Reports into nearly 200 college and ITP financial probes remain hidden

Yet most financial investigations are into FE providers

Yet most financial investigations are into FE providers

The outcomes of almost 200 investigations into fraud and financial misconduct at FE providers are still unpublished, despite the government releasing probes into academy trusts this week.

For at least a decade, the Education and Skills Funding Agency’s (ESFA) ‘investigation publishing policy’ promised to be “fair and transparent” by releasing detailed financial investigation reports into education providers it funds “where appropriate to do so”.

The majority of investigations carried out by the ESFA related to England’s 1,900 colleges and independent training providers (ITPs) with access to almost ten billion pounds in public funding for FE and skills each year.

Meanwhile, during the same period, the ESFA, which has now merged with the Department for Education, released 17 reports into academy trusts.

But an FE Week investigation found only two reports into FE providers had been published – the most recent six years ago – despite at least 193 ESFA investigations being made into FE providers since 2017.

Delayed academy findings

On Tuesday, the DfE published five investigation “outcome” reports about academy controversies that included financial conflicts of interest and spending on antique furniture, booze and gift cards, some dating as far back as 14 years.

In January, following concerns from the Public Accounts Committee about a lack of reports hindering transparency, permanent secretary Susan Acland-Hood repeated a pledge to publish investigation reports “within two months, subject to legal or regulatory activity”.

She told the committee that preparing “very detailed reports” about named individuals was “causing significant delays”, due to the Maxwellisation process, which offers people who are criticised a right of reply.

Financial investigators’ time would be “better deployed” looking into fraud and error, the review concluded.

So officials instead decided to only publish much shorter “outcome reports” that would avoid naming individuals to prioritise “transparency” and “timeliness”.

Still no FE accountability

However, the permanent secretary did not explain why the public had yet to see reports of probes into FE providers.

Anne Murdoch, senior adviser in college leadership at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “While we welcome the DfE’s recommitment to publishing outcome reports, we are yet to see this come to fruition.”

“More has got to be done to ensure there is transparency around ESFA/DfE’s investigations and to allow the sector to learn lessons from these.”

In January, Acland-Hood also claimed the investigation publishing policy did not include FE providers until 2023, despite several past versions of the policies clearly stating they included “colleges” and “training providers”.

The policy has included “colleges” and “any other provider in receipt of funding”, which would include ITPs, since at least 2014, when the permanent secretary was director of education and funding at the DfE.

‘We’ll consult colleges’

Acland-Hood claimed that including details on individuals, or explaining how fraud, financial irregularity or error happened, was “not required” to support other providers to learn lessons.

But she did say future reports would be “more explicit” in describing the learnings for the sector and promised officials would consult trust and college “forums” to “seek feedback” on how they “further support” the sector “to understand the gaps in practice identified and lessons they can learn from the investigations”.

The outcome reports released this week all contained ‘lessons learned’ sections produced following “prevention analysis exercise[s]”.

But some ‘lessons learned’ were generic recommendations such as trusts having “a robust policy and procedures for procurement”.

Gathering dust

The permanent secretary also reiterated the DfE’s commitment to publishing the “outcome reports within two months, subject to legal or regulatory activity, to provide transparency over how public money is spent”.

However, the most recent of the five reviews released this week was completed last summer.

Meanwhile, reports from several high-profile investigations are gathering dust, including those into Brooklands and Strode colleges, as well as independent training providers such as 3aaa and four companies owned by Angela Middleton.

Figures obtained by FE Week under the Freedom of Information Act show that between 2017 and 2024, the ESFA recovered £49 million in public funding from colleges and training providers following 193 investigations.

But the agency only published two investigation reports detailing the findings and outcomes – for the College of West Anglia in 2018 and Bournville College in 2019.

The DfE was contacted for comment.

Latest education roles from

Principal & Chief Executive – Bath College

Principal & Chief Executive – Bath College

Dodd Partners

IT Technician

IT Technician

Harris Academy Morden

Teacher of Geography

Teacher of Geography

Harris Academy Orpington

Lecturer/Assessor in Electrical

Lecturer/Assessor in Electrical

South Gloucestershire and Stroud College

Director of Management Information Systems (MIS)

Director of Management Information Systems (MIS)

South Gloucestershire and Stroud College

Exams Assistant

Exams Assistant

Richmond and Hillcroft Adult & Community College

Sponsored posts

Sponsored post

Screening for the cognitive needs of apprentices is essential – does it matter if the process is engaging?

Engagement should be the first priority in cognitive assessment. An engaging assessment is an inclusive assessment — when cognitive...

Advertorial
Sponsored post

Skills Bootcamps Are Changing – What FE Colleges Must Know 

Skills Bootcamps are evolving as funding moves to local control and digital skills trends shift. Code Institute, an Ofsted...

Code Institute
Sponsored post

Building Strong Leadership for Effective T Level Implementation

Are you struggling with T Level curriculum and implementation, or building strong employer relationships? Do you want to develop...

Advertorial
Sponsored post

Derby College Group DIRT and TOES: A Story of Enhanced Learning and Reduced Workload

"Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement" - Hattie and Timperley 2007. This powerful...

Advertorial

More from this theme

DfE

DfE seeks job share director to oversee T Levels and level 3 reforms

It’s the second senior skills role to be shared by two people announced in recent months

Josh Mellor
DfE

£155m for FE to help fund national insurance hike

It’s unclear whether the funding will fully cover extra costs

Anviksha Patel
Adult education, DfE

Come clean on cuts, demand adult education providers

Providers face uncertainty after news emerged in a 'fragmented' fashion

Josh Mellor
DfE

TRA seeks extra misconduct volunteers amid FE expansion

TRA looking to double misconduct panel members with 150 hires

Anviksha Patel

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One comment

  1. Peter Marples

    The reason why the reports are never published is because the majority are never finalised OR they have more holes in them than a leaking bucket.

    I have finally seen the 3AAA report after six years (and only because of our court case) and I am not allowed to disclose its contents (yet !). But believe me, I see many of their ‘investigation’ reports in our work helping providers. Only this week, I was asked to review one received by a provider and to be blunt, the investigators are utterly clueless !

    I understand that their reporting of ‘fraud’ isn’t actually fraud at all. It is error or interpretation of funding which never leads to much recovery because the methodology and approach doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny.

    It’s even worse with multiply – I have a provider I am supporting where the local authority had not process, no performance management and couldn’t even provide the signed contracts ! (oh and tried to cover it up when they were being audited by DFE)

    The reports will never see the light of day because it would result in £100m’s of litigation

    Oh – and ask the DFE what qualifications their investigators hold – never managed an ILR, don’t understand what is involved and most of them possess not one professional qualification !!