Government loophole allows apprenticeship brokerage to continue

Taking fees for brokering apprenticeship funding is acceptable, according to correspondence from the Skills Funding Agency – as long as payments aren’t made directly from government funding.

The government recently promised to crack down on brokering, which can see subcontractors charged up to five per cent of their total contract funding in commission to be matched with a prime.

The AELP now wants this loophole fixed for good, to “ensure the need for brokerage is eliminated”.

Funding rules were changed last year to prevent brokering, and state that “funds in an employer’s digital account or government-employer co-investment must not be used for… specific services not related to the delivery and administration of the apprenticeship”.

But the director of a Yorkshire-based firm that openly offers a “subcontracting and brokerage service” on its website has denied any wrongdoing, and has correspondence from the body that became the Education and Skills Funding Agency to prove it.

It is fantasy and fallacy to imagine that if brokering was banned, the funds previously paid in commission would find their way into learning

Daniel Scargill, the boss of Diamond Advisory Services, was told that “the service you provide is not fundable under the funding rules – however, any employer/provider can pay you for your service, just not using government funds”.

The message, seen by FE Week, also indicates that profits from funding can still be “indirectly” spent on his brokerage services, though “they cannot be used and included as part of an apprenticeships funding value”.

Mr Scargill claimed while the funding allocation system “is not a perfect one”, his company was “helping to perfect it”.

“It is both fantasy and fallacy to imagine that if brokering was banned, the funds previously paid in commission would find their way into learning,” he added.

AELP boss Mark Dawe was not at all happy to discover the existence of this guidance.

“Anything that takes funding away from frontline has to be assessed for value for money. Sadly the clunky funding system and disastrous procurement exercises mean for many quality providers, they have to find a prime contract partner,” he said.

Mark Dawe

“This will always lead to a potential market for intermediaries. We are working closely with the ESFA to try and ensure the need for brokerage is eliminated.”

Diamond Advisory Services was previously known as the Funding Brokers, but its name was changed a year ago.

FE Week reported on the Funding Brokers in April 2016, during an investigation that found brokers were typically charging subcontractors up to five per cent of their government cash for matching them to a prime provider.

The firm had posted an advert which said “we have been providing this service for over three years, securing in excess of £100 million in the process for our clients”.

“Diamond Advisory Services offers a diverse range of services to a similarly diverse clientele,” Mr Scargill said this week. “As such, a decision was taken regarding the company name that the Funding Brokers was inappropriately narrow in what it conveyed.”

Quattro Consultancy, which offers on its website to match prime contractors “looking to work with training providers on a subcontracting or associate basis”, also denies that moves to cut down on brokerage have had a meaningful effect.

“The key change to the rules is that ‘from May 1, 2017, no government money can be used to pay brokers’ fees’,” the firm which did not comment this week, said on its website. “Will this affect our clients? Well we don’t think so.”

This loophole is not the first example of weak enforcement. It was reported last year that the NHS and Nottingham city council were continuing to charge what amounted to brokerage fees for allowing providers access to apprenticeship contracts.

The Department for Education clarified its approach to brokerage this week.

“Any government funding provided for apprenticeships must be spent on apprenticeship training and assessment only,” a spokesperson said.

But third-party brokers appear to be in the clear, as it was stressed the ESFA would “only investigate organisations with which it has a contractual relationship”, referring employers or providers.

Victory for Grenfell campaigners as FE Commissioner scraps colleges’ merger

A merger between two London colleges has been called off following direct intervention from the FE commissioner, triggered by fallout from the Grenfell Tower fire tragedy.

Kensington and Chelsea College had been pressing ahead with plans to merge with Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College, despite massive local opposition.

But Richard Atkins told campaigners yesterday that it was now off.

One of their leaders Meg McDonald, from The Save Wornington College group, which has been working in partnership with campaigners battling for justice following the Grenfell Tower fire, has thanked the thousands of people who helped fight to stop it.

“The merger is definitely off and that’s because of you whether leafleting and fly posting, emailing the governors and the principal, lobbying governors meetings in the cold, getting the petition signed, standing at the stall on Fridays, coming to meetings with your ideas, investigating legal matters, writing letters, speaking at meetings for the campaign, you have been the core of this campaign,” she said.

She added the FE Commissioner will share the report of his team’s recommendations next week.

Mr Atkins was sent in before Christmas to review the situation, along with further intervention from skills minister Anne Milton, in-part because KCC’s Wornington campus is in the shadow of Grenfell Tower, which was struck by tragedy last June when 71 people died in a huge fire.

The final vote by KCC board of governors either to accept or reject a merger with Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College had been due to take place on December 18.

But they agreed to delay at least until the end of next April, after Ms Milton and Mr Atkins made fresh recommendations.

FE Week has had it confirmed separately that the merger is off.

“They will be looking into the quick sale of the college, other partnerships, proper consultation with the community and other interested parties, speaking to the council to negotiate a better and longer lease for Wornington, and the finances,” Ms McDonald said.

More than 1,600 campaigners who oppose the merger have signed a petition to be handed to college leaders.

They believe convinced the resulting super-college would have been more likely to allow the local council to redevelop KCC’s Wornington Road campus, situated close to Grenfell Tower, which was devastated by fire over the summer killing 71 people, for housing.

Wornington has traditionally been a popular place of learning for many of the sort of less affluent residents in the local area, for example it has been people who would have lived at Grenfell.

Mr Atkins visited KCC last month under orders from Ms Milton to review the merger plan which were meant to go ahead from January.

Campaigners, led by Grenfell survivor Ed Daffarn, had been saying for months that they felt confident they would stop the merger, because they believed that would be given special consideration by the government because of the Grenfell fire tragedy.

Ms McDonald added that “many people have asked how to seek the dismissal or resignation” of Kensington and Chelsea College’s chair of governors, Mary Curnock Cook, also a former UCAS boss, and principal, Dr Elaine McMahon, who have remained committed to the merger as local opposition has mounted.

Ms Curnock Cook said: “The board of Kensington & Chelsea College will be discussing the recommendations of the FE Commissioner at its February meeting.”

The Wornington campus is one of the college’s two main sites, and was recently sold under a lease-back deal for £25.3 million to the borough council, which then outlined plans for the site which would at best result in greatly reduced teaching space.

But Kim Taylor-Smith, who took over as deputy leader of the council in July and is lead member for Grenfell recovery, said he has listened to a huge number of complaints about the plans, and paused the campus redevelopment plans.

The Department for Education has not commented so far.

Area reviews mishandled early on, DfE research concludes

The way the government handled the first wave of the area reviews has been slammed by new research on behalf of the Department for Education.

Most of those who took part “considered their involvement in the first wave of the process as a challenge”, consultancy firm CFE found.

Major obstacles included a “lack of lead in time to understand the policy” or prepare for it, and “underdevelopment of the guidance”.

There was initially too narrow a scope of providers, especially because school sixth-forms weren’t included, and there was too much focus on finance above all else.

“Many interviewees said it was unfortunate and sometimes frustrating that the needs of learners and local businesses were not considered in the same level of detail as financial issues,” the report said.

The area reviews of post-16 education and training were announced by the former Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in July 2015, and kicked off in September that year, concluding in March 2017.

The process was intended to lead to “fewer, often larger, more resilient and efficient providers”.

The needs of learners and local businesses were not considered in the same level of detail as financial issues

Early predictions claimed up to 80 mergers would result, just 58 were proposed – of which 35 have gone through, according to the FE commissioner Richard Atkins, who oversaw the final reviews.

He told the Commons education committee this week the reviews weren’t an “unmitigated success”, but claimed that “on balance they had a number of successful elements”.

These included “bringing colleges, local authorities and local enterprise partnerships together”. He also highlighted the benefits of “holding colleges to account in terms of looking at their data and sharing their data”.

The research focused on the experiences of people involved in two of the first-wave reviews: Birmingham and Solihull, and Tees Valley, which were the first two to finish in March and May 2016 respectively.

Many of the difficulties cited have been reported extensively by FE Week.

We covered the long delays to the early reviews, and the initial timeframe of three to four months that even the government representatives involved in the process acknowledged had been optimistic.

Participants in the Tees Valley review, which was jointly chaired by Sir David Collins, the FE commissioner at the time, and Gill Alexander, Hartlepool council’s chief executive, complained that “the two individuals had different ambitions for the review”.

This echoed deep divisions in the Greater Manchester area review – not included in this report – between the colleges and combined local authority, leading to lengthy delays.

The research sheds some light on why so many recommended mergers, including all three of those proposed in Tees Valley, have subsequently fallen through.

“The extent to which the options were appraised in both areas was relatively light touch, with the emphasis being on pragmatic partnerships between colleges to merge rather than a detailed analysis of the data to suggest which merger options would be best based on the evidence base,” the report said.

However, it didn’t look at the outcomes and impacts of the reviews as “at the time the evaluation took place it was too soon to measure these”.

But the report did note that “only a few respondents agreed that the changes recommended would have happened without the area review process being undertaken”.

Over half of Learndirect’s 17,000 apprentices failed last year

More than half of the 17,000 apprentices due to complete their course with Learndirect last year failed, as its achievement rate slumped a further 8.6 percentage points, FE Week can reveal.

These latest figures now mean that nearly 25,000 learners have failed to successfully complete their apprenticeship at the nation’s biggest FE provider over the last four years – during which time it was given over £150 million to deliver these qualifications.

The ESFA shared its provisional data for individual providers in 2016/17 last week, revealing that Learndirect had accomplished its worst ever overall achievement rate for apprenticeships.

Back in November, following its first monitoring visit since Learndirect’s infamous grade four, Ofsted announced that its rates had fallen below the 57.8 per cent dip recorded in 2015/16, but that the actual figure would not be available to the public until as late as June.

FE Week has now seen the data and can reveal that during the last academic year, Learndirect’s cohort of 17,033 apprentices had an overall achievement rate of just 49.2 per cent. In other words, more than half failed to attain their qualification.

This is significantly below the ESFA’s minimum threshold of 62 per cent and raises yet more concerns about the quality of training its apprentices are receiving.

The timescale of the 2016/17 figures shows that even after Learndirect’s damning inspection in March, when concerns about its delivery were first raised, it didn’t sharpen up quickly and continued to fail the majority of its trainees.

Its achievement rate has dropped considerably over the last four years (see table), and since 2013/14, Learndirect has trained 58,283 apprentices but 24,712 of them failed to achieve their qualifications.

During that time, it was given £153 million by the ESFA to deliver apprenticeships, according to the National Audit Office. It will get an additional £14 million to deliver the qualifications in 2017/18.

During the full inspection in March, Ofsted inspectors slammed managers for allowing around a third of apprentices to “not receive their entitlement to off-the-job learning” and miss out on “the skills they require to progress to the next step in their career”.

Its monitoring visit report from November said it still “remains unclear” what off-the-job training had taken place at the provider.

It added that senior leaders had overseen the “phased introduction” of a new policy to clarify how assessors are expected to plan and record apprentices’ off-the-job training, but this did not start until two months after the grade four.

Almost half of apprentices were “identified currently as being behind target, and a further fifth are at risk of falling behind target”, Ofsted found.

The monitoring visit did have some more positive news about the current delivery of apprenticeships, however.

“Since the inspection, the proportion of apprentices leaving their programmes early has reduced, and the number of apprentices on unauthorised breaks in learning, which was a major contributing factor to the poor overall achievement rates in 2016/17, has declined significantly,” inspectors wrote.

“As a result, the proportion of apprentices completing their qualifications is beginning to increase, but from a very low base.”

There is, however, no evidence of this improvement for courses that ended by July 2017.

Learndirect has been under the microscope ever since the ‘inadequate’ report appeared in August, and the government subsequently singled it out for special treatment by allowing it to retain its contracts for almost a year – much more than the usual three-month termination period.

It was subject to an NAO investigation and then a Public Accounts Committee hearing, and the report of the latter is expected in the spring.

Learndirect declined to comment on its apprenticeship achievement rates.

Ofsted Watch: Luton Sixth Form College slips from grade one

Luton Sixth Form College has become the latest FE provider to lose its prized grade one status.

It follows last week’s Ofsted Watch in which three other providers all fell from ‘outstanding’.

Inspectors said that progress mentors at grade two-overall rated Luton, which teaches over 2,500 learners, do not have the “information that they require” to provide the “swiftest possible support to enable more students to achieve their best”.

They added that students’ achievement on A-level science and maths is “too low and too few students achieve the grades of which they are capable”.

Teachers also do not “consistently challenge” the most able students to make the progress of which they are capable.

Governors, senior leaders and staff at the SFC, which was rated ‘good’ in all headline fields, were however praised for understanding the local community well.

“They use this information to develop a safe, supportive and harmonious working environment and an ambitious culture,” inspectors said.

They added that leaders and managers analysis of learners’ qualification outcomes is “very thorough”, and when they identify declining trends in achievement they take “swift action” to make improvements.

It was better news for two private providers: London Skills for Growth and MPower Training Solutions, who both hopped from a grade three to a two.

Based in Bexley, London Skills for Growth was applauded for improving its teaching, learning and assessment, as well as setting an “ambitious improvement strategy” and ensuring that staff are committed to it.

“Staff have remedied the key areas for improvement identified at the previous inspection,” inspectors said.

The board of trustees has also taken “bold and effective steps” to strengthen its partnership with local colleges, and in doing so, leaders and managers have “secured the long-term future of the organisation”.

Over at the Essex-based MPower Training Solutions, leaders were highlighted for setting personal development, behaviour and welfare at an ‘outstanding’ level.

Leaders and managers promote a “culture of tolerance and mutual respect,” inspectors said, adding: “Consequently, learners and apprentices develop an excellent awareness of a wide range of social and ethical issues they may face in their work and social lives.

“Learners and apprentices take pride in their work and enjoy their time at the training centre.”

It wasn’t such good news for fellow private provider JFC Training College, based in London, which was given a grade three in its first ever inspection.

“Senior leaders do not monitor the quality of provision effectively and do not have a full understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of teaching, learning and assessment,” Ofsted said.

VQ Solutions was also given a grade three, falling from a grade two.

Inspectors said leaders at the Harrogate private provider do not manage the performance of assessors well enough to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment.

A ‘requires improvement’ rating was given to the UK’s largest hospitality company, Whitbread PLC.

Leaders at the employer provider, which provides intermediate, advanced and higher-level apprenticeships in hospitality and catering at their Premier Inn hotels and Costa outlets, do not use data “well enough” to check the progress that apprentices make.

Trainers and assessors also do not ensure that apprentices achieve as well as they can.

The Activate Learning Group, which has three main campuses of Reading College, City of Oxford College and Banbury and Bicester College teaching over 9,000 learners, maintained its ‘good’ grade following a full inspection in December.

Among a host of positives, inspectors highlighted governors and senior leaders for providing a “clear strategic direction, vision and mission”.

There were two short inspections, where providers also maintained their grade twos. These were had at the City Of Bradford Metropolitan District Council and The Sixth Form College Colchester.

One monitoring visit report was also published. This was the first for Easton & Otley College since its ‘inadequate’ report in July.

Inspectors said that too much teaching, learning and assessment requires improvement but leaders have responded “well” since the last inspection, particularly ensuring that safeguarding arrangements are effective.

 

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Easton & Otley College 12/12/2017 23/01/2018 M M
Activate Learning 12/12/2017 22/01/2018 2 2

 

Sixth Form Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Luton Sixth Form College 28/11/2017 23/01/2018 2 1

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
JFC Training College Ltd 05/12/2017 24/01/2018 3 N/A
London Skills for Growth Limited 12/12/2017 24/01/2018 2 3
MPower Training Solutions Ltd 21/11/2017 23/01/2018 2 3
VQ Solutions Ltd 06/12/2017 22/01/2018 3 2

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Whitbread PLC 03/10/2017 26/01/2018 3 2

 

Short inspections (remains grade 2) Inspected Published
City Of Bradford Metropolitan District Council 06/12/2017 23/01/2018
The Sixth Form College Colchester 14/12/2017 25/01/2018

Multi-academy trusts fail to implement Baker clause

Just two of the 10 largest multi-academy trusts in England have fully complied with their new legal duty to allow training providers and colleges the chance to speak to pupils about technical qualifications and apprenticeships.

The Baker Clause, an amendment to the Technical and Further Education Act, came into force on January 2, and requires all schools to publish a policy statement on their websites.

An FE Week investigation has found that most large trusts have however failed to meet that duty.

In fact, of the 10 trusts investigated, only The Kemnal Academies Trust (TKAT) and Delta Academies Trust responded with a copy of their statements and proof they had published them on their schools’ websites.

Plymouth CAST had a document ready, but admitted it was only available from its trust homepage; the others were either in the process of formulating the documents or declined to respond to our requests.

Lord Baker, the former education secretary who forced the new law through, has written to the government demanding action.

Under the rules, every school is obliged to give training providers access to every pupil between years 8 and 13, so they can find out about non-academic routes.

According to the Department for Education’s statutory guidance, schools needed to have published “a policy statement setting out their arrangements for provider access”, which “should be made available on the school website”.

This must explain how to arrange access, which premises or facilities can be used, and the grounds for granting or refusing requests.

When Lord Baker prosed the changes in February last year he acknowledged the move was likely to be “met with great hostility in every school in the country”.

Nevertheless, he told FE Week this had been a “very, very poor start”.

“I am going to write to [academies minister] Lord Agnew about it. It’s really a matter for the government to chase them up,” he said, though he admitted he was “not surprised”.

“We know that many schools will try to resist this, but it’s very important that it should be implemented more rigorously.”

Robert Halfon, a former skills minister who now chairs the parliamentary education committee, has also pledged to write to Agnew, and said trusts “must get their act together”.

“Parliament has legislated for this requirement for a very good reason – it’s vital that more is done to promote technical education,” he said.

“I shall be writing to the minister to establish what efforts the Department for Education has made to ensure academies publish these policy statements, and what actions it intends to undertake to ensure academies up their game and comply with the law.”

A DfE spokesperson said “We brought in these reforms to make sure that all pupils are aware of the range of routes into the workplace so that they can make confident, informed decisions.

“We published statutory guidance for schools on 2 January, to coincide with this new duty coming into force, which made clear that schools have to provide opportunities for technical education and apprenticeship providers to talk to pupils, and to publish a statement of their plans on their website.

“We recognise this is a major change for schools, which is why we have allowed them time to prepare and ensure they can introduce it successfully.

“We will continue to work with schools, academy chains and representative groups, to make sure pupils are getting the advice they need, and schools are doing what they are obliged to do.”

Lauener pledges salary to student hardship fund

Peter Lauener will donate the £25,000 salary he will earn as chair of one of the UK’s largest college groups to a student hardship fund.

Apparently one of the busiest men in FE, the former boss of the ESFA and the Institute for Apprenticeships, who currently leads the Student Loans Company, bagged himself yet another job last week, this time as chair of NCG.

Taking up the position in the spring, he’ll replace Jamie Martin, who has held the role for 11 years.

The post is not remunerated, but Mr Lauener will earn a salary as he will also cover Intraining, NCG’s national independent training provider, which is a wholly owned subsidiary.

The former civil servant has however asked that the money is paid directly to a student hardship fund, a spokesperson for the group told FE Week.

He retired from his government roles in November last year, but became interim chief executive at the Student Loans Company after the sudden departure of Steve Lamey, and will stay in post until a permanent replacement is found.

“I am looking forward to taking up this new role at NCG and getting to know the different colleges and organisations in the group,” said the new chair.

“There is nothing more important than developing the skills of all our people and NCG has a critical role in supporting learners, businesses and communities.”

In his spare time, Mr Lauener is also the official delegate for Worldskills UK, and was a major force behind in the IfA last year as its first chief executive.

Before taking the reins at the ESFA, he helped implement the Youth Training Scheme, worked for the Manpower Services Commission in the 1980s, and set up the Training and Enterprise Councils in the 1990s.

“Peter has played a leading role in the shaping of education and training in the UK for some years now,” said Joe Docherty, NCG’s chief executive.

“He has steered a course for the Skills Funding Agency and the Education Funding Agency through a period of great political and economic change, and consequently made a positive impact on the education and training of people across the country.”

His predecessor Mr Martin is now the managing partner of law firm Ward Hadaway.

During his 11 years as chair he oversaw NCG’s expansion, and leaves it as one of the biggest college groups in the country.

The group now comprises Carlisle College, Kidderminster College, Lewisham Southwark College, Newcastle College, Newcastle Sixth Form College, and West Lancashire College. It also runs two training providers: Rathbone Training and Intraining.

Mr Martin said it had been a “great experience” to have been involved with NCG’s “expansion and growing success” and to have “seen the difference which it has made and continues to make to the career prospects and the lives of thousands of people not just in the north-east, but across the country too”.

Mr Lauener will start on March 1, 2018.

What now for the levy reforms?

Apprenticeship take-up since the introduction of the levy last May continues to slide, but whether this represents a longer-term problem is debatable.

The CBI calls it “alarming”, which, given it represents employers, will be uncomfortable for the government.

But if big employers are simply in the planning phase, as the skills minister suggests, the CBI has only got itself to blame.

It successfully lobbied to let levy credit sit unused in accounts for a full two years, longer than the government had originally planned.

Is it any wonder then that employers are in no rush to spend it?

Writing my editorial last October, after the first dramatic fall in apprenticeship starts were revealed, I predicted this was a temporary fall.

Anecdotal evidence is that many large employers, particularly in the public sector, are gearing up for huge recruitment in April, the start of their financial year.

These figures that won’t be made public for at least another seven months.

But as I’ve also said before, the problem isn’t likely to be quantity or even quality, it’s whether employer decisions are aligned to government priorities.

So keep an eye on 16- to 18-year-old starts, down 20 per cent between May and October.

Parents’ negative perceptions of apprenticeships aren’t the problem, something the skills minister has also said this week.

The problem for 16- to 18-year-olds will be employers lacking sufficient incentives to create vacancies for them.

 

Top providers turn to MPs for non-levy relief

Top training providers and colleges still denied non-levy contracts are turning to influential MPs in an effort to squeeze the cash they need from the government.

Exeter College, which FE Week rates as the best college in the country, and Hull’s HYA Training both appealed the ESFA’s decision not to fund their apprenticeships with smaller employers before Christmas.

These appeals were swiftly denied – even though the two providers are respectively rated grade one and two by Ofsted.

Determined not to give up, Exeter College has now turned to its influential local MP Ben Bradshaw (pictured above left), a former culture, media and sport secretary and shadow deputy prime minister, to take the battle to Whitehall.

HYA Training is meanwhile liaising with its own MP, Emma Hardy (pictured above right), who sits on the education select committee.

Mr Bradshaw has already written to Anne Milton about the damage the decision will cause if it is not overturned.

This lack of clarity only left everyone second-guessing

“It is inexplicable to me that the top-performing college in England, with an excellent record on delivering apprenticeships, has lost out in this way,” he told FE Week.

“Both Exeter College and local employers are aghast. I have written and spoken to the minister and officials in her department and at the ESFA to impress on them the importance of finding a solution to this problem and warned them that otherwise the provision of apprenticeships in the Exeter area will be seriously affected.”

Exeter College has an 81-per-cent overall apprenticeship achievement rate, well above the national average of 67 per cent.

“We are currently exploring all available options to resolve the present situation,” said a spokesperson.

Another high-profile organisation denied a contract in the non-levy tender was children’s charity Barnardo’s.

The provider is rated ‘good’ and has 30 years’ experience in delivering apprenticeships to the UK’s most vulnerable young people.

It appealed the decision before Christmas but Ms Milton stuck to her guns.

A spokesperson for the charity said it would continue to support vulnerable young people into apprenticeships with smaller non-levy employers by becoming a subcontractor to other organisations, “albeit with reduced funding”.

Patrik Knowles, the managing director of HYA, has sought legal advice, complaining that the non-levy tender was unfair and represented more of a lottery than a procurement process.

We remain hopeful that a satisfactory outcome will be reached

His provider, like Barnardo’s, passed the score criteria but fell below the £200,000 threshold the ESFA uses to apply its pro-rata methodology – a rule which applicants did not know about until the tender results were released.

This “lack of clarity only left everyone second-guessing”, Mr Knowles wrote in an article in last week’s FE Week.

Ms Hardy said the entire system of apprenticeship funding needs to be more transparent, and wants powers to be devolved to allow local commissioning.

Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group, another ‘good’ provider denied a non-levy contract, is still in the midst of its appeal, and is “hugely encouraged” by the level of support it has garnered from its local MPs.

The college’s chief executive, Karen Dobson, said she remains “hopeful” that a “satisfactory outcome will be reached in due course”.

The much-delayed procurement process has tormented the sector all year and ended up causing huge controversy when results were released in December.

One of the most frustrating cases was revealed by FE Week when we found one organisation that had ceased trading in October was awarded a contract in the procurement.

A total of 714 providers were given allocations to use between January 2018 and March 2019, but 227, nearly a third, are on their first direct apprenticeships contract.