The FE sector faces an anxious wait before the budget is announced on November 22 after it united to make a last-ditch plea to reverse funding cuts.

The Support our Sixth Formers campaign, backed by major players including the Association of Colleges and Sixth Form Colleges Association, as well as FE Week, wants a £200 “SOS uplift” in 16-to-18 per-pupil funding rates.

Last week, the Sixth Form Colleges Association claimed colleges had reached “tipping point”, after their overall Ofsted ratings fell for a third year running.

Cuts were largely blamed after just 69 per cent were rated ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ in 2017.

The AoC’s chief executive, David Hughes, said he was “hopeful but not optimistic” ahead of next week’s announcement, and that it would be a “real shock” if any cuts to FE were made.

There is “still not enough money” to support students, particularly 16- to 18-year-olds and those undertaking adult education courses, he claimed.

“This country needs investment in colleges to improve skills, social mobility and productivity. All these words the government keeps saying,” he added. “The most important thing is that students are missing out.”

Providers and employers deserve more support to meet the challenges of social mobility, low productivity and Brexit skills shortages

Sue Pember, the boss of adult learning body Holex, wants to see a new basic adult skills fund for low-skill sectors, to ease the anticipated problems in home-grown recruitment post-Brexit.

She argued this should work alongside a new cross-department post-16 education, skills and employment strategy to help “meet the twin challenges of developing our own resident workforce in the context of a tighter EU immigration policy and increases in the state pension age”.

“In this week’s debate on Brexit, very little was said about what this means to ordinary working people,” she said.

“We have a skills deficit, low productivity, and people in the workplace with poor skills ill-equipped to meet post-Brexit challenges. We need the chancellor to recognise these issues and fund accordingly.”

For the AELP’s chief executive, Mark Dawe, this budget is a chance for the government to “turn the rhetoric surrounding social mobility into reality”.

“We would argue that this year the agenda has gone backwards, with the number of apprenticeships for 16- to 18-year-olds dropping by 44 per cent in the last quarter and traineeship opportunities falling over the year,” he said.

“Providers and employers deserve more support to meet the challenges of social mobility, low productivity and Brexit skills shortages.”

AELP wants a greater commitment to the traineeship programme, as well as equitable funding for additional maths and English provision on apprenticeship programmes, and an “open debate” on funding non-levy apprenticeships after April 2019.

The Learning and Work Institute has warned that there could be bad news on the horizon for the levy.

In an expert piece for FE Week, its chief executive Stephen Evans warned the amount it is expected to raise may be downgraded once again.

In last year’s autumn statement, initial predictions that the levy would raise £3 billion in 2019/20 were revised down by £200 million.

Mr Evans, based on his organisation’s analysis, now believes the levy revenue estimate may drop by as much as a further £100 million.

SFCA’s deputy chief executive, James Kewin, said the budget was an opportunity for the chancellor “to start giving sixth-form students a fair deal” after the association’s funding impact survey found two thirds of schools and colleges were forced to drop extracurricular activities and student support services due to funding cuts.

He claimed education funding for 16- to 18-year-olds, which is stuck at 2013 levels, is “chronically” lacking, and “young people are being short changed as a result”.

A welcome home reception was put on for the 34 heroes who made up Team UK and competed in Abu Dhabi last month, on day two of The Skills Show.

Hundreds of visitors and VIPs headed to the spotlight stage at Birmingham’s NEC Arena to celebrate and welcome back the team (pictured above) who retained our country’s top 10 position at WorldSkills this year, winning one gold, three silvers, three bronzes, and 13 medallions of excellence.

The event, which was hosted by Will Torrent, a former Team UK member who this week celebrated his 10-year anniversary since competing in Japan, included heartfelt speeches from WorldSkills UK’s official delegate and chief executive of the ESFA, Peter Lauener, and chair of WorldSkills UK Carole Stott.

“Today we have some really important people to celebrate,” Mr Lauener said. “I had the great privilege of being out in Abu Dhabi where we experienced a combination of high emotion, real pride in the team’s achievements, and a lot of pleasure just seeing how much everyone can achieve with a lot of team work.”

The welcome home reception was also used to recognise several individuals who have gone above and beyond the call of duty when competing for Team UK, and in promoting skills competitions across the country.

Rona Griffiths from Coleg Cambria was named the WorldSkills UK Local Heroes Winner 2017.

Five other skills heroes –  Jane Benefield from Warwickshire College Group, Darren Collins from Airbus UK, Christian Hatherall-Good from Brooklands College, Sureshkumar Kamadchisundaram from Nescot, and Patrick Roberts from Belfast Metropolitan College – were given highly commended awards for championing skills competitions.

Mr Lauener continued with his congratulations of Team UK, highlighting the amazing work of their “unsung heroes”.

“Of course we celebrate all of the hard work that our competitors put in but there is one other group of people who we want to celebrate the contribution of,” he said. “That is all the people who support Team UK in the competitions our training managers, performance coaches, and team leaders.

“When I get the privilege of going to competitions I get to see the fantastic work that all of those people make to build the skills and encourage and support our guys through the tough times, building the ethos of Team UK.”

A special guest was then brought on to the stage and introduced to the audience. Douglas Hill, the first ever member of Team UK to compete in a WorldSkills competition.

He was the sole competitor to represent the UK in the 1953 competition, held in Madrid, Spain, and brought home a silver medal in cabinet making.

After walking on stage to a standing ovation, Mr Hill said: “I just went there, did the work I was given, and won silver. From then on whenever there was an opportunity to support WorldSkills I did, it changed my life and allowed me to build my own business. I was even able to buy an Aston Martin and I wouldn’t have been able to do that without WorldSkills UK.”

Following this, five awards were given to various members of Team UK. Mechanical engineering CAD competitor Betsy Crosbie won the Douglas Hill Award for overcoming obstacles to competitions, and Mechatronics competitor Tom Revell picked up the John Barnes award for boosting team morale.

Three training managers – beauty therapist Jenna Bailey, stonemason Kevin Calpin, and plumbing and heating’s Paul Dodds – also picked up awards for their honorary contribution to Team UK.

Lastly, Ms Stott took to the stage to once again congratulate all of Team UK, and present one final award to the UK’s official delegate to WorldSkills.

“This is somebody who has worked tirelessly with this organisation over very many years. He is the person who champions the cause for us in the halls of power in Whitehall and Westminster when we go saying ‘please give us more resources and support’ and he has always recognised all of the achievements and everyone involved.

“He is always very calm and collected and walks thousands and thousands of miles around these shows. Can we please put our hands together for Peter Lauener.”

FE Week & FE Week are proud media partner of WorldSkills UK, The Skills Show, WorldSkills UK Competition Finals. You can follow our live coverage on Twitter @feweek using the hashtag #SkillsShow17.

Ofsted has commended the new leadership team at a London college as it moves up to be rated ‘good’ while the grades of other providers fell.

Richmond-upon-Thames College climbed from grade three to grade two in a report published on November 17 which congratulated the new principal, senior management team and governors for their success in “rapidly” improving student outcomes.

The report said staff had “carefully redesigned” the curriculum to suit the needs of the community, and “share a determination to improve the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, which is now good”.

The college, which offers both academic and vocational courses, was inspected on October 10 and inspectors found students were well-behaved with “high aspirations”, and that “experienced staff” were developing the confidence and independence of high needs learners “very well”.

However, other colleges faced difficulties this week.

Bradford College fell from a grade two to a grade three when Ofsted published its report on November 14, and was hit with a financial health notice to improve from the Education and Skills Funding Agency the next day.

The college later confirmed its group chief executive, Andy Welsh, would be standing down at the end of this academic year.

And Redcar and Cleveland College faced an ‘inadequate’ rating on November 16, after receiving grade threes across the board at inspections in February 2013, July 2014 and November 2015, and a notice of concern for financial health from the ESFA in March 2015.

The same day, the college announced plans to merge with grade two rated Stockton Riverside College.

Elsewhere in the sector, Stoke-on-Trent Unitary Authority maintained its grade three rating on November 15 after being marked as ‘requires improvement’ in every category apart from apprenticeship provision, which was ‘good’, and a monitoring visit to grade four rated Gateway Sixth Form College in Leicester found it was making “reasonable progress” to improve. 

Seven providers maintained their grade two ratings in short inspections: East Surrey College, Hereford College of Arts, South Gloucestershire and Stroud College, Hair and Beauty Industry Training in Durham and the borough councils of Luton, Havering and Lewisham.

A total of £5.2 million was shared among 19 general FE colleges during the recent adult education budget procurement, sparking complaints that the money did not go to independent training providers.

ITPs were told a year ago that their AEB contracts would come to an end this July, rather than being automatically renewed as before, and they were forced to take part in a procurement process for a pot worth
around £110 million.

Colleges did not have to take part in the bidding war, which at first resulted in major funding cuts for many ITPs compared with previous years.

The ESFA later found extra cash, and many providers learned in September if their allocations had been increased for November to July.

The figures for the full AEB procurement have now been revealed, and colleges have received an unexpectedly large sum.

“If colleges were allowed to tender for the £110 million AEB pot that was previously allocated to ITPs in addition to their allocations, then the whole budget should have been put out to tender,” said AELP boss Mark Dawe.

Eastleigh College received the highest sum at £1.18 million, on top of £8.34 million it gets in non-procured AEB funding.

“We have a high demand of AEB funding. Our provision is in priority areas, so we bid and were awarded it,” said its principal Jan Edrich.

Middlesbrough College was awarded £329,825, on top of £4.23 million AEB that it didn’t need to bid for.

“After discussions around employer and adult demand, we took up the opportunity to bid for additional funds to support the retraining needs of our regional economy. We were pleased with the outcome,” said its
principal Zoe Lewis.

A spokesperson for the college added that “colleges were encouraged to participate” in the bidding process, so ITPs may wish to take up any complaint “directly” with the government.

Bridgwater and Taunton College was allocated £375,335 through the procurement, and £5.32 million otherwise.

A spokesperson said this was “to support the skills training needs of the nuclear new build at Hinkley Point C”.

“Our bid was made with the full support of local colleges and independent training providers, the majority of whom are members of the Hinkley Point Training Agency and will work with us to deliver the vast number of skills interventions required,” he added.

Neither North East Surrey College of Technology nor Strode College, the other two biggest recipients, were available for comment.

FE Week revealed in September that providers had failed to spend a giant chunk of the AEB over the past academic year.

A staggering £200 million remained unspent, which caused an outcry at many ITPs, which are exasperated now the extent to which colleges dipped into the procurement funding pot is clear.

“The invitation to tender for the adult education budget is open to all eligible organisations, which does include colleges,” a Department for Education spokesperson said.

“As is normal, the procurement was done in accordance with procurement regulations for the public sector.”

Just one independent training provider has been included in the government’s 45-day work placement pilot for T-levels – as well as 20 colleges.

Twenty-one FE providers have been selected to test “high-level principles and models”, and work gets underway at the beginning of this term, ending next July.

The pilots are expected to determine the wrinkles providers could face when delivering this mandatory component of T-levels, which are due to be taught from 2020.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers has supported the government’s idea of introducing substantial work placements in T-levels, but said it was shocked to find there is just one private provider involved, considering that many of the courses will be delivered by the independent sector.

“We believe that making work placements as part of T-levels is essential to make young people work ready, and that’s why work-based apprenticeships are so successful,” AELP’s boss Mark Dawe told FE Week.

“Independent training providers are largely responsible for driving the growth in apprenticeships through their excellent relationships with employers so it is a little surprising that the government has felt it necessary to include only one ITP in the pilot.”

Paul Warner, AELP’s research director, added that there should be a “spread of pilot provider types” in order to “identify what good placements should look like and identify specific challenges and ways of overcoming them”.

A DfE spokesperson did not explain the imbalance directly.

“The department worked with organisations including the Association of Colleges and the AELP in order to ensure they had the opportunity to feed in to the process,” they said.

“Successful providers were selected on the basis of their ability to deliver a robust delivery plan and overall value for money.”

Around 2,500 students currently on vocational courses across the country are involved with the pilots.

The Challenge Network is leading the work after winning a contract in February to design a framework for how good placements should look. It declined to comment on the situation.

DfE guidance suggests that it expects 180,000 work placements per year, each lasting an average length of 50 working days, in a range of 45 to 60, lasting a minimum of 315 hours.

Officials have so far been clear on their approach, insisting “no work placement, no certificate”, but many college leaders believe the rule will limit young people’s choice as it stands, and want it changed.

In an FE Week investigation into the feasibility of the rule, David Hughes, the boss of the AoC, said it would “punish” young people to make work placements mandatory.

“The danger is you limit people’s choices to what they can attend on a local basis in labour markets that are sometimes very limited in scope,” he said.

“You might not have engineering, manufacturing and creative, for example, where you live, so does that mean you can’t do any of those? That doesn’t feel right or fair.”