Latest news from FE Week | FE Week

DfE hands out £2m for more levy research

An FE-focused research centre has been given the ministerial nod to continue its work until 2020, and the apprenticeship levy will be particularly in focus.

The Centre for Vocational Educational Research had its mid-term review at the beginning of this year.

After an initial £3 million grant from the Department for Education in May 2015, and there had been speculation about its long term prospects.

It has now been given an extra £2 million to continue until the end of the decade, and has some stirring projects up its sleeve. These include evaluations on FE’s role in increasing social mobility, and the impact of university technical colleges.

Its work on the apprenticeship levy, however, is likely to bring the most interest.

After gaining recent approval from its steering group, CVER has started planning a major evaluation of the policy, which came into effect last April.

“The focus of the work on the apprenticeship levy will be on its effect on training outcomes, overall and by sector,” said Dr Sandra McNally, who leads the centre.

“Questions will include: ‘to what extent has the training been additional to what would have taken place otherwise?’ ‘How has the volume and composition of apprenticeship training been affected?’ and ‘Has there been any change on the characteristics of those being trained by firms?’”

CVERs work will continue but with increased emphasis on social mobility, the apprenticeship levy and standards, and drivers of quality in FE

The evaluation will be conducted using a quantitative analysis, involving the use of “various data sets including the Individual Learner Record, the Employers Skills Survey, the Employers

Perspective Survey, the Inter-Departmental Business Register and the Annual Business Survey”.

There is no set publication date, as the research will involve “complex” data construction and analysis, and the policy needs to run for long enough to have its true effect judged.

In the three years it has been running, CVER has focused on collating “huge administrative data”, such as individual learner records, the national pupil database and longitudinal education outcomes data, in an attempt to process, code and apply it to research.

It currently has about 30 projects on three main themes: the impact of vocational and technical education on individuals, firms and growth; the drivers of the quality of provision in FE; and the factors affecting individuals’ participation in vocational education.

The centre is currently, for example, evaluating how the opening of UTCs affects the “enrolment and attainment” of the students living in the approximate catchment area of the college.

The Department for Education said that since its conception, CVER has “created accessible information and data on the vocational education sector and built high-quality, policy-oriented research on the topic”.

It added that the overall themes of CVERs work “will continue but with increased emphasis on social mobility, the apprenticeship levy and standards, and drivers of quality in FE”.

CVER’s work around social mobility will explore to what extent participation in vocational education is related to family background, how FE routes influence social mobility, and what the role is of training providers for influencing progression.

“I am delighted with the decision to fund CVER for the full five years to mid-2020,” Dr McNally said.

“We have an exciting programme of research which I hope and expect to make a useful contribution to policy.”

While CVER has been given the green light to continue its work, one “pioneering” FE research centre had its funding come to an end last year.

The Behavioural Research Centre for Adult Skills and Knowledge (ASK) was given £2.9 million by the now-defunct Department for Business Innovation and Skills back in 2014, to carry out randomised control trails to apply behavioural science to adult learning.

Its grant ended in April 2017 and it is due to release its final reports in the coming months.

College group giant welcomes move to campus level inspection

The nation’s largest college group has welcomed a change in how it collects data on learners and it is expected to pave the way for campus-level Ofsted inspections.

NCG will introduce a new college “campus identifier” field into individualised learner records from 2018/19.

The data will identify a “campus within a college group” that is “no longer a separate legal entity”, according to Education and Skills Funding Agency guidance. The intention is to “allow identification of provision delivered across the various sites of merged institutions”.

Ofsted may use this information to launch new campus-level inspections from as early as next year. These would allow for reports on colleges that were previously independent, but which now sit within merged groups.

Moving to inspections of individual campuses was a logical next step

Neither Ofsted nor the Department for Education would say for certain that the new field was being introduced for this reason.

However a spokesperson for the inspectorate admitted to being in discussion with the DfE about campus-level inspections.

“We will consider it as part of the inspection of the whole college as we review the education inspection framework,” he said.

Joe Docherty, chief executive of Newcastle-based NCG, the country’s largest college group, said moving to inspections of individual campuses was a “logical next step” that the group would “strongly welcome”.

He said NCG – which counts six FE and sixth-form colleges, and two independent providers, as members – had been “asking Ofsted to consider” grading each campus individually for two years.

“It’s vital for the communities we serve to ensure true transparency on performance – which in a group means campus-level inspection grades for the quality of provision,” he said.

He explained that NCG had been working on a pilot with the government to report data for each of its members separately.

“NCG data is due to be published at campus level for the first time in March 2018,” he added.

IT glitches related to the pilot have however meant that data from the group was missing from the 2015/16 achievement rate tables.

There was a long delay in the publication of NCG’s most recent Ofsted report, which finally appeared last September, a fact blamed on a dispute over the group’s achievement rate data.

The published data – described by the group as “misleading” – was for all the group’s members, when the inspection just covered the colleges, of which there were four at the time.

The new data field will mean colleges will have a year’s worth of campus-level data in time for the new Ofsted common inspection framework, expected from September 2019.

The prospect of campus-level inspections was raised last March, during an FE Week interview with Ofsted boss Amanda Spielman and her deputy director for FE Paul Joyce.

They were asked if it was realistic to expect inspection teams to reach consistent verdicts on huge groups, which often encompass multiple learning bases across the country and have different priorities.

Ms Spielman conceded that “the most useful way of reporting on a large, diversified, multisite college is not necessarily the same as a smaller one”. Mr Joyce added that campus level inspections were being investigated with the DfE.

Frank Coffield, emeritus professor of education at UCL’s Institute of Education, also argued that “applying one summary term” to these huge colleges was “unjust”.

But David Corke, the director of policy at the Association of Colleges, was more cautious this week about campus-level inspections.

“Much more analysis needs to be done into what constitutes a campus, and there also needs to be more research conducted into what the complex practical implications will be during an inspection,” he said.

A DfE spokesperson would not say how the new ILR field relates to future inspections, but admitted it could “allow a granular level view of data for audit, funding and success rates”.

Employer satisfaction surveys to be audited for the first time

The government will audit the results of its employer satisfaction survey for the first time, due to concerns over the way it is distributed by providers.

The ESFA said it would provide “additional quality assurance” in this year’s survey, in new guidance, in order to ensure the data is comparable between providers.

It specifically wants to “ensure that colleges and training organisations are using the prescribed methods to survey their employer customers”.

To pass the audits, providers must email their employers with a link to the survey along with their employer ID.

The ESFA claims this is the “best method” for surveying, as results are “instant” and easily comparable.

If employers are more likely to respond by paper, a hardcopy of the questionnaire can be sent.

The guidance makes clear, however, that interviews must not be done over the phone or in person as employer confidentiality “must be protected”.

The agency will “monitor” cooperation with the rules through its audits, which have been introduced to ensure comparability.

The questions themselves will also be different this year.

These are being updated to “ensure the survey continues to provide information that employers find useful”, but the agency did not provide examples.

As with previous years, the survey will be provider-led, requiring colleges and training organisations to administer it to their employer customers themselves in the first instance.

If providers are unable to meet their minimum response target, the ESFA will step in and ask the polling company Ipsos MORI to contact employers directly to gather the answers.

The employer satisfaction survey runs every year. It asks employers to rate their pleasure with different aspects of training delivered by individual college and training organisations.

The data collected then allows employers to make comparisons.

The survey for 2017/18 will start on March 26.

Ofsted Watch: First inspection since merger produces ‘good’ result

A college inspected for the first time since a merger was rated ‘good’ in a week that saw local authority provision struggle.

Bath College, which was formed in April 2015 from a merger of City of Bath College and Norton Radstock College, was found to be grade two across the board.

The report commended teaching, student behaviour and high quality facilities at the college, as well as the “excellent support” given to disadvantaged and vulnerable learners and those with additional needs at an Ofsted inspection on January 16.

Inspectors found that a high proportion of learners move on to employment or higher levels of education or training, and noted that staff have built strong relationships with partners, stakeholders and local employers.

Sunderland City Council was, however, handed an ‘inadequate’ rating, which raised concerns about radicalisation, “deterioration” in the achievement of apprentices and poor subcontracted apprenticeship delivery.

The council, which had been rated ‘good’ back in 2014 and trains just over 3,000 learners, said it was “disappointed” about the findings of the report.

It was also not a ‘good’ week for Slough Borough Council, which received its second ‘requires improvement’ rating for its community learning and skills provision after an inspection on January 16.

Ofsted said the local authority, which was last inspected in June 2016, had made improvements but warned that too much of the teaching is not planned carefully enough and “fails to motivate learners”.

However, Slough did receive grade two ratings for its apprenticeship provision and for the personal development, behaviour and welfare of adult learners, and was commended for its work to “improve the lives of hard-to-reach and vulnerable adults”.

The report added there were “comprehensive plans in place to secure further improvements.”

A further four providers managed to improve on their previous inspections and another four kept their grade two ratings in short inspections.

Gateway Sixth Form College in Leicester had been rated ‘inadequate’ in November 2016, but was deemed grade three across the board this time round.

Inspectors said the majority of students were now making good progress, after disappointing results last year, and that leadership and governance had been strengthened at the college.

However, it raised concerns that teachers were not providing appropriate feedback or setting challenging enough work.

Lancashire’s Accrington and Rossendale College moved up from grade three to grade two, and its leaders were commended for rectifying “the vast majority of weaknesses identified at the previous inspection”.

Ofsted said senior leaders had been “unremitting” in working to improve provision, leading to better achievement rates, good links with employers, community groups and voluntary organisations and “highly motivated” learners.

The report said most learners progress to further study, higher education or employment, but warned that apprenticeship provision still ‘requires improvement’.

Also moving up from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ were two adult and community learning providers: The Greenback Project in Liverpool and Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council in the West Midlands.

The Greenback Project, which provides education and training to disabled people and other disadvantaged groups through Greenback College, was praised for its improved teaching, with tutors using “a variety of stimulating, creative and interesting activities” to “enthuse and motivate students”.

Students were said to be well behaved with improving grades and supported to learn independently, although inspectors warned that feedback was “encouraging and motivational but it is not sufficiently developmental”.

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council was also commended for providing “good education opportunities for the most disadvantaged learners” at its inspection on January 16.

Staff were said to place the welfare of learners “at the heart of their work” while learners worked well together and were developing confidence, personal and social skills.

The report said the “large majority” of learners achieve their aims on community learning, employability and functional skills courses.

Keeping their grade two rating after short inspections are East Durham College, The Child Care Company (Old Windsor) in Slough, S&B Automotive Academy in Bristol and Hounslow Adult and Community Education in west London.

GFE Colleges	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Bath College	16/01/2018	21/02/2018	2	N/A
Accrington and Rossendale College	16/01/2018	19/02/2018	2	3

Sixth Form Colleges	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Gateway Sixth Form College	16/01/2018	21/02/2018	3	4

Adult and Community Learning	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
The Greenback Project	16/01/2018	23/01/2018	2	3
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council	16/01/2018	21/02/2018	2	3
Sunderland City Metropolitan Borough Council	16/01/2018	19/02/2018	4	2
Slough Borough Council	16/01/2018	19/02/2018	3	3

Short inspections (remains grade 2)	Inspected	Published
East Durham College	11/01/18	21/02/18
The Child Care Company (Old Windsor) Ltd	24/01/18	22/02/18
S&B Automotive Academy Ltd	23/01/18	21/02/18
Hounslow Adult and Community Education	17/01/18	21/02/18

Mayors raise concerns over weak adult education budget devolution powers

The six regional mayors tasked with overseeing devolution of the adult education budget have met the Department for Education to “voice concerns” over the process.

High among the issues that are worrying the combined authorities are “inadequate” influence and a lack of funding during the transition year, as well as “challenging” timescales for the handing over of power.

The transition year is set to take place over 2018/19, after the original plan to fully devolve the budget was delayed by a year.

Tim Bowles, the mayor of the West of England combined authority, said the mayors were “encouraged” by the fact the DfE is “actually now listening” to concerns about implementation and that dialogue was “now becoming positive”.

He explained that the West of England is expecting between £15 million and £20 million a year once the devolution is implemented in 2019/20, even though this would “never be enough to meet the ambitions that I have”.

He also confirmed that his region would be seeking additional funding elsewhere.

A report submitted to the Tees Valley combined authority cabinet in November revealed that the authorities were given a choice of two arrangements for the transition year: an “influencing” option or a strict “delegated” option.

The “influencing” option would see the combined authorities attempt to guide how the Education and Skills Funding Agency spends its budget in their regions during the transition year.

The extent of that influence is unclear, but the Tees Valley report described it as “inadequate” and of “limited benefit”.

Under the delegated option, the education secretary would delegate AEB functions and funding to the authority.

This body would then act as an “agent” of the secretary within a “rigid set of parameters” to commission skills provision, fund providers and manage delivery. For this option, the authority would need to pass “stringent practical readiness conditions”.

The report warned this option “creates too many risks for the combined authority without adequate corresponding benefits” and does not have a clear legal basis, and there are concerns it could create “additional risk for providers receiving this funding”.

A spokesperson for the DfE confirmed that every combined authority including Tees Valley had decided to take the influencing option for the transitional year.

She added that the devolution was “progressing well” and details about the transition period would be revealed “in due course”, despite the fact the government had promised to give more information on it at the start of this year.

A spokesperson for Liverpool City region confirmed it would have “no actual delegated power on the way the budget is spent” during the transitional year, and said it was not known how much funding it would receive after that.

“There has been progress with the DfE in recent months,” he added. “The timescales remain challenging, but we will continue to work at pace to enable the devolution of the AEB to proceed on time.”

Seven combined authorities have signed devolution deals alongside London to take control of AEB spending in their regions, with the newly announced North of Tyne combined authority expected to do the same.

Sheffield City region, one of the seven set for devolution, will elect a mayor in May.

The other combined authorities who will be receiving devolved AEB budgets are Greater Manchester, West Midlands, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.

Ofsted accused of waste over inspection for just 7 learners

Ofsted has been accused of wasting scarce resources on an inspection that only took into account seven learners.

Leicester-based Train Together was rated ‘good’ overall at its first ever inspection last month.

But the two-strong inspection team only took seven learners into account, and they were all directly funded by the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

The provider is also training around 300 learners as a subcontractor for Calderdale College and Lincoln College, but they were ignored because they are the responsibility of the lead contractors.

Training standards for a further 65 apprentices was also overlooked, because the provider only “very recently” started running this type of provision.

Certain quarters of the sector have suggested the inspection has been a waste of Ofsted resources, at a time when the chief inspector has been asking for more funding to keep tabs on the expanding numbers of apprenticeship providers.

We usually get this right, but occasionally the data misleads us

Ofsted implied the inspection would not have taken place at all, had it known there were so few directly contracted learners on roll.

“Once an inspection has started, we have to inspect the provider as we find it,” a spokesperson said. “We work hard to ensure that we use our resources as efficiently as possible. We usually get this right, but occasionally the data misleads us.”

He didn’t explain why no-one called the provider before the inspection to check on learner numbers.

“Sometimes the data that we are dealing with is not up to date,” he added.

“We inspect the provision that is the responsibility of the provider. We do not consider any subcontracted provision that is not the direct responsibility of the provider.”

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers boss Mark Dawe questioned whether inspection should have taken place, and said it was “one of many examples where government data would seem the data have let us down”.

But Charles Dall’Omo, managing director of Train Together, defended the decision to inspect.

“Having Ofsted visit us was hugely beneficial,” he said. “Ofsted, like all of us, is responding to what is a rapidly changing marketplace. Independent training providers need to be monitored and measured regardless of size.”

He insisted that despite their “numbers being small”, he has “an experienced team” worthy of consideration.

“All providers should operate ready for inspection,” he added.

Train Together launched in 2010 and was allocated just £180,179 in direct ESFA funding for 2017/18.

It was listed last year as a subcontractor to Calderdale College and Lincoln College, through contracts worth £975,000.

Mr Dall’Ormo said he was still pleased to be training around 300 learners for the colleges.

Ofsted, like all of us, is responding to what is a rapidly changing marketplace

The Ofsted report did not mention its subcontracting activities once, though it did note that Train Together’s apprenticeships will be inspected “at a later date”.

Chief inspector Amanda Spielman warned the Commons public accounts committee last month that Ofsted’s resources are being increasingly stretched.

Former skills minister Robert Halfon, who now chairs the Commons education committee, said the inspectorate should start directly inspecting subcontracted provision.

Ofsted currently doesn’t, but it has announced a new, “tougher approach” to subcontracting, including monitoring visits, that will concentrate on lead providers. Subcontractors will probably not be graded on their subcontracted provision any time soon, however.

Inspectors recognised in the report that the seven were “confident, contribute well to team working and show good interpersonal skills”.

It explained they were mostly studying specialist support for teaching and learning in schools and higher-level teaching assistants’ courses. The provider’s apprentice programmes focus on teaching and learning and business administration.

Leaders were praised for creating a “highly inclusive culture that focuses on developing individual talent for the benefit of the business, employers and learners”.

Stoke-on-Trent silent on severance pay for job-switch CEO

A cash-strapped college will not explain why it paid thousands of pounds in severance to its former chief executive – even though she went straight into another job in charge of the college’s academy trust.

Sarah Robinson led Stoke-on-Trent College until March last year, and that same month took a new role as full-time chief executive of what was then the College Academies Trust, which was run by the college at the time.

Despite this, she has confirmed to FE Week that she received a severance payment from the college, as part of a £150,000 “compensation for loss of office” paid to “former key management personnel” that was listed in the college’s 2016/17 accounts.

The accounts also revealed the college was almost £16 million in the red and dependent on government bailouts.

But the college refused to say why it had paid its former bmuch she received. It would also not comment on how many people split the £150,000.

“Information relating to former key management personnel of the college is documented in the 2016-17 accounts,” a spokesperson said.

Ms Robinson left on March 3, 2017, after more than six years in charge.

She refused to divulge to FE Week how much she received in severance, claiming it was “overseen by the FE commissioner and with legal opinion” and “made at contractual and statutory rates”.

Accounts show she received £101,000 in salary between August 1 2016 until March 3 2017.

Statutory redundancy calculations take into account weekly pay, but it was not clear as FE Week went to press what her payment would have been.

Ms Robinson insisted the payoff was a “direct result of the fresh start for Stoke-onTrent College”.

“Fresh start” was the recommendation that emerged from a commissioner-led structure and prospects appraisal in February last year,after the college had been “unable to find a willing strategic partner”.

This process was recommended to a number of colleges following the area reviews, or as a result of FE commissioner intervention.

Colleges commit to significantly changing their business or operating model, and the process can include a change in senior leadership.

According to accounts for the academy trust, Ms Robinson stepped into her current role as its chief executive in the same month she left the college.

“There is also a charge for the group chief executive’s time (until appointed by the trust as full time CEO in March 2017) which is spent running the trust,” the document said.

It’s not clear how much she currently earns at the trust.

The accounts show that one person working there received a salary in the band £150,001 and £160,000 during 2016/17, and also that Ms Robinson received remuneration of between

£70,000 and £75,000 in return for services she provided to the trust.

A spokesperson for the trust said it had “bought in” Ms Robinson’s services as chief executive when it was still linked to the college.

Following Ms Robinson’s departure the trust could no longer do this, so it appointed her as interim chief executive to guide it through the process of becoming independent – with her appointment made permanent from January 1, following a national recruitment process.

Ms Robinson had a turbulent final few months at the college, including a failed audit which found “over £3 million of SFA funding claimed that the auditors were unable to confirm accuracy regarding” and a “negotiated clawback from the EFA circa £250,000 of funding”, according to governing board minutes.

Adult education budget used to bail out struggling colleges

The adult education budget is being used to cover the cost of emergency handouts to struggling colleges – causing outrage with the Department for Education.

But in the same week that news broke of a £63 million AEB underspend, the government has repeatedly refused to say exactly how much is being used for these bailouts.

AELP boss Mark Dawe said he was appalled that AEB cash was being used for this purpose.

“Complete transparency is needed and instead of bailing out failed institutions, any underspend should be reallocated to support the participation of learners by effective providers,” he said.

“We shouldn’t need clever sleuthing from FE Week to get a fuller picture of the scale of the bailouts; nor should we just receive incomplete answers on the size of the AEB underspend and what it’s being used for.”

FE Week found out about this unplanned use of the AEB during a weeks-long attempt to discover how much government money is being spent on failing institutions.

This was itself prompted by the DfE’s accidental revelation earlier this month that more than £11 million had been dished out to 12 colleges in December alone.

At the time, the DfE told us that information about colleges’ exceptional financial support (EFS) funding could be “found in individual colleges’ annual accounts” and that “the value of the EFS loan book is reported in the Education and Skills Funding Agency annual accounts”.

EFS is only available to colleges that are “encountering financial or cashflow difficulties that put the continuation of provision at risk”, and which have “exhausted all other options” – and it can come as a loan or a grant.

When we asked two weeks ago whether details of the EFS grants were published anywhere, we were told they were paid from the AEB – information which was included in the ESFA’s 2016/17 accounts.

However, a spokesperson conceded the accounts did not include the level of detail we were looking for.

FE Week is still waiting for a response to a Freedom of Information request submitted last month asking for more details on how much EFS has been doled out so far.

We may not get one however; the DfE is claiming an exemption on the basis that it intends to publish the information in the future.

The £63 million underspend was revealed via a parliamentary question answered by skills minister Anne Milton. Her response was met with anger and disbelief by Mr Dawe earlier this week.

He said it was “disappointing” that the answer only referred to the “mainstream participation element of the budget” and not the whole budget.

The heavily over-subscribed AEB tender – which saw independent training providers bid for their share of £110 million – was evidence of “unmet demand” for the budget, he argued.

However, Julian Gravatt, the deputy chief executive at the Association of Colleges, said the AEB underspend happened “because the rules are too restrictive and because the funding rates are too low”.

“If the DfE used money from this budget for temporary financial support, this is better than not using it all. Better still would be to fund adult further education properly,” he said.

FE Week has reported on a number of colleges that are dependent on EFS support – including Bradford College, which was bailed out twice in one month, and Stoke-on-Trent College.

The bailout tap will be turned off later this year once the insolvency regime – introduced as part of the Technical and Further Education Act 2017 – comes into effect.

How Greater Manchester plans to boost BAME apprenticeships

The city-region is front and centre in the government’s new plan to boost BAME participation in skills, writes Cllr Sean Anstee

Greater Manchester has a long and proud history of striving for fairness, equality and inclusion – and in the past month we’ve been reminded of the important role that various great Mancunians played in the suffrage movement.

That spirit of fairness and equality of opportunity lives on today, but not everything is totally in place. Demographic factors such as gender, ethnic background, age and economic circumstances can have an effect on people’s opportunities as they grow up and get old.

Education and skills are great ways to help level that playing field and give everyone the tools they need, whether that’s in technical education and training such as a high-quality apprenticeship, or through an academic route.

Apprenticeships are an extremely accessible way for people to learn. There is no age limit and they can be done at any point during working life.

Apprenticeships are an extremely accessible way for people to learn

Yet across our city-region and the country there is a much lower proportion of people from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds taking apprenticeships compared to the population as a whole. This has been the case for a number of years and we believe it’s time to change this, which is why we are working to increase this figure from 10.4 per cent to 16 per cent to reflect the Greater Manchester population.

Earlier this month I attended the launch of the Five Cities Project, at which Anne Milton, the minister for skills and apprenticeships, announced a new pilot scheme designed to increase number of people from BAME backgrounds taking on apprenticeships. A group of Greater Manchester apprentices attended, alongside a range of large local employers, and I’m proud that our city-region is part of a new project which will celebrate its diversity.

This pilot will help to ensure that Greater Manchester’s apprentices reflect the diversity of their communities. Our employers and our communities will play a crucial part in how the pilot develops and will help achieve the following objectives:

-Looking into why people from BAME backgrounds are underrepresented in apprenticeships and how this compares to other career options

-Making sure barriers are removed so all communities can participate

-Considering how to improve recruitment processes so that people from BAME backgrounds receive the same opportunities as others

When this information is gathered we will be able to make an informed decision on how to improve life for people across Greater Manchester. Some actions may take longer to implement as we challenge mindsets, but it is a challenge we accept. In the short term, busting myths and providing role models will go a long way to show the opportunities apprenticeships provide.

At the project launch, I was privileged to meet a number of apprentices who are fantastic examples of the role models that I believe can make a difference in this pilot.

One of those apprentices was Mahmuda Khanom, a level five leadership and management apprentice working at Oldham borough council. Alongside her apprenticeship, Ms Khanom is working in a role which supports local residents in improving their skills and securing employment, including through apprenticeships.

She admitted that apprenticeships are not always the first option when people from BAME communities consider further or higher education or work. Her hope is that the pilot in will emphasise attractive option for career development and acquiring what she calls “real-life skills” that apprenticeships offer.

“The general route considered for higher education qualifications and pathways to entering the labour market is usually a traditional degree, which arguably holds significant status within BAME communities,” she told me. “As much as I loved the years I spent as an undergraduate and how proud I am of my academic achievements, there is a stark difference between the skills acquired in an apprenticeship and in a degree.”

I want Greater Manchester to be a place where everyone has the best opportunities in life as they grow up, get on and grow old, whatever their circumstances, background or aspirations. We are making moves to achieve this.

Councillor Sean Anstee is the lead for skills and apprenticeships at Greater Manchester Combined Authority