Our model for prison education could be key to reducing re-offending

In his new role as minister for prisons, James Timpson will be looking for innovative ways to reform the prison system, with a focus on improving rehabilitation and driving down re-offending rates. Skills development is self-evidently key to achieving that ambition, and one of our recent programmes offers an innovative approach that could be replicated system-wide.

At City & Guilds, we understand the life-changing link between skills development and social mobility, prosperity and success. Nowhere is this more the case than with our work in helping unlock the skills potential of the UK’s prison population.

When it comes to prisoners, the relationship between high-quality skills training, access to employment opportunities and community integration is obvious. At a time when employers are facing critical skills shortages and prisons are over-crowded, the economic and moral imperative to effectively and systematically strengthen that link has never been more urgent.

Re-offending costs the UK approximately £18 billion every year, and engagement with education and training has been shown to reduce re-offending considerably. Indeed, a report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons in 2020 showed that the one-year re-offending rate among prison learners was 34 per cent, compared with 43 per cent for those who did not engage in any form of learning.

It’s deeply frustrating therefore that there remains a real gap in terms of high-quality in-prison skills and education programmes. Typical ‘success’ rates on these programmes are often cited in the 15 to 20 per cent range, which surely can’t be good enough.

To help address this, City & Guilds launched The Future Skills Commission for Prisons back in 2019, backed by a £1 million Big Ideas Fund. The fund works with UK charities, prison governors and local innovators to deliver transformative approaches to the delivery of skills both in and after prison.

One of the programmes to receive funding under this scheme is the work we do in partnership with HMP Highpoint. In 2022, through the City & Guilds’ Big Ideas Fund, HMP Highpoint opened their Rail Centre of Excellence.

The economic and moral imperative has never been more urgent

This state-of-the-art facility gives prisoners industry-standard training on rail infrastructure, and every successful participant is guaranteed employment on release – backed by leading employers from across the rail sector. Even better, the courses are funded via the DfE’s Skills Bootcamp initiative, creating a virtuous circle of funding into training into employment.

The results of this programme at HMP Highpoint speak for themselves. To date, over 75 per cent of our graduates are still in employment six months after release. As City & Guilds learner Ryan Hull explains, “When you live a certain lifestyle for so long it’s hard to break the cycle. This course offered me a different route away from that.”

We are now working to scale up this model dramatically, and we’re supported in this ambition by other donors. Most notably, colleagues at Clothworkers have donated funds that will help expand provision into exciting new areas such as signalling and telecoms.

We’ve also been hugely supported by our employer partners, including Balfour Beatty and Keltbray, who have contributed both employment opportunities and the high-quality kit that our learners train on.

The model that the team at HMP Highpoint have championed really does show the way for a more effective, impactful model of prison education. A model that truly unlocks the potential of the UK’s prison population, and helps keep people in high-quality employment for the long term.

That’s good for employers, for our criminal justice system, and for prisoners, their families and their communities. So as James Timpson sets out to fix our revolving prison doors, we hope he sees in this programme a key that he can copy.

Find more information on City & Guilds’ work within prisons here

Slash tuition fees to £6k to fix tertiary system ‘bias’, says think tank

Tuition fees for degrees should be capped at £6,000 to tackle the “financial bias” towards higher education in universities compared to colleges, a think tank has said.

In its ‘Augar Reviewed’ report published today, EDSK outlines why the post-18 education system in England remains “broken” and sets out an 18-point plan to “fix” it.

This includes rebalancing the cost and financial support available for further and higher education courses, including by radically cutting the cap on tuition fees for degrees, currently set at £9,250, by a third.

It comes at a time when universities are pleading with government to increase the fees amid widespread funding struggles.

Report authors – former adviser to skills ministers Tom Richmond and Eleanor Regan – argue that political instability has led to “little progress” being made since the 2019 Augar Review, an independent government report that addressed the “disparity” in funding between universities and further education.

They conclude that the Conservative government’s “experiment” with tertiary education has “failed” and led to “exorbitantly” high tuition fees for students, the “marketisation” of HE, slashing budgets for adult education, falling apprenticeship numbers and “further entrenching” the dominance of full-time university degrees over colleges and other tertiary provision.

To address “distortions and biases” in funding for post-18 education, Richmond and Regan say the government should integrate HE, FE and apprenticeships by switching to a “devolved model for tertiary education” that pushes providers to work together regionally.

Key recommendations include building a “new foundation” by formally recognising a single “tertiary” phase of post-18 education that is funded and overseen by a single independent body, in place of quangos like the Office for Students, that would act as a “steward for the whole system”.

Fees for all tertiary classroom-based courses should be limited to £6,000 and a single tuition loan system should established, with a “stepped repayment” system that would reduce monthly payments for low-earning graduates and save money.

The report argues that the government’s “uncoordinated” approach to post-18 education has led to duplication “hot spots” where hundreds of the same degree course are available in one region and isolated “cold spots” where education options are limited.

Addressing the recent change in government, and Labour’s repeated focus on “growth”, the authors wrote: “If the new Labour government wants to improve economic growth and productivity, increasing the skill levels of workers of all ages through a more effective and responsive approach to education and training will surely be a critical part of their agenda.”

The report is the last from EDSK, following Richmond’s announcement this week that the non-profit think tank will close after six years.

Here’re the key recommendations:

A new foundation for tertiary education

The government should formally divide education into four phases: primary, lower secondary, upper secondary and, for ages 18 and above, tertiary. This would cover all training and levels, including workplace training and apprenticeships.

A new National Tertiary Education Council (NTEC) would fund, regulate and oversee this.

Better deal for students

Alongside a “significant reduction” in the cap on tuition fees, a single loan system should be available to all students of level 4 to 6 courses.

Loans should be repaid through a “stepped” system that would aim to reduce the cost burden on those with low earnings by asking graduates to pay back different percentages of their earnings based on their total salary.

Coupled with lower tuition fees, this should reduce tuition fee and maintenance loan write-offs, freeing up “almost £2 billion” for a “student support fund” that would fund support for students from the poorest households.

Fairer funding

An apprenticeship and skills levy of 0.4 per cent on the annual payroll costs of all employers with at least ten staff would generate £4.1 billion a year to pay for apprenticeships and skills training.

A new £5 billion teacher support fund would pay for high-cost classroom-based courses in colleges and universities through two sources: The present £1.4 billion of teaching grants distributed by the Office for Students; and a new £3.6 billion employer levy of an additional 0.4 per cent Employers’ National Insurance contribution for organisations employing graduates.

EDSK said all HE and FE providers should also have access to a single capital funding pot.

Building a tertiary system

NTEC would set a “simple and transparent” funding system for HE and FE, with the more expensive courses receiving the most funding. The divide between HE and FE would be eliminated by offering sub-degree level 4 certificates and level 5 diplomas that learners could be awarded if they leave a course early.

A localised model

Devolved regions such as combined authorities should coordinate a local tertiary education plan for each area. They should also be given their proportionate share of the proposed new funding pots.

For greater stability, combined authorities should pay providers in three-year funding cycles and should also be given the power to licence providers receiving public funds to combat “inappropriate” franchising and subcontracting arrangements.

Rethinking the quality and regulatory landscape

For a more “coherent” approach to regulation, Ofsted should inspect all teaching up to level 5 and Ofqual should regulate all qualifications up to the same level. To improve the quality of apprenticeships, including degree apprenticeships, a new ‘national apprenticeship inspectorate’ should report to the NTEC.

The Department for Education was contacted for comment.

Meet the ministers: Starmer’s first DfE lineup confirmed

The new government has finally confirmed who is responsible for what at the Department for Education, nearly three weeks after Labour won the general election.

As reported, former home secretary Jacqui Smith leads on skills, further and higher education. Her confirmed title is minister for skills.

Smith was inducted to the House of Lords last week and is responsible for delivering Labour’s manifesto pledges to establish Skills England, reform the apprenticeship levy and introduce technical excellence colleges.

Catherine McKinnell is the minister of state for school standards, a brief the Newcastle MP shadowed in opposition before the election.

MPs Janet Daby and Stephen Morgan have been appointed parliamentary under-secretaries of state, the rank below minister of state.

Morgan was replaced by McKinnell as shadow schools minister last year, but is now responsible for early education in government.

Morgan is also responsible for safeguarding and counter-extremism in post-16 education settings.

Meanwhile, Daby, who was previously the shadow youth justice minister, is now the minister for children and families.

Daby will also answer on skills, further and higher education in the House of Commons, as Smith can only speak from the Lords.

In practice, the parliamentary under-secretaries carry out the basic functions of ministers of state such as leading legislation through parliament and answering parliamentary questions, but they are paid less.

As a cabinet minister, education secretary Bridget Phillipson receives a £67,505 top-up to her £91,346 MP salary. Ministers of state receive a £31,680 top-up, and parliamentary under-secretaries of state get an extra £22,375.

Skills led from the Lords

As the DfE’s minister in the Lords, Smith will be responsible for facing questions and seeing through any legislation across all of DfE’s remits in the upper chamber. She made her maiden speech on Friday introducing the education legislation from the King’s Speech.

Because equalities policy sits at cabinet level with Bridget Phillipson, Anneliese Dodds is listed as a DfE minister as minister for women and equalities. Dodds is also minister for international development at the Foreign Office.

Over at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), Alison McGovern has been confirmed as the minister for employment overseeing skills programmes, labour market policy and devolution.

Stephen Timms, who used to chair the DWP select committee, is now the minister for social security and disability with responsibility for universal credit and cross-government disability policy.

Here’s what’s in each DfE minister’s brief…

Bridget Phillipson, secretary of state for education

  • early years and childcare
  • children’s social care
  • teacher quality, recruitment and retention
  • the school curriculum
  • school improvement
  • academies and free schools
  • further education
  • apprenticeships and skills
  • higher education

Baroness Smith of Malvern, minister for skills

  • Skills England
  • Technical qualifications, including T Levels
  • Higher technical education
  • Adult education and devolution
  • Careers advice and support for young NEETS
  • Apprenticeships, including the growth and skills levy
  • Technical excellence colleges
  • Local skills improvement plans
  • Governance, intervention and accountability of FE colleges
  • Education funding, provision and outcomes for 16-19 year olds
  • FE funding, including financial stability and workforce
  • Access to higher education, participation and lifelong learning
  • Quality of higher education and student experience (including OfS)
  • Student finance (including Student Loans Company)
  • International education

Catherine McKinnell, minister for school standards

  • School improvement, intervention and inspection
  • Teacher training, retention, pay and pensions
  • School leadership and governance
  • Core school funding
  • Qualifications, curriculum and assessment
  • SEND and high needs
  • Alternative provision
  • Admissions
  • Pupil premium
  • School uniform and transport
  • Faith schools
  • Access to sport, music and arts in education

Janet Daby, minister for children and families

  • Children’s social care
  • Children in care and children in need
  • Looked-after children
  • Child protection
  • Adoption, kinship care and foster care
  • Care leavers
  • Children’s social care workforce
  • Unaccompanied asylum-seeking children
  • Local authority improvement
  • Family hubs
  • Families support and parenting
  • Skills in the House of Commons

Stephen Morgan, minister for early education

  • Early years education including children with SEND
  • Early years workforce
  • Breakfast clubs
  • School food, including free school meals
  • Independent schools
  • Education estate
  • Environmental sustainability in education sectors
  • Safeguarding, online safety and serious violence prevention in schools and post-16
  • Counter extremism in schools and post-16
  • Use of AI and data in education

Driving employer engagement is key to apprenticeships success. Here’s how

This spring, we conducted a survey that revealed significant gaps in employers’ awareness and understanding of the long-term benefits of apprenticeships. Seven years after the introduction of the apprenticeship levy and extensive promotion of the scheme over that period, it’s clear we must do better to engage employers, but how?

Among our more striking survey results, we found that only 23 per cent of respondents understood how apprenticeships could help with succession planning. Less than one-third (a mere 29 per cent) recognised that apprenticeships could significantly enhance employee loyalty. 

We must do much more to demonstrate that apprenticeships can form the foundation of employers’ learning and development strategies. With Labour’s promised shift from the apprenticeship levy to a growth and skills levy, now is a crucial time to highlight the transformative power of these programmes.

During my time working in this sector, I’ve found a number of employer engagement approaches really work when building long-term relationships. Here are a few.

Guidance and support

Many employers don’t want to invest a lot of their own time into running apprenticeships, and many smaller and private-sector employers are looking for an easy step-by-step process to ensure they don’t feel overwhelmed. 

The system is ever-changing and difficult to navigate, so as experts in the space it’s our responsibility to guide employers through it. This is particularly true for critical elements like off-the-job training, and understanding how it can be incorporated into helping achieve business objectives.

Employers also prefer options which fit learning around project deadlines and work priorities. Indeed, ‘blended’ is the most popular search filter on the AAT’s ‘find a training provider’ feature. 

Return on investment

To secure a new employer partnership, providers should emphasise the return on investment they will see. I have found this especially true with private-sector partners who are generally more apprehensive about investing in their team through apprenticeships.

Take employers using apprenticeships for the first time. They often seek reassurance from market insights.  A couple of key facts that have helped us secure partners: 76 per cent of employers say that training existing employees through apprenticeships improves staff retention, and 62 per cent of apprentices stay working for the company that trained them after completion. 

Of course, securing meaningful relationships with potential employer partners is a matter of return on your investment too. We often attend employer events on behalf of our college partners and find them to be invaluable for making initial connections. However, implementing a thorough follow-up plan is an essential part of that initial investment. 

The ladder of opportunity

In a challenging labour market for everyone, using other employers as examples of best practice shows how apprenticeships are giving some organisations a competitive edge.

More than that, many public- and third-sector organisations can provide a scalable blueprint for businesses looking to use apprenticeships as the foundation for strategic learning and development pathways.

Among organisations to take inspiration from, the NHS is a real standout. It has achieved success in apprenticeships for vital clinical areas like nursing and midwifery and then made a strategic decision to expand apprenticeships into corporate and business support roles (where they were relatively much more straightforward to implement).

When advising employers on including apprenticeships in their talent strategy, start with a ‘ladder of opportunity’. The first rung on this ladder would be a baseline qualification which could be beneficial to a wide range of employees, for example business administration.

A level 2 or 3 apprenticeship allows employees to explore different pathways before progressing up the ladder, whether that’s to a general management qualification or a specialist pathway which will help the organisation fill skills gaps.

In summary, bridging the gap in employer understanding of the strategic benefits of apprenticeships is crucial to securing multiple apprenticeships opportunities with employers.

By using real-world examples, demonstrating a clear return on investment, and nurturing relationships by providing supportive, scalable frameworks, we can better engage employers and unlock the full potential of apprenticeships.

HE regulator puts 3 colleges on notice

Three colleges have been sanctioned by the government’s higher education regulator for high dropout and low completion rates.

The Office for Students (OfS) today has published a batch of improvement notices for courses in eight HE providers that have breached condition B3. The condition was refreshed in 2022 and sets numerical thresholds for students continuing and completing their course, and achieving successful outcomes after graduation.

Burnley College, Blackburn College and Croydon College were included and will now be monitored by the regulator for the next few years. They have been ordered to submit a “comprehensive review” in the next six months of the failings and actions to improve student outcomes.

The regulator examined performance data spanning the past decade.

Here’s what the OfS said about each college:

Croydon College

The OfS’ investigation into Croydon College found the poorest performance rates out of the three colleges put on improvement notice.

As of September 2022, the college recorded 28 per cent of part-time, other undergraduate students continuing their HE courses into the next year, achieving just half of the OfS’s 55 per cent benchmark.

Just 41 per cent of part-time students completed their degrees compared to the 55 per cent OfS benchmark.

The regulator accepted the college’s evidence that the low outcomes data among part-time students was due to the “historical withdrawal” of student recruitment on Higher National Certificate (HNC) in business course during 2014-15 and 2015-16.

This was due to a terminated partnership agreement with distance learning recruitment company Acquire Learning UK, following a 2015 investigation into the organisation’s recruitment processes by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills and the Student Loans Company.

Meanwhile, for full-time first time degree students, the college recorded a 76 per cent continuation rate against an 80 per cent threshold.

The college also fell 11 percentage points behind the 75 per cent requirement for full time students to complete their first degree.

In its explanation following the OfS investigation, the college said it had made changes to its higher education portfolio since 2013-14, closing poor performing courses, focusing on the needs of local employers and developing courses within the Higher Technical Qualification and higher apprenticeship frameworks.

The college added that changes to its senior leadership since March 2018 meant the leadership team “did not know many of the historical reasons” for lower continuation and completion rates. 

But the OfS pointed out that while the continuation rate data investigated spanned from 2016-17 to 2019-20 and the completion rate data from 2013-14 to 2016-17, leadership team would have had access to historical documentation such as annual reports, minutes of meetings and handover notes. 

It concluded the leadership team would have had some historical information to analyse the areas of concern and reasons for poor performance, which “could have informed any improvement plans”.

The regulator added that it was not satisfied with the college’s improvement plan from 2018-19 for its HE provision and has mandated the college to undertake a review and submit to the OfS by January 31, 2025.

The regulator said the college was at “increased risk” of failing to achieve the benchmarks in future years. 

It will continue to monitor the provider’s performance until its outcomes data in spring 2027.   

Croydon College was downgraded by Ofsted to ‘inadequate’ last year after inspectors found “significant minority” of students reported instances of homophobic language and “taunting” behaviour. Its latest monitoring visit since has found reasonable progress made.

Blackburn College

At Blackburn College, the OfS investigated courses delivered by the college’s University Centre and found it breached the “student outcomes” conditions of registration as of September 2022.

Blackburn College’s proportion of full-time students on their first degree who continued their course from year to year was 75 per cent against the OfS’s 80 per cent threshold.

For full-time, other undergraduate students, the “continuation rate” was 72 per cent against a 75 per cent benchmark.

The college also failed in meeting the 75 per cent threshold for full-time students completing their degree (67 per cent).

The college submitted explanations for not meeting the benchmark values, such as the changes to its senior leadership since 2019 and actions like offering targeted pastoral support and staff development to improve the quality of its courses.

The OfS found that the contextual factors submitted by the provider justified its performance but concluded that there is an increased risk of the provider breaching the benchmarks.

The college will have to conduct a comprehensive review by January 2025 and bring its performance in line or above the OfS thresholds by spring 2028.

“We consider that this aligns with our commitment to undertake a ‘light touch’ approach in the first year of conducting revised B3 assessments by using improvement notices, rather than the more intrusive sanctions available to us,” the report said.

Rachel Tarplee, vice principal of curriculum and quality at Blackburn College, said the college acknowledges the findings and has taken the recommendations into account.

“We remain proud of our offering at UCBC. Our smaller student population enables us to provide a high quality and uniquely personalised local University education, encompassing a range of degree subjects that set our students up for successful futures,” she said.

“The focus for UCBC and the wider team at Blackburn College will be on continuing to deliver quality education that meets the needs of our students.”

Burnley College

The OfS found Burnley College was at “increased risk” of breaching two student outcomes, the continuation of full-time, first-degree student and the progression of full-time, first degree students.

As of September 2022, the college achieved a 76 per cent continuation rate, against an 80 per cent benchmark.

The OfS also found 50 per cent of full-time students on Burnley College courses progressed in managerial or professional employment, further study or other positive outcomes, 10 percentage points lower than the requirement.

The college explained the performance data was lower than the regulators’ benchmark due to the impact of the pandemic and “historical data quality issues at the college”, both of which the regulator rejected.

The OfS also found the college’s provision of financial, pastoral and academic support and a campus extension supported students provided “little evidence” that it had improved outcomes.

“While the college had already taken actions in relation to some programmes, these had not led to any noticeable improvement,” the report said. “For example, an allied health programme had been under significant review since 2017 and was only moved into critical review in 2021 after it became clear that previous actions had not been effective in bringing about improved and sustained outcomes for its students.”

The OfS will monitor the college until spring 2028 and has mandated a review of its current improvement plans by January 2025.

The regulator explained: “The actions the provider has taken have not yet led to substantial and sustained improvement in performance, and we do not consider the actions the provider plans to take are likely to sufficiently improve performance in an appropriate timescale.”

Croydon College and Burnley College were approached for comment.

Policy for 16-19 is finally catching up with the evidence

Since the mid-1990s, policymakers have tended to look earlier in the system for solutions to tackling persistent inequality in education. But not only has this come at the expense of post-16 education, new evidence suggests the approach of dismissing the later years needs reevaluating.

The rationale was fuelled by neuroscientific studies which first emerged in the 1970s and indicated that the first ‘window of opportunity’ for learning is in early childhood. As a result, many educators and policymakers came to believe that stopping gaps in cognitive outcomes emerging by the age of five would stop the attainment gap from appearing later in education.

But neuroscience today is not the same as it was in the 1970s, or even the 1990s. The latest studies show that late adolescence is, in fact, another window of opportunity for learning.

Moreover, robust early education studies show that the positive benefits yielded from intervening early are at risk of fading over time if there is a lack of support running throughout the education system.

Not keeping up with science has come at a significant cost to other parts of the education system. Back in 2014, when the Department for Education’s budget was cut, then-secretary of state Michael Gove decided that it was 16-19 funding that would reduce. He described this as ‘the least detrimental option’.

But this approach has seen further education experience the largest cuts in funding of any phase of education in the decade after 2010. Even now, further education remains a non-protected government budget.

Today, a new report by the Education Policy Institute reveals the damage this lack of focus and funding has had on state-education for 16- to 19-year-olds.

The report finds that students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds are over three grades behind their peers by the time they finish 16-19 education. This gap, it shows, is not only a result of the educational inequalities students from low-income families experience in school or earlier. These students are falling further behind during the post-16 phase.

The report also finds that as young people from disadvantaged backgrounds transition from secondary to post-16 education, the funding their college or sixth form receives to support their education drops by over one-third.

FE is effectively missing funding for over one-quarter of 16- to 19-year-old

In part, this is driven by the absence of pupil premium funding after the age of 16. Further education settings are effectively missing funding for over one-quarter of 16-19-year-olds. As the authors point out, the attainment gap continues to widen beyond the age of 16 and there is no clear rationale for this funding cliff-edge.

Remarkably, the report’s investigation shows that over the past two years, less than one-third of further education colleges used the existing tool available to them to identify which of their students were economically disadvantaged.

This would be unthinkable in a school. If Ofsted inspectors arrived and a school did not have this information about its student cohort, it would struggle to meet the criteria for a ‘Good’ or ‘Outstanding’ judgment. Yet Ofsted judges 91 per cent of further education colleges to be in those two categories.

This is not the fault of colleges, whose leaders do their best with the few resources and little funding they have. The truth is that our accountability system, like the wider education system, simply doesn’t place the same significance on post-16 education as it does on other phases.

The Education Policy Institute is right to start with the absence of a 16-19 pupil premium to point this out, but there is much more evidence than that.

For example, one of the hottest topics in education policy in the run-up to the election has been the removal of the VAT exemption for private schools. But it has barely been mentioned that colleges – part of our state education system – are not exempt from VAT.

Meanwhile, teacher recruitment challenges are greater in colleges than in schools. However, college teachers are paid on average £7,000 less than their school counterparts and interventions to support schools like Teach First have never been given a contract to place teachers in further education.

Deprioritising a compulsory part of our education system is not just unethical, it is wrong. Science tells us that we can’t fix inequality in education early and avoid all problems later. Interventions to sustainably address education inequality must exist across the whole education system.

Post-16 education is the last moment in the compulsory education system to set young people up with the qualifications they need to thrive in life. The sector has tremendous potential to address existing attainment gaps and break down barriers to opportunity.

For all these reasons, I wholeheartedly endorse the Education Policy Institute’s recommendation for a 16-to-19 pupil premium. I hope policymakers take note.

Read the EPI report, Implementing a 16-19 pupil premium in full here

Mayor intervenes as judicial review puts college’s £22m rebuild at risk

The future of a large college redevelopment project has been thrown into doubt by a local businessman’s legal challenge and tight funding deadlines set by the Department for Education (DfE).

In 2022, Harrogate College, part of Luminate Education Group, celebrated winning £20 million from the DfE to completely redevelop its site.

But following delays caused by a planning dispute with a neighbouring business park, Luminate is now publicly campaigning for the DfE to extend a spending deadline to avoid losing the funding completely.

The plea for an extension raises questions about whether tight government budget deadlines give colleges enough room to manoeuvre when managing large or complex projects.

The DfE’s funding – a £16 million FE Capital Transformation Fund grant and £4 million loan, bolstered by £2m from Luminate – came on the condition that building work must be complete by March 2025.

But the college says threats of a judicial review challenge to the planning application, made by the owner of a neighbouring business park, mean the rebuild is likely to continue to September 2026.

Luminate’s campaign has won the support of recently elected Labour mayor of York and North Yorkshire, David Skaith, who today published an open letter to new education secretary Bridget Phillipson warning that missing the “valuable window of opportunity” for funding would be a “damaging outcome” for the college and region.

Principal of Harrogate College, Danny Wild has also said: “I hope the levels of local and regional support for the project are recognised by the new education secretary and our request for an extension to the funding timeline is approved.”

No decision on extending the deadline is understood to have been made by the DfE yet.

‘I think it’s wrong’

The legal challenge is being brought by Hornbeam Park Developments, although the exact grounds are yet to be confirmed.

The company’s owner Chris Bentley told FE Week he is in favour of modernising the college’s facilities, but has several concerns, including whether taxpayers are getting value for money through the redevelopment, the way North Yorkshire Council approved the planning application without a public meeting and a loss of parking spaces.

Despite the size of the redevelopment, and 31 local objections, North Yorkshire Council chose to sign off the planning application in April this year without holding a public committee meeting.

Bentley questioned whether Harrogate College should demolish its building after refurbishing it at a reported cost of £6 million in 2016.

He suggested that rather than rebuild on its current site, the college should move to a neighbouring playing field which Hull College owns and has been attempting to sell for redevelopment.

The businessman, who reportedly also threatened North Yorkshire Council with a separate judicial review in 2023, said: “I’m not prepared to accept it sitting down when the college have alternatives.

“I’m completely in agreement with providing the best possible facilities for educational needs.

“But it’s only about seven years since they spent money on a building that is proposing to be demolished – I have similar buildings that will probably stand for another 100 years.

“I will vigorously progress this [judicial review] because I think it’s wrong for the college and for the taxpayer to build on the site and it doesn’t have the possibility for expansion.”

Bentley added: “It’s so short sighted – it’s complete insanity.

“I will put all my efforts and resources to frustrate it and thwart it because it’s wrong, someone at the DfE needs to come and have a look at the site.

“It’s been seven years since they spent six million on the site and now they want to throw it all away.”

A Department for Education said they do not normally comment on cases of individual colleges.

North Yorkshire Council’s assistant director of planning, Trevor Watson, said the college’s April planning decision is now expected to be “quashed” and re-run.

He claimed the original decision was taken “in accordance” with its usual policy on dealing with planning applications.

EPI’s blueprint for a 16-19 student premium

The government should spend £340 million a year on a new “student premium” to tackle the “sizeable” attainment gap facing disadvantaged 16- to 19-year-olds, a think tank has said.

Under the policy, in scope sixth formers would attract an extra £1,035 each for FE colleges and providers, matching current secondary school pupil premium.

The report from the Education Policy Institute warned of a “cliff edge” funding drop when economically disadvantaged students enter 16 to 19 education, citing figures that show they are funded “at least one-third higher” in schools.

There have been multiple calls for such a 16 to 19 student premium in the past. Today’s report provides a blueprint of how the government could introduce the policy if ministers ever give it the green light.

In schools, pupils eligible for the pupil premium funding are those who are on free school meals 80 per cent or more of their time in education up to 16.

In adopting this definition, the EPI estimates around 28 per cent (or 329,000 students as of 2021/22) of 16- to- 19-year-olds would be eligible for the student premium.

The report recommends initially modelling the student premium to match the pupil premium rate at a cost of £340 million, equivalent to £1,035 per student in 2023/24.

It also proposed a second scenario, where the government would match the per student rate at which disadvantage is funded in secondary schools through the national funding formula and the pupil premium. This would cost £1,495 per student at a total cost of £491 million.

The final and “least generous” scenario for a student premium would match the proportion of total 16 to 19 funding allocated to the disadvantaged (currently 10 per cent) to match that of secondary schools (13 per cent). The payment would equate £647 per eligible student, taking the total funding to £213 million.

“Making funding comparisons across phases is not straightforward but our scenarios consistently demonstrate that disadvantaged students are funded at least one-third higher in secondary schools than in 16 to 19 education,” the report said.

The EPI did warn that introducing a student premium as its own funding stream could potentially “add further complexity” and bureaucracy to the 16 to 19 funding system.

They added that the DfE should stagger the roll out so it can grow an evidence base of what works and review the rate of the student premium.

Additionally, given that post-16 providers are not required to report how they spend their disadvantaged funding, unlike schools, there is “more limited” information on whether and how targeted students are benefitting from the funding.

The report repeated previous warnings of an attainment gap in disadvantaged students. This cohort were found to be an average of 3.2 grades behind their peers in post-16 education, a slightly higher disparity than the 3.1 grade gap in 2021 and the 2.7 grade gap in 2019.

Emily Hunt, associate director for social mobility and vulnerable learners at the EPI, said: “With the gap between disadvantaged students and their peers at over 3 grades by the end of 16 to 19 education, urgent action is needed to prevent these young people from falling further behind their peers.

“There is no justification for the cliff-edge in funding for disadvantage of almost £1,000 at the point students turn 16. Existing funding is insufficient to offset the educational challenges facing 16 to 19 disadvantaged students, particularly in the context of rising child poverty and the further education sector having seen the largest spending cuts of any education phase since 2010.”

David Hughes, chief executive of Association of Colleges, said: “The report points out that whilst achievement gaps between disadvantaged students and their peers start early, they widen throughout their education, including in the final years to 18. Colleges have been seeing and trying to address the serious impact of poverty on their learners without the targeted additional funding that an extended pupil premium would offer for the most disadvantaged students.”

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “Post-16 education has been persistently underfunded and it is disadvantaged students who suffer the most as a result of this. It’s clear that schools and colleges need more funding and for this to be targeted in a way that makes it easier to support these students. 

“In the past ASCL has called for the pupil premium to be reformed to include funding for disadvantaged 16- to 19-year-olds which matches that for younger pupils, and for this to be weighted towards pupils in persistent poverty.

“In time we would like to see funding increased to ensure a consistent approach across 0-19 education, that accounts for varying levels of disadvantage across different communities and is based on detailed analysis of what every young person needs to succeed. Only by putting in place adequate support at every stage can we hope to close the disadvantage gap.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “We recognise that too many young people are being held back by their background. That’s why we have committed to working with the sector to make sure that we can break down the barriers to opportunity.”

Skills England: DfE non-exec appointed interim chair

A Department for Education non-executive director and former boss of the Co-operative Group has been named interim chair of Skills England, a new national body aimed to fix the “fragmented and broken” skills system. 

Richard Pennycook (pictured), currently lead non-executive director at the DfE, will lead the establishment of Skills England while ministers look to appoint a permanent board, chair and CEO in the coming months. 

It follows last week’s King’s Speech which announced legislation that will transfer functions from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) to the new skills body. 

IfATE will continue while Skills England is established in phases over the next 9 to 12 months, the government said today. The DfE has so far refused to clarify whether this means IfATE will close entirely once Skills England is fully operational.

A skills England bill will be introduced in parliament this year that will initially insource “relevant” functions from IfATE to the secretary of state for education while Skills England is being set up, a spokesperson said.

Launching the new body today, prime minister Keir Starmer said Skills England will “kickstart economic growth, by opening up new opportunities for young people and enabling British businesses to recruit more home-grown talent”.

DfE will initially host Skills England in a “shadow form” while parliament passes legislation to officially establish its role and remit in law. In the meantime, Skills England will begin to build relationships with employers and carry out an assessment of future skills needs. 

Apprenticeship levy reform

Establishing Skills England to co-ordinate a national strategy to boost the nation’s skills base was a key plank of Labour’s education policy pre-election. 

As well as bringing together unions, businesses, local government and training providers to have “strategic oversight” of the skills system, Skills England will have several more operational responsibilities. 

Ministers have confirmed Skills England will decide what non-apprenticeship training courses employers can fund through the new growth and skills levy. 

The new levy will replace the apprenticeship levy and will allow employers to spend a proportion of their funds on training courses for the skills they need, in addition to apprenticeships. 

However today’s announcement, like Labour’s manifesto, doesn’t mention previously announced detail that at least 50 per cent of employers’ levy spend must go on apprenticeships before non-apprenticeship funding can be accessed. 

Number 10 said last week Skills England will “consult on (and maintain a list of) levy-eligible training to ensure value for money, and that the mix of government-funded training available to learners and employers aligns with skills needs”.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said he was “pleased to see that ministers are getting on so quickly in establishing Skills England”.

He added: “A shadow board can make a quick start, alongside legislation, to firmly place Skills England at the heart of the government’s drive for economic growth. We will do all that we can to help Skills England make a strong start and establish itself over the coming months and years.”

But Len Shackleton, labour market expert at the Institute of Economic Affairs, questioned the value of another skills quango. He said: “Another top-down talking shop seems unlikely to achieve very much.

“Successful real businesses will make their own arrangements and send second-raters rather than top executives to meetings, which will be dominated by public sector attendees. Documents and policy statements will be prepared by consultants with no skin in the game.”

Shackleton added: “Despite the bustle and the new appointments on generous salaries, it’s unlikely much will be achieved. In five or six years time there will be another reorganisation as another newbie administration thinks it has the key, a process which has been going on for at least sixty years.”

Training up ‘home-grown talent’

Labour has also emphasised Skills England’s cross-government responsibilities through prioritising training against the government’s national industrial strategy and working to reduce immigration by working with the migration advisory committee to reduce reliance on overseas workers in certain sectors like construction and care.

Starmer said: “From construction to IT, healthcare to engineering, our success as a country depends on delivering highly skilled workforces for the long term. Skills England will put in place the framework needed to achieve that goal while reducing our reliance on workers from overseas”.

Labour has also previously said Skills England will run a bidding process for colleges to become designated “technical excellence colleges” if they show they are meeting local skills needs, though no further detail on this was announced today. 

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “The skills system we inherited is fragmented and broken. Employers want to invest in their workers but for too long have been held back from accessing the training they need.

“[Skills England] will bring businesses together with trade unions, mayors, universities, colleges and training providers to give us a complete picture of skills gaps nationwide, boost growth in all corners of the country and give people the opportunity to get on in life.”

However, it remains unclear how Skills England will work with the higher education regulator, the Office for Students, which is also currently looking for a chair, to fulfil Labour’s manifesto commitment to a “comprehensive” strategy for post-16 education.

Who is Richard Pennycook?

Skills England’s interim chair is Richard Pennycook, the Department for Education’s lead non-executive director. Phillipson is Pennycook’s ninth education secretary having been appointed by Justine Greening in 2017. 

Richard Pennycook

DfE’s non-executive board works with ministers on the running of the department and the delivery of its objectives. The board is chaired by the secretary of state. 

In this role, Pennycook also chairs the DfE board’s nominations committee which advises and scrutinises DfE’s ministers’ appointments to key roles.

DfE’s latest available accounts show Pennycook was paid £20,000 a year as its lead non-executive director. 

This is not the first interim skills post Pennycook has been asked to fill.

Following the last government’s skills for jobs white paper in 2021, Pennycook stepped in as interim chair of a new skills reform board before a permanent post-holder was found.

Pennycook is credited with rescuing the Co-operative Group as CEO after its banking division, Co-op Bank, nearly collapsed in 2013. He left the Co-op in 2017 and joined the DfE’s board that year.

His current portfolio includes directorships at Boparan Holdings, which owns 2 Sisters Food Group and restaurants like Ed’s Easy Diner and Gourmet Burger Kitchen, travel firm On The Beach Plc, and ethical fashion brand Wolf & Badger.

Pennycook was made a CBE for services to retail in 2020 birthday honours.