6 October 2017 Warren Ralls Director The LEP Network Oakley House Headway Business Park 3 Saxon Way West Corby NN18 9EZ

Transcription

1 Education and Skills Funding Agency The Cube 123 Albion Street Leeds LS2 8ER 6 October 2017 Warren Ralls Director The LEP Network Oakley House Headway Business Park 3 Saxon Way West Corby NN18 9EZ Dear Warren Re: ESFA and ESIF Programme Thank you for your letter and apologies for the delay in responding. Unfortunately, it appears that we have been unable to find a mutually convenient time to meet to discuss the issues you raised in your letter of the 7 th August In your letter you raised the situation regarding activity Post July The date that ESFA current contracted commitments come to an end, and present a number of options you believe could be considered to offer flexibility to LEPs to decide locally which option they wish to pursue. We are unable to present this offer as we are awaiting advice from ministers on the direction they wish us to consider, and this has been delayed by the summer recess. We hope to be able to outline these options very soon. You also raised a number of key issues affecting the delivery of current contracts which I would like to respond to taking each in turn; - Contractors can only claim progression payment for learners who progress from one level to a higher level. However, it is a shared view that a disadvantaged individual s progression could be part-qualification to full qualification at the same level, and that there should be flexibility to enable this to be a paid progression. For example, progression from a short course Level 2 certificate in construction skills to a full Level 2 Diploma. - The requirement that progressions are to a higher level than the delivery funded through the ESF project was part of the published funding/evidence rules when procurement took place The ESFA has explored some flexibility around this since your letter was received, any further changes would be considered to be of a material nature and could compromise the procurement process causing all delivery to be considered ineligible.

2 - The 28 day rule for evidencing progression to an apprenticeship, which includes weekend and bank holidays. Historically, the SFA had a 3 month rule but this has been shortened to 28 days for this programme. If the 28 days cannot be changed, can the evidence requirement be flexed to enable employment to have started but not necessarily the learning, but with a start date for learning. The requirement that the progression occurs within 28 days of leaving the ESF activity was articulated in the procurement documentation, and is an ESF programme requirement set out in the ESF Programme Evidence Requirements, this is not an ESFA criteria and failure to observe it would invalidate the progressions against the ESF programme targets. Unfortunately, this cannot be changed - Opportunity to review apprenticeship progressions in light of the apprenticeship reforms and funding implications for non-levy payers. We will review any requests to move from one deliverable line to another at the next ESF Performance Management Process (PMP) review in October but Providers/College who currently do not have adequate apprenticeship starts on their mainstream contract could have/can request growth under mainstream PMP, or indeed refer learners to other providers - Greater ability to work with the ESFA to challenge under-performance and action plan, particularly where generic offers are being delivered which do not necessarily meet the LEP's strategic priorities. Arrangements are currently in place to allow LEPs to raise concerns over under performance and programme delivery, this is fed into the contract performance management. The opt in agreements set out at the outset of the programme stated that The ESFA would contract and performance manage the delivery and report to LEPs and ESIF committees. We welcome any challenges where delivery is not in line with the agreed specification and will continue to work with LEPs to address this with contractors through existing arrangements. - Provision of data which enables analysis of whether projects are delivering priorities against the LEP's strategic priorities as set out in the original specifications for example, Management Information by sector, priority group and sub-geographies. Data is currently available on the performance of contracts against the levels of funding and associated contract deliverables, in addition to this the performance data relating to programme indicators will be made available following the submission of claims to the Managing Authority Unfortunately whilst some of the additional information you mention can be supplied not all of it is available eg we can-not break delivery down into sub geographies beyond the LEP level it would be useful if we could work with you to understand exactly what is needed and what the ESFA can provide from the information it currently captures. - The 14 credit rule which restricts delivery of Level 3 and Level 4 qualifications. Whilst it is appreciated that this is due to Advanced Learner Loan policy, there is currently no win-win as there is little engagement and no progression to full qualifications. If the rule was relaxed there would be a greater number of progressions to further learning and therefore Advanced Learner Loans. The 14 credit rule cannot be changed. This links to the requirements of Advanced Learner Loans Policy which requires qualifications over 14 credits to be funded by loans 2

3 the ESFA has reviewed the situation regarding delivery of units up to 14 credits and progressions to the full qualification and we are currently updating the evidence requirements document this will be published shortly. There were also a number of additional queries in a table attached to your letter so I have provided responses to these below. I trust that this provides a satisfactory response to the issues you raise, we will of course be in touch very shortly to discuss the options going forward beyond July 2018, and as outlined above please could LEPs nominated Single Point of Contact approach their ESF Management and Delivery Manager in the first instance to clarify any issues. Thank you again for affording the opportunity for us to respond and we look forward to working with you in the future. Yours sincerely Karen Sherry Deputy Director, Business Operations Education and Skills Funding Agency 3

4 Summary of concerns over ESF from LEPs July 2017 Issue Possible solutions ESFA RESPONSE 1. No match identified post- Opt In. 2. Need to improve contract management` and transparency by: a. improving quality of performance information; b. taking a consistent approach to issue resolution across LEPs; c. LEPs are working in silos, tackling issues in piecemeal fashion; d. Ensuring that prime contractors are flexible and don t just deliver their standard offer which is not locally tailored. New arrangements made to ensure national funds (e.g. Adult Education Budget) can be used as match, with special consideration to non-devolved areas who will have fewer options. a. Standard detailed MI agreed nationally; b. SFA issues FAQ with standard responses to ensure consistency; c. LEPs work together to highlight key issues and have collective relationship with Opt ins; d. Opt Ins must ensure that primes offer locally tailored provision as that is what was procured. Once ESFA withdraw from programme delivery, the arrangements over match need to be established and agreed with the funding body DWP the ESFA will work to clarify which funds are clean for matching but will not be acting as a public match funder a. Standard MI was established in opt in agreements where LEPs identifed additional information prior to procurement this was built into ITTs ESFA can review additional requests aligned to data currently captured b. The unique nature of specs per LEP area mean that questions are raised and responded to, at individual contract level. c. ESFA cannot commit on behalf of other opt-ins and is willing to consider regular collective meetings where this can have a proven benefit however as above the unique nature of individual contracts needs to be considered d. The ESFA will manage contracts to the agreed specifications and be as flexible as procurement and contracting legislation allows 4

5 3. Need clarity on a number of technical issues, including: a. learners not able to do multiple courses at the same level; b. definition of unemployed status; c. ESFA unrealistic about repro-filing e.g. very high progressions to apprenticeships which are impossible to achieve but cannot be reduced therefore locking funds in contracts unnecessarily; d. ESFA sticking to 14 credit limit but some important qualifications are over that. 4. Funding is only available for a short period. 5. Importance of an exit strategy / succession plan. a. Learners are able to progress at the same level as long as there is evidence to demonstrate need; b. Standardise definition across all three Opt Ins; c. ESFA enables contractors to re-profile where LEP agrees; d. ESFA relaxes this rule where appropriate and qualifications can be delivered in timescale. There is a need to resolve matters speedily to make best use of remaining funds. Develop and communicate plans for post-esf to avoid a gap in supporting the most vulnerable participants. a. Unfortunately, by changing from the original published requirement, this would constitute a material change As identified above the ESFA have explored and implemented flexibilities in this area since receiving this correspondence. b. The programme definition as LEPs will understand is specified by the MA who have insisted there is a different definition and evidence requirement for DWP CFO and all other CFOs/direct bids this is not in the ESFA gift to change c. Reprofiling is undertaken in line with the published timescale and Funding Rules and consideration of LEP views are taken balanced to the requirements of the contracted MOU d. This is national funding rules for qualifications at level 3 and above and is loans policy all ITTs were required to support and not undermine national policy the less than 15 credit rules applies to loans policy anything at 15 credits or more should be supported by loans The ESFA are working with DFE and DWP to set out future options asap As above we will communicate when agreement is reached on options for delivery 5