Towards Ambition 2020: skills, jobs, growth
Expert advice from the UK Commission for Employment and Skills

A 157 Group perspective

The 157 Group

The 157 Group consists of 27 of the largest General FE Colleges in England all of whom are graded good or excellent for leadership. Together they have a combined turnover of £1.5b; educate over 650,000 students and employ almost 40,000 staff. The group was formed following the recommendation of Sir Andrew Foster in his report on FE that principals of large colleges with the capacity should provide leadership and work to build the reputation of the sector. Current patrons include Sir Andrew Foster, Sir David Melville, Sir Mike Tomlinson, Baroness Sharp, Baroness Wall and Baroness Perry. The group meets regularly with ministers, civil servants, the LSC and key influencers to help shape and implement policy. It gives evidence to select committees and produces policy papers. .

Introduction

The 157 Group welcomes the UKCES report and the challenging ideas it contains. Overall we share the commission’s aspirations and are keen to support UKCES on developing the thinking within the report to provide practical ways forward.
157 recognises the economic challenges the UK faces both in terms of the current recession, which is naturally pressing and demands immediate attention, but also the long term challenge of ensuring the UK is globally competitive. We suggest that further education colleges are central to the solution. As a sector we have a record of flexibility and delivering for employer’s, learners and on national skills challenges. We are pleased that the report talks about placing more trust in learning providers. Colleges are keen to respond to the huge challenge ahead but to do so effectively we need to be further empowered.

UKCES identifies three underlying causes as to why the UK is not yet world class in skills. Individual aspiration, employer demand, responsive provision. 157 would see the challenge of the perfect triangle – the connection between learner, business and provider. We would however suggest that community is another element.

One effect of the recession has been to throw a light upon skills and in particular higher level skills. The discussion therefore presents an opportunity to shift how individuals view education and skills and alternatives to traditional routes.

What we welcome

The 157 group welcomes the UKCES challenge to shift the leadership thinking on how learning and skills should be viewed and organised. The approach of challenging the status quo and moving from top down measurement and accountability to an approach based in trust empowerment and the introduction of systems which enable the learner and customer to ensure quality, responsiveness and choice shift in leadership thinking from central control new vision for the sector is a dynamic and challenging approach that the sector should embrace.

As a group we wholeheartedly agree with the suggestion that there should be less intervention from government and its intermediaries and that content of programmes should determined by sectors and providers. We strongly welcome the assertion that as a sector we should be more trusted. 157 have written extensively on this subject and how a new relationship can be achieved. The sector would wish to take responsibility for the new proposed measures of accountability.
We are keen to explore the proposed measurements (in the context of them replacing current processes rather than adding to them) as they have the potential to bring about a powerful customer led way to ensure accountability and to raise standards. We are already in discussion with the commission to ascertain how the 157 group can lead and support the next stage of development and pilot implementation

UKCES suggest that the nation needs ‘active engagement with education and training providers’ 157 would go further. If such a shift is to succeed it will necessitate whole new relationships with providers based on coproduction
We support the simplification of the skills system, the emphasis on reducing costs and improving efficiency at national levels and not affecting the front line. There are a variety of ways of doing this, of which decluttering the landscape is critical but not alone. Essentially more money must be directed to the front line, particularly with the current funding crisis. We would encourage UKCES to consider broader mechanisms including taking a position on future funding streams. The report is correct in stating that colleges need to grow not diminish.

We are pleased that geographical inequality is recognised within the report. This adds to the 157 argument that planning and decisions need to be made locally.

What we support but challenge

157 are in favour of funding following the learner and we support a move to learner accounts but within a process that ensures its effectiveness and no increase in central administration costs. There is a real danger that accounts could become extremely complicated and bureaucratic and we would welcome further thinking on how funding would flow through this mechanism. Finally Learner Accounts should be used as a vehicle for expanding learner choice, not constraining it.
The commission suggest that providers should have local discretion over 2% of their budgets. Whilst we welcome the principle of this we would suggest that to really meet the needs of local employers and communities such a discretionary amount should be significantly higher.

The suggestion that employers work collaboratively in sectors to identify future skills priorities is welcomed, however we would suggest that community leaders must also be engaged. This is vital.

157 support the proposals that that success should be measured in part in terms of impact at community level, which build on the ASCL Bill recommendation for a local ‘duty to cooperate. We are keen to explore further how this could be measured. 157 member colleges have already done work on being accountable to local communities for example in the North West where the Manchester College has chosen to put itself through a council audit process. We would be keen to share such practice.

Where UKCES should have gone further

The commission touches upon the possibly alignment HE and FE funding agencies. We would have liked to explore this possibility further. With education and skills discourse focussing upon progression this was an opportunity to move the agenda significantly further.

The 157 Group would argue that sector skills councils should become self financing. We would urge the commission to develop proposals to do so.

We welcome the commissions call for ‘co investment’, that is employers contributing more to training. In the context of the economic situation this is increasingly vital. The 157 group has long argued that the state has been subsidising some skills areas inappropriately. We would like the commission to go further and develop suggestions as to how this could be achieved.

We agree with the assertion that we need responsive provision, but challenge the assumption that our skills systems are always excessively complex from the views of business. Excellent 157 practice would challenge this, where processes have been put in place to act as a ‘a one stop shop’ for provision, where the bureaucracy is hidden behind the systems and the employer merely gains the skills they need.

The 157 Group welcomes the concept of community accountability, and the mention of ‘regional skills’. We would urge the commission to expand their thinking and develop substantial proposals on how this could be achieved.

There are concerns as to how these proposals will affect the role and work of the YPLA and SFA. The group seeks clarity on this matter.

With‘re’ rather than ‘up skilling’, personalisation and concepts of coproduction individuals relationship to education are rapidly changing, we urge like UKCES to build this into their future thinking

Detail that concerns us

We welcome that more work need to be done on disseminating benefits to individuals of skills. We would seek acknowledgment that work needs to begin early which has a significant impact upon current Information and Guidance practices. There is a need for a uniformed lifelong I&G service. UKCES acknowledge the flaws within current provision this but offer no recommendations for the future.

In promoting the value of skills to adults we would suggest there is a need to develop alternative routes of doing this effectively. Union Learning reps have been a success but we believe we need additional routes to reach a wider community.

We have significant concerns on ‘future forecasting’ of skills. The 157 group are not wholly convinced on the accuracy of such predictions.

There is no mention of the role of Regional Development Agencies. We seek further clarification.
Finally we would suggest SSC’s still do not really have the necessary full engagement and support of employers to move towards an empowered consumer approach. We would urge the commission to review this.