Colleges must justify ‘excessive’ staff pay, union demands

Colleges must justify staff who are paid over £150,000 a year, according to the University and College Union, which says oversight is “desperately needed”.

Seventy-one college leaders earned salaries of that size or more in 2015/16, according to FE Week analysis of DfE accounting records.

This rises to 132 (over two thirds of all colleges) when pension contributions were included.

The government is beginning to crack down on high pay for academy chief executives and university vice-chancellors.

The new Education and Skills Funding Agency boss Eileen Milner joined the universities minister Jo Johnson this week to order both types of institution, which often pay salaries of more than £150,000 a year, to justify the excessive remunerations.

They were echoing the words of the former education minister Andrew Adonis, who called in August for university heads’ pay to be capped at that amount.

Sally Hunt

Colleges have however so far not received the same scrutiny, and the Department for Education this week refused to tell FE Week whether it would request similar rationalisation from FE providers.

Sally Hunt, UCU’s general secretary, said the bumper salaries enjoyed by many principals show that “too many college leaders are out of touch” and demanded more accountability on high pay.

“While staff pay is being eroded and colleges are struggling to recruit because of low pay, these pay awards show it’s one rule for staff and another for those at the top,” she told FE Week.

“The recent scandals over pay and perks in universities show the desperate need for proper accountability of senior pay in all education institutions which receive public funding, including FE colleges.”

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said principals lead “large and complex” organisations, and it is “right” that their pay should be “commensurate with the significant level of responsibility involved in these extremely demanding roles”.

Ms Milner wrote to 29 academy trusts which have just one school, asking them to defend high salaries for their chief executives.

She said this is needed because of the “considerable scrutiny” over taxpayer-funded executive salaries that has emerged “in recent months”.

In August, Mr Johnson asked the same of vice-chancellors, after it emerged that dozens of university heads were earning £300,000, and some were on more than £400,000.

“While it is essential that we have the best people to lead our colleges if we are to raise standards, it is also important the system commands public confidence and delivers value for money,” said a DfE spokesperson.

“That is why colleges must disclose senior staff pay annually in their audited accounts. Disclosure requirements are kept under review by the ESFA.”

It is not only chief executives and principals who are being paid such exceptionally high salaries.

FE Week looked at the accounts of the colleges (see table) with the highest salary and pension packages in 2015/16, and found that more than one person was on £150,000 or more at four: NCG, Loughborough, Gateshead and Stafford.

The board of the Hart Learning Group said a “significant element” of its chief executive’s pay was based on “performance, including some long-term measures”. The group comprises North Hertfordshire College, Hart Learning and Development, and the Hart Schools Trust.

The Manchester College said the chief executive of its parent company, the LTE group, was the person receiving a pay packet of £242,000.

A spokesperson said the group is one of the UK’s largest skills social enterprises, and operates five separate organisations in over 120 locations with a combined turnover of more than £180 million in 2016.

He added that the principal of The Manchester  College earns a salary of £141,050 excluding pension contributions. 

Nevil Croston, the chair of governors at West Nottinghamshire College, said the remuneration package for principal Dame Asha Khemka is commensurate with her “skills and expertise, her profile and reputation within the sector, the significant influence she has on government policy, and the success she has brought to the organisation over the past 11 years”.

A Weston College spokesperson said: “Unlike other college groups, Weston College’s multi-academy trust accounts are consolidated within the overall college group accounts. To compare like for like, approximately £31,000 should be removed from these figures for the accounting officer work on behalf of the trust.”

FE Week did not list colleges where chief executives’ pay topped £200,000 if there were overlaps in principals or one-off severance payments.

No sign of government’s pay transparency pledge

The Department for Education has not acted on a promise once made by a former skills minister to increase pay transparency for senior management positions in colleges.

Nick Boles hinted that growing numbers of college staff were receiving excessive salaries in a review of post-16 education released in March last year.

Even though colleges have to publish what they pay senior staff every year in their audited accounts, they are not required to detail exactly how much they pay or who receives it.

Mr Boles said the DfE would explore accountability measures to publish the salaries of the three highest-paid members of college staff, to ensure value for money.

But the government appears not to have made any headway in this area in the last 20 months.

A DfE spokesperson said that senior staff pay disclosure requirements “are kept under review by the ESFA” when FE Week asked about progress on accountability.

FE Week found four colleges – NCG, Loughborough, Gateshead, and Stafford – had paid more than £155,000 in 2015/16 to more than one employee, after we combed college accounts.

NCG paid its chief executive £278,000, its group director for finance, estates and IT up to £210,000, and the principal of Newcastle College up to £160,000. These amounts included pension contributions and bonus payments.

A spokesperson pointed out that CEO Joe Docherty’s remuneration also included a car allowance. He is responsible for the whole group, which has six FE colleges and two private training providers, with a combined turnover of circa £170 million.

The NCG spokesperson added that none of the trio have received any increase in salary for the last three years.

Stafford College meanwhile paid its previous interim principal Ian Clinton £155,000, and one other unnamed interim vice-principal above £200,000 in 2015/16.

Loughborough paid £254,000 for its principal in 2015/16, but said this was because of an overlap in leadership between Esme Winch and Heather MacDonald. Another of its employees was paid up to £160,000, but the college would not be drawn on who or what role this was for.

Gateshead paid its principal Judith Doyle £244,000 and one member of its executive team up to £160,000, although a spokesperson would not reveal their identity when asked.

He did point out that senior pay is determined by the college’s remuneration committee which follows “robust governance procedures”.

Battle to save college campus near Grenfell Tower gets FE commissioner support

The FE Commissioner has become embroiled in the battle to save a college campus for residents dealing with the fallout of the Grenfell Tower fire.

Richard Atkins visited Kensington and Chelsea College this week to review its proposed merger with Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College, which had been set for January 2018.

It is understood he was sent in by skills minister Anne Milton, after she met with members of the Grenfell Action who are campaigning to stop KCC’s Wornington Road campus from being redeveloped for housing.

Verena Beane, a retired KCC employee and leading campaigner, said a major reason the group was determined to stop the merger was because they think the resulting super-college would be less likely to retain the campus used by the sort of less privileged residents affected by the fire at nearby Grenfell Tower.

She added the group “put to the minister very strongly how the community felt that the loss of their local community college would be a step too far”, during the meeting arranged following requests by the group’s founder, Grenfell-survivor Ed Daffarn, to Nick Hurd, the minister for Grenfell victims.

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

This provoked a furious local reaction, and residents clashed with college and council leaders during a heated public meeting in September.

They claimed this was an example of “social cleansing” where services for poorer people could make way for costly housing.

Kim Taylor-Smith, who took over as deputy leader of the council in July and is lead member for Grenfell recovery, said afterwards that he had listened to the complaints the following week, and the campus redevelopment plans had been paused.

KCC was rated as ‘requires improvement’ in its most recent Ofsted report, published in March, while EHWLC had only come out of FE commissioner intervention in September, having improved from an Ofsted grade four to a grade two in May.

“A merger at this early stage of recovery is just crazy,” Ms Beane said.

She acknowledged that the “high profile” of the area following the tragic events of June 14, which led to 71 deaths, had helped the group to get the minister’s ear.

“We were fighting it before Grenfell, and we were getting small wins, but the whole thing has become a centre of focus in North Kensington,” she said.

“The one thing we’re asking for is that these things be done as a form of reparation.”

The Department for Education would not be drawn on whether it was giving special treatment to the college, nor would it say whether Anne Milton had asked the FE commissioner to intervene.

But a spokesperson did confirm that Mr Atkins was carrying out a review into the decision by KCC to merge with EHWLC.

“The commissioner will take into account the educational and financial case for the merger, and consider any wider issues surrounding the Wornington Road site,” he said.

The two colleges said in a joint statement: “We welcome the FE commissioner’s decision to review the merger and we look forward to receiving his feedback.

“We have responded to the concerns raised through the public consultation as part of the proposed merger and we are confident that the merger will secure the future of Kensington and Chelsea College, its staff and students as well as serving the needs of local residents and employers through its Chelsea and North Kensington sites.”

Ofsted Watch: Tough week for FE as grades fall

Two FE providers have seen their ratings tumble, and two others have received ‘requires improvement’ grades, in the latest reports released by Ofsted.

The independent training provider London Skills and Development Network (LSDN) fell from a grade two to a grade three, with its apprenticeship provision described as ‘inadequate’, in its most recent inspection on October 17.

The provider mainly caters for adult learners working towards qualifications in rail engineering or transport operations, but also provides apprenticeship frameworks in early years, digital media, accountancy and finance. A high proportion of its learners previously served time in prison, and a small number are currently released from prison on license.

According to the report, published on December 6, apprentices do not receive “all elements” of their apprenticeship training programme at LSDN, and too few develop good skills and knowledge or continue into higher training or supervisory roles.

The regulator also criticised “repeated instances of poor behaviour”, low attendance, undemanding teaching and poor careers guidance.

However, it added that a high proportion of learners achieve their qualifications, and the rail engineering programmes particularly help learners who have previously struggled with employment find work. It also commended the “wide range of additional qualifications” on offer including alcohol awareness and heavy lifting.

South Devon College also experienced a drop this week, falling from ‘outstanding’ to ‘good’ with its full-time provision for 14- to 16-year-olds marked ‘requires improvement’.

The report, published on December 7, warned that the college does not take action quickly enough to prevent weaknesses including poor attendance and declining qualification outcomes, and the proportion of learners achieving functional skills qualifications or completing apprenticeships has fallen over the past four years.

The college provides 16-to-19 study programmes, adult provision and apprenticeships, and full- and part-time education is provided for 14- to 16-year-olds through the South Devon High School located on its site in Paignton.

Its school for 14- to 16-year-olds takes on a number of pupils who have struggled at other schools and have “a range of social, emotional or behavioural needs”, but the report warns that staff “are too ready to use learners’ prior difficulties or negative experiences at other schools as a reason for underachievement”.

Ofsted criticised teaching, warning that staff do not plan their lessons well enough to meet different needs and do not push learners to reach their potential or have high enough expectations.

However, it commended the college for a strong focus on progressing learners into higher education, focusing on the needs of the community and offering “a wide range of high-quality work experience placements”.

Sussex Downs College kept its grade three rating in a report published on December 8, which warned that too few students are achieving qualifications, particularly level two maths, or attending maths and English lessons.

Ofsted said teachers do not help students progress or have high enough expectations, and too few have the opportunity to take work experience placements. However, they develop “very good practical skills” and the quality of teaching, learning and assessment was commended for adult students, apprenticeships and high-needs students.

Inspectors also noted “very good” behaviour from students, and said leaders and managers had improvement actions in place which were beginning to have a “positive impact”.

The college, which was inspected on October 31, caters for 5,600 students and has three main sites in Eastbourne, Lewes and Newhaven.

Northumberland-based Skills North East, which also delivers courses in Kidderminster, Doncaster and Hull, received a grade three on its first inspection on November 1.

Ofsted warned that learners are not making “enough progress” to develop skills and are not given enough opportunities to advance in English and maths, nor is enough done to make sure they understand the risks of radicalisation and extremism.

The provider currently has 50 learners on level three programmes, the majority on courses in nail services and nail technology which have a high proportion of learners achieving their qualifications and progressing to employment or higher study.

The regulator also commended the “culture of respect and tolerance” created by leaders, who collaborate to meet the “regional priorities” in each of the provider’s locations.

Three other providers kept their ‘good’ ratings in short inspections published this week: Sandwell College in the West Midlands, New College Swindon and the London Learning Consortium Community Interest Company.

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
South Devon College 31-Oct-17 07-Dec-17 2 1
Sussex Downs College 31/20/2017 08-Dec-17 3 3

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
London Skills & Development Network 17/10/2017 06/12/2017 3 2
Skills North East 01/11/2017 08/12/2017 3 N/A

 

Short Inspections  Inspected Published
Sandwell College  15-Nov-17 04-Dec-17
New College Swindon 02-Nov-17 04-Dec-17
London Learning Consortium Community Interest Company 31/10/2017 06/12/2017

BREAKING: Non-levy £650m tender results finally shared

The long-awaited non-levy tender results, for funding apprenticeships with small (non-levy) employers, have been revealed by the Education and Skills Funding Agency this evening.

It follows a worrying few days for providers, after it was announced on the Bravo tendering site last Friday that after a temporary ‘postponement’ they would be out some time this week.

The actual notices of decisions have not yet been made public, and it only emerged that the results had been shared with providers shortly after 10pm.

FE Week has already launched a survey inviting providers to share their experiences, which can be reached here, and will be reporting further tomorrow.

The survey asks ‘how much was your levy tender cap’ and ‘how much non-levy tendering (January 2018 to March 2019) did you actually bid for’, along with questions on how much they received and how providers feel about it?

FE Week reported on November 17 that the second attempt at tendering for the £650m tender round had been postponed yet again.

The ESFA said at the time this was due to it needing more time to evaluate the high volume of applications.

The process had though been plagued with problems, with providers submitting nearly 1,000 clarification requests.

The ESFA also needed to verify provider tender cap calculations within individual submissions, which in many cases they challenged.

Less careers strategy, more high-risk experiment

The UK’s careers so-called “strategy” is to ditch trained, independent professionals in favour of volunteers, warns Dr Deirdre Hughes

The long-awaited careers strategy is finally in the public domain. There will be a huge sigh of relief from the DfE – and a sharp intake of breath for those at the coalface trying to deliver careers support to young people in their local communities.

There is certainly some good news for those working with adults: “All adults should be able to access free face-to-face advice, with more bespoke support for those who most need it.”

What’s more, career learning pilots and a national retaining scheme will be funded in support of lifelong learning. But careers support for young people continues to form part of a high-risk experiment in England.

Careers support for young people continues to form part of a high-risk experiment in England

The government plans to allocate more funds on top of the initial £30m+ investment to the Careers and Enterprise Company (CEC) to embed all eight Gatsby benchmarks throughout England. These key ‘good guidance’ principles were introduced in 2014. The CEC has been very slow to embrace the careers profession at board and operational level. 

In 2017, two of the eight National Careers Service contractors achieved an ‘outstanding’ grade from Ofsted; the rest were rated ‘good’. These included the Inspiration Agenda, which supports teachers and young people’s encounters with employers and experiences of workplaces. The Education and Skills Funding Agency has now informed National Careers Service providers that funding for this work will end in September 2018. Trained and professional careers advisers face uncertain futures.

There will instead be 20 new careers hubs, led by CEC. But how will these differ from partnerships that are already established in communities? And CEC is to be involved in primary school activities, competing with other well-established providers. But there is no mention of careers advice for young people in training.

Research published alongside the careers strategy shows that of the 2,000 young people asked who helped them make decisions about what to do after year 11/13, only two per cent pointed to a CEC enterprise adviser. Forty per cent spoke to an adviser at school or college. Although most young people are willing to access information online, they prefer face-to-face help.

A parallel DfE report indicates that staff feel that there are enough tools and resources available, but that more personnel are required. Both reports are a reality check – many young people want greater access to face-to-face careers guidance, no different to adults.

The DfE proposal is to train 500 careers coordinators, now called “careers leaders”. Will they be existing or new teachers? There are over 3,000 schools and 280 colleges.

This is a unique experiment not evident in other OECD countries; we over-rely on volunteers and employers, and have a major void in the system when it comes to government investment in careers professionals’ work. Ironically, as more young people face more complex education and labour market choices, their access to independent and impartial careers professionals is left to chance in England, in contrast to other parts of the UK and further afield.

Some good news is that the Education and Training Foundation will provide professional development for those working with special educational needs and disabilities. But what of those young people not in schools and colleges? Does the CEC role now extend to cover those in apprenticeships/traineeships?

Delivery and implementation in communities is what really matters. Local partnerships will do their best to make things work. Over the next 12 months, it will be essential to monitor closely what’s happening at both a national and local level. Fortunately, the minister has promised a review, so watch this space.

Deirdre Hughes is an associate fellow at Warwick University’s Institute for Employment Research, and former chair of the National Careers Council

‘Social mobility’ means nothing without financial support for FE

This Conservative government certainly talks the talk when it comes to social mobility. But, as Emily Chapman explains, it doesn’t walk the walk when it comes to FE students.

Social mobility has become a bit of a buzzword for the current Conservative government. Justine Greening claims that education is at the heart of social mobility, Anne Milton sees the careers strategy as central to ensuring social mobility for all, and last year Theresa May set out her vision for a truly meritocratic Britain, where social mobility meant that “everyone has a fair chance to go as far as their talent and their hard work will allow”.

This vision took a bit of a beating last week when the Social Mobility Commission released its damming ‘State of the nation’ report, highlighting the stark regional differences that exist in Britain today. It sustained an even bigger blow when all four members of the committee quit last week, with Alan Milburn claiming that he has “little hope of the current government making the progress I believe is necessary to bring about a fairer Britain”.

This is something I’ve been reflecting on myself since I started as vice-president for further education at the NUS six months ago. The findings in the report were incredibly disappointing and concerning, but I would be lying if I said they’d come as a surprise. In my role, I meet students all across the country. The huge gulf that exists between those that have and those that don’t is particularly stark when considering FE. Yet I’ve seen little evidence that this government is truly committed to supporting FE students to become socially mobile.

The huge gulf that exists between those that have and those that don’t is particularly stark when considering FE

FE students disproportionally come from deprived backgrounds; they need the most support to access education, but you wouldn’t know it from the current discourse around education funding.

As is often the case, higher education dominates and the issue of maintenance support in FE is glossed over.

The much-anticipated tertiary education funding review is expected to cover age 18 and above, and let’s be honest, we’ll be lucky if it addresses the significant drop in advanced learner loans or the serious lack of maintenance support adults get to access FE. Last week, Anne Milton was asked a written question about the frankly inadequate maintenance support that 16-to-18s in FE receive.

Her response suggests that the Department for Education is happy with the postcode lottery that discretionary bursaries create.

This issue is a particular feature of the commission’s report, which found that the effect of one’s postcode on one’s prospects is particularly acute for young people, and that disadvantaged youths in urban areas tend to benefit from better outcomes than young people in other areas.

A huge range of factors contribute to this, including a lack of access to higher education institutions. One recommendation it made is for local authorities to offer travel bursaries to enable poorer young people to study degree courses.

Transport is an issue that consistently comes up as a problem for learners, and so I agree that they should receive financial support. But I don’t believe this should be limited to people who want to access higher education. Transport provision and costs vary considerably across different regions in England, but one constant is that plenty of people suffer from poor, unreliable services with little to no financial support.

Last month I launched the #myFEjourney campaign, which lobbies for subsidised or free travel for post-16 learners and apprentices, so that everybody can access and succeed in education, not just those at university.

Further education does so much to support social mobility, but this is often in spite of government policy, not because of it. The government claims to be committed to creating parity of esteem between further and higher education and to ensuring social mobility for all.

To achieve this, though, there needs to be an honest discussion about financial support across the entirety of tertiary education – not just higher. Without this, the government’s great “meritocracy” is nothing more than a buzzword.

Emily Chapman is vice president of FE at the National Union of Students

Adult learners are vital to our skills strategy

The government is taking positive steps on skills development, but adult learners must be attended to, says Ruth Spellman

In recent weeks, our government has set out its vision for a country that’s “fit for the future”. The chancellor’s budget, the industrial strategy and now the Skills Summit have all shone a spotlight on the need to upskill and retrain home-grown talent to close the productivity gap.

Last week, Justine Greening used her speech at the summit to develop this agenda further and the WEA welcomes many of the ambitions she set out.

For instance, she was right to say that alongside investment in manufacturing and technology, we must invest in our country’s biggest asset, our people. She was right because it is an investment that underpins not only our economic strategy but that reaps dividends across every part of society.

She was also right to address the needs of both young people and adults in regards to education. Yes, we must prepare our workforce for jobs that don’t yet exist, through high-tech training and investment in STEM, but we must also offer support for services and education providers that help adults take their first steps back into employment.

We need to invest in our adult learners, just as we do with our under 19s, to connect them up to new opportunities

The WEA welcomes a National Retraining Scheme, with career learning pilots and initiatives on digital and construction skills, but there is currently no clear vision for a future in which access to learning for all ages is recognised as a driver of productivity and creativity.

This government’s “future” also needs to include support for millions of adults who would benefit from accessible learning to help them with their basic skills, enabling them to get back to work, or retrain across all sectors of the economy.

We face today, as the education secretary rightly explained in her speech, a problem of lost potential. What we must remember is that potential is not only found in young people. We need to invest in our adult learners, just as we do with our under 19s, to connect them up to new opportunities.

Our own recently launched impact report showed the positive impact of offering people the chance to return to learning. 57 per cent were better equipped to find work, and 82 per cent reported improvements in mental health and wellbeing. Our report showed that people who undertake adult education courses do not rely so much on the benefits system, find employment more easily and become active citizens.

Many of the opportunities are going to come from business, which is why we are pleased to see links forged between education providers and employers.

Business must absolutely be present in schools and colleges

As well as helping learners develop new skills and confidence, it is important for people to get a sense of the needs and the culture of employers.

Business must absolutely be present in schools and colleges, inspiring students and setting out clear pathways to employment, but they should also be involved in working with adult learners, for example through mentoring programmes and through volunteering. If firms were more closely involved in lifelong learning they could ensure that the skills and talents of adult learners were evolving to keep pace with a changing workplace.

That’s also why we should see greater emphasis on careers guidance for adults as well as young people. Skills development and training alone will not necessarily help people back into employment, and we should not assume that adults don’t also need support in navigating the world of work.

We know through many years of work that people respond best to flexible, accessible learning opportunities close to home. This means offering education courses that often don’t look like education at all, but that offer people a local and welcoming environment in which they can start to develop the skills that they require to find their own pathways in life.

This government’s vision to invest in our people is positive, but we must ensure that really means all people and give adults the chance to contribute to our economy and society and to be great role models for their children.

Ruth Spellman is general secretary of the Workers’ Educational Association

High transport costs are letting SEND learners down

It has become all too clear this term that learners with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) who want to study further education are being badly let down.

The local government ombudsman warned in October that growing numbers are missing out on places at colleges, because of delays with local councils producing their education and health care plans.

Now Natspec, the membership association for SEND providers, has warned that more and more learners with special educational needs or disabilities are not now taking up FE places as the cost of travelling to and from lessons is too high.

Every single county council paid for their travel in full a little over a decade ago, but our investigation has shown two thirds are currently charging wildly variable fees.

The financial burden is worse for SEND learners, due the long distances they and their families often face to reach suitable colleges.

The government was wrong to ignore the Association of Colleges’ call last year for a review on travel costs, and it simply isn’t good enough that they’re still passing the buck to local authorities.

I know that councils have statutory responsibility, but the DfE admitted it has an overview and requires LAs to make “reasonable decisions”. It should take this role more seriously.

Paul Offord is deputy editor of FE Week

No sign of hoped-for levied apprenticeships surge in latest statistics

There is no sign of the major upturn in levied apprenticeships that the government has been praying for, according to the latest statistics.

There were 13,910 commitments made through the apprenticeship service in October, down from 27,130 the previous month, the Department for Education has said.

A fall-back is normal after the September surge – but at 49 per cent it is a much bigger drop by proportion than in any of the past three years, which have seen an average die-back of around 39 per cent.

These figures suggest the government will have to wait even longer for an upturn in apprenticeship numbers, which have been in freefall since the introduction of the levy in May.

Figures for the final quarter of 2016/17, from May to July, were down 59 per cent relative to the same time the previous year, according to the November statistical first release.

But Justine Greening told an education select committee hearing in October that the government had been “expecting” this fall in numbers, on the basis that employers would “take some time to look at how they wanted to invest” their levy money.

Others in the sector have attributed this fall-off to different causes, however. 

These include changes to apprenticeship rules which mean apprentices must do a minimum of 20 per cent off-the-job training – a rule that the AELP insists is a barrier for many employers who can’t afford a “non-productive” apprentice for the equivalent of one day a week.

Companies not subject to the levy also now have to pay 10 per cent of the cost of apprenticeship training for the first time, another circumstance widely held to have contributed to the collapse in starts.

The government’s first attempt at a non-levy procurement exercise had to be scrapped in June, after it was “markedly oversubscribed”.

Providers are still waiting to hear the results of a second tender, launched in July, which are now two weeks overdue.

That exercise descended into farce just days before the September deadline, as the Education and Skills Funding Agency issued multiple confusing clarifications to its complex tender rules and requirements.

Figures for apprenticeships with non-levy paying employers aren’t included in the latest experimental figures, which are just for commitments made by levy-paying employers through the government’s apprenticeship service.

This means it’s not possible to directly compare these figures to previous years, which include starts for all employers.

However, by looking at the percentage drop from September to October – which has remained relatively static until now – we can get more accurate picture of the current position relative to previous years.

There has been no indication of an upsurge in the number of employers signed up to use the apprenticeship service.

Just 600 employers registered an account in October, the same number as the previous month – which was already at its lowest since February.

There are now 11,800 employers with levy accounts, which represents around 61 per cent of all the companies the DfE estimates are eligible to pay the levy.

Apprenticeships and skills minister Anne Milton said in October she was “flabbergasted” to find that many large employers were unaware of the levy, even though they were paying it.

A DfE spokesperson told FE Week in November that feedback the department had received from employers has shown they were “taking their time to plan ahead and maximise the opportunities the apprenticeship levy can bring” and “they plan to increase their demand for apprenticeships”.