The government must urgently address employer resistance to the minimum off-the-job training apprenticeship rule, the AELP has said ahead of its autumn conference.

This is one of many actions that the association is asking for, to foster a “more flexible” approach to the apprenticeship reforms and make them a success – and something that apprenticeships minister Anne Milton has herself said she wants to implement.

According to the AELP, it must be a “top priority” to recognise the challenges employers face with the new rule that specifies off-the-job training must amount to “20 per cent of the apprentice’s contracted employment hours across the whole apprenticeship”.

A spokesperson claimed employers in both the private and public sectors, including NHS Trusts, can’t afford an apprentice who is “non-productive” for one day every week in order to meet this criterion.

Nor, it is claimed, can they afford the “cost of staff backfill to cover their absence when there are many other appropriate flexible and effective ways of delivering knowledge, skills and behaviours required”.

AELP also denies that this much off-the-job training is required to ensure the quality of teaching on apprenticeships is sufficiently high, and that learning time isn’t swallowed up by work requirements.

Two large levy-paying employers – Health Education England and Grafton Merchanting GB – are expected to voice their concerns about the 20-per-cent rule at today’s AELP autumn conference in Manchester.

The AELP has been demanding widespread changes throughout the year, asking particularly for more detailed guidance on how the rule will work in practice.

The Department for Education published additional guidance in June, but the AELP said employers believe the rule “limits their participation, engagement and appetite to fully embrace apprenticeships”.

Today’s conference, sponsored by City & Guilds, is taking place just two weeks after official government statistics revealed a 61-per-cent slump in apprenticeship starts compared with a year ago.

The AELP said the collapse is due to how the government funds the apprenticeships of smaller employers who don’t pay the levy.

“A disastrous procurement exercise, which had to be scrapped by the incoming minister, and a requirement for small businesses to make a financial contribution towards the cost of the training, have led to huge falls in starts among SMEs across the country, including in the many areas where levy payers don’t operate,” a spokesperson said.

Earlier this month, at the Conservative party conference, Ms Milton admitted that the apprenticeships system would not work “unless there is flexibility in it”, and said she was “flabbergasted” that several big businesses had told her they were unaware of the new reforms.

“The skills minister has said that she has heard two different stories about how the reforms are going but encouragingly she has also said that she is very willing to listen to those who are experiencing their impact on the ground,” said AELP boss Mark Dawe.

“Many of these people will be at our conference today and AELP will be calling for urgent action so that providers can work with their local employers to get things moving again.”

In the AELP’s view, the government needs to “remove disincentives for employers to recruit young apprentices, halt the decline in apprenticeship opportunities at levels two and three, guarantee a minimum £1 billion budget for the apprenticeships of non-levy paying SMEs, allow flexibility between on and off the job training, and review the co-investment requirement for non-levy payers”.

And after FE Week revealed the £200 million underspend in the adult education budget this year, the AELP’s chairman Martin Dunford will say in his opening remarks at the conference that whether the AEB is devolved or not, the government, the combined authorities and the LEPs should “start a transition to full commissioning of publicly funded skills programmes”.

Speakers at the autumn conference include Keith Smith from the ESFA, Anthony Chalmers from the DfE, and Chris Jones from Ofsted, among many other sector leaders. They will debate on improving quality, the T-level reforms, overcoming barriers to social mobility and English devolution of skills programmes.

FE Week is media partner and will be reporting live from the conference.

The government will review into higher-level technical education – although it’s not yet clear when this will happen or what it will involve.

The review, which will look at all education at levels four and five,  with a particular focus on technical qualifications, aims to address the needs of learners and employers.

This will include scrutiny of progression from T-levels into work, as well ways higher-level technical qualifications can benefit people already in the workplace who want to upskill or retrain.

Anne Milton, the apprenticeships and skills minister, said the review was the “next logical step” following the apprenticeship reforms and the creation of T-levels.

“High-quality technical education helps young people and adults get into new, fulfilling and better paid careers – that’s good for them and good for our economy,” she said. “This is the way we build a better, higher-skilled workforce.”

Today’s announcement gives little detail about how the review will be carried out, or when it will begin, but it does say that “employers, providers, learners and others with expertise in this area will all feed into this review”.

It will build on previous focus on improving technical education at lower levels.

The government previously announced in November 2015 that it had plans for reforming post-16 skills training, starting with a review by Lord Sainsbury, which looked at lower levels.

In May 2016 FE Week exclusively reported that there would be an academic and vocational divide at 16, with 15 new technical education routes.

Then in July, the government officially responded to the Sainsbury Review and confirmed the plans for 15 routes in a post-16 skills plan, which developed into plans for new T-levels from 2020.

The DfE was reluctant to provide further details on what the latest review will look like.

“The review will consider the supply of, and demand for, high-quality higher-level classroom-based technical education,” said a spokesperson. “More information will be available in due course.”

Learners will face an anxious wait after an independent training provider that’s heavily focused on FE-loan funded provision was given the worst possible Ofsted rating.

Activ8 Learning, which is based in York and delivers programmes in early years education for adult learners who fund their courses through advanced learner loans, was today given ‘inadequate’ ratings across the board after being inspected last month.

The provider, which taught 93 learners over the previous full academic year, also offers other non-Education and Skills Funding Agency-funded provision – such as first aid and sports leadership courses, according to its website.

But this will still be a worrying time for the company and its learners, given that it is usual practice for the ESFA to pull its funding from a provider given the lowest Ofsted grade, which has often forced them to close.

And the government is still refusing to write-off loans debt for other blameless learners left with repayment demands but no courses or qualifications to show for it, following the demise of other loans-orientated providers.

Ofsted inspectors slammed the provider’s managers for their “lack understanding of their obligations” in running courses funded directly by advanced learning loans.

“They have been slow to implement quality assurance arrangements to ensure that they are providing learners with a comprehensive and high quality training programme,” today’s report said.

Activ8’s contract with the agency this year was for the delivery of advance learner loans provision and totalled £175,000, and they run no subcontracted provision.

FE Week approached the ESFA to ask if it now plans to cancel this, but a spokesperson would only say: “We are considering their [Activ8’s] Ofsted report in line with our published intervention policy.”

We have also asked Activ8 what affect having its funding pulled is likely to have on its long-term future, but the provider has not yet responded.

Today’s Ofsted report added: “Directors do not have a clear oversight of the quality of the training that Activ8 Learning provides for learners funded by advanced learner loans. They do not hold managers to account for the progress that learners make.”

Inspectors added that current governance arrangements are “ineffective”.

“As a result of the ill health of key members of the board, there has been a period of instability. Managers have identified new board members but they are yet to gain a close understanding of the provision.”

Ofsted also said that tutors at Activ8 “do not hold appropriate qualifications or have sufficient experience” to assess progress and learning “skilfully and effectively” on the early years educator programme at level three and the children and young people’s workforce programme at level five.

Activ8’s grade four follows a year of FE Week investigations into scandals involving loans funding – with the likes of John Frank Training, Edudo Ltd, and Focus Training & Development Ltd closing and leaving hundreds of blameless learners with huge debt but no qualifications – which subsequently formed part of our #SaveOurAdultEducation campaign.

One other private provider had a full Ofsted inspection report published this week: Inspire 2 Independence Ltd, which fell from a ‘good’ rating to ‘requires improvement’.

Inspectors said that directors and managers at the York-based provider have “not been successful” in sustaining the previously good standard of provision.

“Quality improvement arrangements are not sufficiently ambitious,” they added.

Meanwhile two general FE colleges were given ‘good’ ratings. One of them was Halesowen College which maintained its grade two, and the other was Burton and South Derbyshire College which improved from a previous grade three.

Governors, leaders and managers were particularly praised at Burton and South Derbyshire for taking “extensive and effective” steps to improve provision, including learners’ achievement rates and learners’ progress in a “wide range of subjects”, such as English and maths.

Regent College, a sixth form college based in Leicester, jumped from a grade three to a two this week, with its leaders and managers lauded for having “successfully improved the quality of almost all teaching and learning since the last inspection”.

It was also good news for Capita PLC, an employer provider which delivers apprenticeship programmes, traineeships and pre-employment programmes for around 6,000 adults nationwide, after it maintained its grade two.

The Wiltshire Council meanwhile was found to be making “reasonable progress” in its third re-inspection monitoring visit since December last year which found the provider to be inadequate overall.

Lastly, there were five short inspections where providers kept ‘good’ ratings. These took place at Harrow London Borough Council, Interserve Learning & Employment Ltd in Sheffield, Vector Aerospace International Limited in Hampshire, Mainstream Training Limited in Kent, and Steadfast Training Ltd in Lincolnshire.

 

 

GFE Colleges	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Halesowen College	18/09/2017	26/10/2017	2	2
Burton and South Derbyshire College	26/09/2017	20/10/2017	2	3

 

Sixth Form Colleges	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Regent College	19/09/2017	24/10/2017	2	3

 

Independent Learning Providers	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Activ8 Learning	20/09/2017	27/10/2017	4	0
Inspire 2 Independence (I2I) Ltd	12/09/2017	23/10/2017	3	2

 

Adult and Community Learning	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
The Wiltshire Council	04/10/2017	24/10/2017	M	M

 

Employer providers	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Capita PLC	12/09/2017	20/10/2017	2	2

 

Short inspections (remains grade 2)	Inspected	Published
Harrow London Borough Council	27/09/2017	27/10/2017
INTERSERVE LEARNING & EMPLOYMENT	26/09/2017	27/10/2017
Vector Aerospace International Limited	27/09/2017	27/10/2017
Mainstream Training Limited	19/09/2017	25/10/2017
Steadfast Training Ltd	27/09/2017	20/10/2017

The government must rethink how it supports low-achieving, disengaged, and special needs students, as help from local authorities and the European Union continues to diminish.

This is one of the main recommendations from the new ‘Educating for our economic future’ report, produced by an independent advisory group of senior figures assembled from the higher and further education sectors, commerce and industry by Pearson, in partnership with the Education Policy Institute.

There are, it claims, “increasingly limited resources of local authorities responsible for education participation”, and warns that schemes which previously helped young people not in education, employment or training are now “in flux”.

For example, previous support from the European Social Fund “may cease after we leave the European Union”.

Education, health and care plans, introduced in 2014 to provide better SEND support for young people under the age of 25, “may support the design of better-tailored support for students”.

However, a local government ombudsman report into EHCPs, published last week, found that councils aren’t doing enough to ensure learners with special needs got the help they need.

Some learners and their families face a “disproportionate burden” to get the support they are entitled to.

As part of its recommendations to help students in need of extra support, the report wants the transition year into T-levels – which is left over for learners who are not yet ready to enter the new vocational programmes from the age of 16 – to be “designed as part of a fully-formed three-year journey”.

This would help to “ensure young people are equipped with the right skills to progress into FE and to re-engage with English and maths over a sustained period”.

It suggests this transition year “may involve traineeships”.

The report cites recent evidence showing that 82 per cent of traineeship participants were satisfied with their programmes, but notes that “there were not wide differences in destinations between those who had completed the traineeship and those who left before completion”.

Other recommendations include urging the government to “launch a high-profile national campaign” promoting free English and maths courses for adults without GCSEs in these subjects.

It also wants functional skills to be developed into a “high-quality, relevant and recognised qualification”, and to review whether apprenticeships are suitable for “those lacking basic literacy and numeracy”.

The government is also asked to “avoid focusing on narrow numerical targets” for apprenticeships, and to instead “develop broader measures of success that consider the quality of training and its value to employers and learners”.

The independent advisory panel was chaired by Professor Sir Roy Anderson, a professor in infectious disease epidemiology at Imperial College London.

“With the UK’s decision to leave the EU, longstanding economic pressures, and disruptive technologies set to change the composition of the labour market, young people today are faced with unprecedented challenges navigating the complex path from education into the workplace,” he said.

Other members of the advisory panel include Neil Carberry, CBI’s managing director of people policy, Martin Doel, the FETL professor of leadership in further education and skills at the Institute of Education and former chief executive of the Association of Colleges, and Lesley Davies, the principal of Trafford College.

A Department for Education spokesperson: “We are transforming technical education so that young people have the skills and knowledge that employers need.

“Together, T levels and apprenticeships will form the new technical education offer, acting as two different routes to skilled employment. Good careers advice plays a critical role in this, which is why from January schools will be required to work with training providers for technical education and apprenticeships.

“We are also developing a transition year for students who are not ready to start a T level at age 16. We will engage with education providers and stakeholders on these proposals as part of the process.”

Applications for FE loans were down in 2016/17 for all age-groups they were available to in previous years.

The total number of applications “received” increased marginally from 80,650 in 2015/16, to 93,660 for 2016/17, according to latest figures published by the Department for Education this morning.

However, this is taking into account 21,240 from 19 to 23-year-olds, who were able to apply for FE loans for the first time from August last year.

All other age groups were down.

The 2016/17 figure for 24 to 30-year-olds was 27,260 – down 12 per cent from 31,060 the previous academic year.

The corresponding drops were 8 per cent for 31 to 40-year-olds (from 28,470 to 26,110); 10 per cent for 41 to 50-year-olds (from 15,650 to 14,040); and 8 per cent for those aged 50-plus (from 5,450 to 4,990).

Mark Dawe, Association of Employment and Learning Providers’ boss, said the fall in applications was linked to new restrictions on loans-funded provision.

The new limits, which include a ban on subcontracted loans provision and growth caps, were brought in by the Education and Skills Funding Agency in 2016/17 following a series of scandals – exposed by FE Week – in which loans-funded learners were left with massive debts but no courses after their providers, including John Frank Training, Edudo Ltd and Focus Training and Development Ltd, went bust.

“Some independent providers can and want to deliver more loans-funded learning but growth is capped,” Mr Dawe said today, a situation that he described as “unfortunate, although we understand the reasons for the agency’s caution”. 

“But even more important and concerning is that the requirements on new entrants gaining access to the loans market are very tight and AELP would like to see them reviewed,” he added.

It comes after FE Week revealed last month, through a freedom of information response, that a massive 58 per cent of FE loans funding – amounting to almost £1 billion – had not been spent since 2013.

The Student Loans Company, which processes advanced learner loans for the government, revealed that only £652 million in loan-funded provision had actually been delivered since 2013, compared to £1.56 billion in allocations.

FE loans, originally known as 24+ loans, were introduced in 2013/14 for learners studying courses at levels three or four and aged 24 and older.

Their introduction corresponded with a fall in adults studying at levels three and four+, from 273,400 in 2012/13 to 195,200 in 2013/14, according to the DfE’s own statistics.

That number had fallen further still, to 169,400 by 2015/16.

Yet loan eligibility was expanded in 2016/17 to include 19- to 23-year-olds, and courses at levels five and six.

FE Week asked the DfE if it was concerned about the fall in applications for all 24+ age groups. In response, a spokesperson said: “Advanced learner loans are available to thousands of adults wishing to retrain, helping them to meet upfront fees and removing one of the main barriers to learning.

“It is vital we build the skilled workforce that business and the country needs to ensure we can compete across the world and adult education is part of this. We will continue to work with colleges and training providers to raise the profile of advanced learner loans.”

Loan applications received by the DfE from 2014/15 to 20167/17 (according to official government statistics):

A major public sector union has recommended that its members reject this year’s “disappointing” FE pay offer, and industrial action could be on the cards.

Unison released an e-ballot last week asking its members whether they want to accept or reject the Association of Colleges’ offer of a one-per-cent pay increase for college staff made in September, over which even the AoC’s chief executive David Hughes admitted having regrets.

The union’s FE committee recommended “rejection of this offer”, and stressed that “a vote to reject the offer would require being prepared to take sustained industrial action”, up to and including strike action.

Ruth Levin, Unison’s national officer for FE, said the committee voted to recommend rejection as the offer represented a “real-terms pay cut”, given that inflation is “running at nearly three per cent”.

“This offer was seen as more than disappointing,” she told FE Week today. “Our members are working harder and harder but they are being paid less in real terms. Many members have not had a pay rise for many years as colleges are not obliged to implement the Association of Colleges’ recommendation.

“In our 2017 survey of members working in colleges, over 16 per cent of support staff told us that they receive gross pay of under £12,000 per annum and over 29 per cent earn less than £15,000 per annum. 

“They are telling us that they are struggling to pay their bills, rent or mortgage, and to pay for food.”

She added that improved funding for the sector is “vital and cannot wait”.

The AoC’s pay offer for 2017/18 has provoked widespread dismay.

It’s particularly controversial given that Theresa May announced at the recent Conservative Party conference that the wider one-per-cent public pay cap would finally be lifted for police and prison officers.

The raise does not however apply to pay at colleges.

The National Joint Forum, made up of the unions representing college staff, had submitted a claim for an across-the-board rise of around six per cent in April.

But the final offer was just one per cent, or £250, whichever is greater – a deal which the Mr Hughes said he was not happy with.

“We wish we were in a position to make a better recommendation,” he said at the time. “But current funding levels for colleges do not allow us to do so.”

The University and College Union also voted overwhelmingly in favour of balloting for industrial action over pay earlier this month.

Following its initial e-ballot, which closed on September 29, more than 75 per cent of members said they would support industrial action. The union is now determining which of its branches will formally ballot for action in support of the national claim.

“Following the disappointing one-per-cent pay offer, UCU is currently finalising which branches will take action in support of the national pay claim,” a spokesperson said.

Mr Hughes insisted in response that his association will continue to “campaign for fair funding” and blamed a lack of government investment for holding back staff pay.

“When we made our recommendation to colleges for this year’s pay award we made it clear that we had hoped to be able to make a better offer,” he said.

Mr Hughes added that the AoC would “like to avoid any industrial action as strikes are disruptive for colleges and more importantly for students”.

Unison’s ballot closes on November 17. After the results are in, the union will “make a decision as to how the campaign will be taken forward,” Ms Levin said.