-form colleges, including those that have converted to academies, and independent specialist colleges.

It is not yet clear by how much Jisc’s funding would be reduced.

It has already had its budget slashed by £10 million over the past five years.

Jisc, formerly the Joint Information and Systems Committee was launched in 1993 and provides a range of IT services and support for FE and HE institutes.

Services provided by Jisc for the FE and skills sector include the Janet network and eduroam, which give colleges internet and WiFi access; a shared data centre; and telephony purchasing.

It also offers a range of support and advice, including a number of best practice guides and tools, for making the best use of digital technologies.

A DfE spokesperson said: “We have asked colleges to make a contribution towards their ICT costs which will mean that they have a bigger say in the services they receive and get the maximum benefit from Jisc.

“This will bring colleges in line with other parts of the education sector by making sure there is a real incentive to get value for money and an excellent service.”

Regional winners of inaugural Annual Apprenticeship Awards announced

The regional winners of the inaugural Annual Apprenticeship Awards have been announced at a special ceremony in the House of Commons today.

The categories included ‘apprentice employer’, ‘apprenticeship provider’ and ‘promoting apprenticeships campaign’, and winners will now head to the national finals on March 22.

The event was sponsored by the chair of the education select committee Robert Halfon, who is also celebrating the start of National Apprenticeship Week. The winners were as follows:

Shane Mann, the managing director of LSect, the group that runs both FE Week and the awards, said: “I would like to say a huge congratulations to our regional winners recognised today, as well as all the national finalists.

“Our panel had a rigorous process for drawing up the shortlist, and identifying the best of the best. It was extremely difficult to do this because we had so many fantastic entrants.

“Today’s event has been a major success and I would like to thank our sponsors and Robert Halfon for making it all possible.

“We now look forward to the national results on March 22 at the Annual Apprenticeship Conference in Birmingham.”

The other regional finalists were EDF Energy, BL Training Ltd, NOVA Training, the Home Office, Specsavers, Lookers PLC, Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Greene King, the Cornwall Colleges Group, Barnsley College, Nova Training, Babcock Training Ltd, Cardiff and Vale College.

FE Week and AELP announced the full shortlists for the AAC Apprenticeship Awards in association with CMI in February, and the national winners will be unveiled on March 22 at the Annual Apprenticeship Conference in Birmingham.

The conference will run from March 21 to March 23 at the International Convention Centre in Birmingham.

The judges for this year’s awards included Alison Birkinshaw, the president of the Association of Colleges, Rob Colbourne, the managing director for Performance Through People & Chair, West Midlands Provider Regional Network, and Sue Taylor, network manager at ALPS Partnership.

Also on the panel were Sharron Robbie, managing director of Devon & Cornwall Training Provider Network and chair of the South-West Training Provider Network, Mike Cherry, the national chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, Mark Dawe, the chief executive of the AELP, Bill Twigg, the senior apprenticeships manager at City & Guilds, and Stewart Segal, an AELP board member.

FE Week and LSect would like to dedicate a special thanks for the generosity of the sponsors which are supporting the awards in their first year.

Particular thanks go to our headline partner for 2018, CMI. “Without their support we wouldn’t be able to administer these awards,” said Mr Mann. The full list of national finalists are as follows:

Here’s video reaction from some of the delighted winners:

Sheffield County Council:

Walsall College:

Kent County Council:

BT:

Government joins unions and industry to thrash out a ‘National Retraining Scheme’

A high-level advisory group made up of top government officials and industry and union leaders has met for the first time today to begin their work in developing a “historic” national retraining scheme.

The first meeting of the National Retraining Partnership was hosted by the chancellor Philip Hammond (pictured above) and joined by such luminaries as Carolyn Fairbairn, the boss of the Confederation for British Industry, TUC leader Frances O’Grady, the education secretary Damian Hinds and the exchequer secretary Robert Jenrick.

The industrial strategy white paper, published in November, contained the first plans for this partnership, which has a primary goal of driving up adult learning and retraining.

It will decide how the upcoming National Retraining Scheme can boost productivity and tackle skills shortages in sectors identified as areas of growth, including in construction, automotive, artificial intelligence and creative industries.

Top of the agenda for the inaugural meeting was finding ways the scheme would “ensure people are given every opportunity to succeed in this new economy, and how British firms can be supported to create better, higher-paid jobs”.

In his autumn budget, the chancellor announced £64 million to get the ball rolling with pilots in digital and construction skills.

“Today’s meeting underlines the importance of working collaboratively to rise to the challenges and opportunities of the technological revolution which is transforming our economy,” said Mr Hammond.

“We are determined to equip our workers with the skills they need to succeed as we make the UK a world leader in new technologies. This partnership is an important step towards doing so.”

Mr Hinds, who chaired today’s meeting, added: “Today’s meeting marks a historic partnership between government, business and unions, and is an important step towards implementing the National Retraining Scheme.

“For our economy to thrive we need everyone, regardless of their age, to be able to gain the skills they need to make the most of the opportunities that lie ahead.

“I’m proud to be working alongside CBI and the TUC to develop and deliver a programme that will boost productivity, which will truly meet the needs of employers and the economy.”

A total of £30 million will be invested in the retraining scheme to test the use of artificial intelligence and innovative education technology in online digital skills courses, so students can benefit from this emerging technology.

Meanwhile, £34 million will be used to expand “innovative” construction training programmes, to train people for jobs such as groundworkers, bricklayers, roofers and plasterers.

Ms Fairbairn said businesses are on board to make this retraining scheme a success.

“Businesses see investing in skills as critical to building an economy that is fit for the 21st century,” she said.

“It’s the best way to compete globally, seize the opportunities of the industrial strategy and increase people’s pay.

“We’re delighted to be involved in the National Retraining Partnership alongside the TUC and the government.

“The partnership, alongside improved technical education and a reformed apprenticeship levy, could drive a skills revolution. We are committed to designing a system that really delivers for those already in work, improving careers, opportunities and business performance. A great starting point is the skills base needed for the UK’s new industrial strategy.”

Anne Milton’s inspirational words for learners on National Apprenticeship Week

Doing an apprenticeship rather than going to university can take “guts”, the skills minister has told a group of apprentices.

Anne Milton was speaking at an apprentice round table hosted by apprenticeship agency WhiteHat, founded by Euan Blair [pictured above with Ms Milton], at the start of National Apprenticeship Week 2018.

“I think anybody who walks away from what everybody else is doing deserves a medal, because it’s quite hard to do,” she said. “It takes quite a lot of guts. So you’re exceptional, just by deciding not to do what everybody else wants you to do.

“I didn’t do what everybody wanted me to do at school, and look where I ended up.”

Ms Milton was speaking to six young people who had all found apprenticeships through WhiteHat.

Anne Milton with apprentices Caitlyn Hardy, Mari Berry and Robert Ukandu

All six shared their experiences of choosing an apprenticeship – including some who had started degrees but then dropped out as university wasn’t for them.

The skills minister said they should not feel like imposters because they hadn’t gone to university.

“So when you stand alongside a graduate you have to remember that you’re not a imposter – you’re there as result of your own efforts,” she said.

“I think I suffered a bit from that when I went into politics. In time that leaves you, and you think I deserve my place here.”

WhiteHat is a tech start-up cofounded by Euan Blair, the son of former prime minister Tony Blair, and Sophie Adelman.

It’s designed to match non-graduates aged 16 to 23 with apprenticeship opportunities at companies including Google and Just Eat.

“Apprenticeships cannot be seen as just being for a certain segment of society. They’ve got to be all-encompassing,” Mr Blair said.