Steve Sawbridge Regional Director, AoC West Midlands

 Announced in July 2015; Area Review guidance published September 2015  Fewer, larger, more resilient and efficient colleges with greater specialisation  Primary focus is general further education and sixth form colleges  Planned series of reviews over 18 months completed by March 2017  Second wave begins in January  Overseen by a local steering group  Outcomes must be in the best interests of learners and employers to ensure the long term viability of provision in the area

 An offer that meets local learner and employer need and provides access to high quality and relevant education and training for all  The right balance of provision, including greater specialisation and higher level technical skills.  Supporting economic development  Creating sustainable institutions  There are no preconceptions – structure must follow purpose

 Chairs of Governors of each institution (supported by their Principals)  Commissioners for FE, Sixth Form Colleges, and Schools  Local Enterprise Partnership(s)  Local Authorities  Funding agencies  BIS and DfE  Chaired by either FE/SFC Commissioner or Combined Authority where there is one

 Briefing sessions  Meeting 1  Background  Process  Key issues  Meeting 2  Curriculum  Findings from site visits  Local economic priorities  Meeting 3  Finance – scope for efficiencies and cost savings  Estates – potential for rationalisation  Meeting 4  Emerging options and recommendations  Chairs’ session  Meeting 5  Feedback from Corporations on options and recommendations  Discussion on implementation  Acceptance of recommendations  Implementation  possibly over several months  supported by EFA/SFA  Ongoing stakeholder engagement

 Open information and data-sharing are an important part of the review process and the discussions of the steering group  Evidence base  Curriculum  Labour market data / economic need, demographics, deprivation etc.  Estates  Finance  Options analysis including scope for Institutes of Technology and/or institutional change  Evidence-based report with recommendations  Challenge on basis of evidence  No college or individual should use any data/information from the review for commercial or competitive gain

 A detailed curriculum plan  The college’s latest self assessment report  The college’s latest management accounts and financial plans  A list of key employers that the college works with and their contact details Plus  Participation and travel to learn  Inflows / outflows from the area  Market penetration  Group size  Labour market intelligence  Financial data

 It will be for the governing bodies of each individual institution to decide whether to accept the review’s recommendations, reflecting their status as independent bodies.  But … college governors will need to … comply with their legal obligations as charity trustees in exercising control and management of the college as a charity.  We expect institutions to take action … to ensure that they are resilient and able to respond to future funding priorities. Ultimately we expect the funding agencies, LEPs and national partners only to fund or support institutions that have taken action to ensure they can provide a good quality offer to learners and employers, which is financially sustainable for the long term.

 Birmingham and Solihull  Feels relatively inclusive  Colleges invited to present to steering group  Strong focus on data and evidence  Less duplication in provision than anticipated  Comparatively low levels of Apprenticeship delivery  Reasonable stakeholder engagement  Colleges are the solution  More generally  Scope and area geography  Consistency  Scale  Timing

 A local offer at levels 2/3 and below  Specialisation at levels 3/4 and above  Meeting local labour market needs  Increasing group size through curriculum rationalisation  Reducing / eliminating poor quality provision  Greater use of technology to support delivery  Less competition between colleges and better promotion of vocational education  Requirement for an increased focus on apprenticeships

 Provision or finance?  Choice versus prescription – sustaining inefficient sixth forms  The ‘Area’ – geography and boundary issues  Big is best – what’s the evidence?  Autonomy and the legal status of colleges  Institutes of Technology??  Unintended consequences – demographic upturn, economic shocks  Implementation  Ofsted  Existing merger / restructure proposals

 There are no preconceptions as to preferred solutions  The recommendations must work for the area and be able to be implemented within a reasonable timeframe  The outcomes must be affordable and lead to a sustainable sector

 Funding  National base rate for years maintained for 4 years  Core adult skills participation budget fixed in cash terms  Apprenticeship levy 0.5% on payrolls over £3 million  FE loans extended to 19 to 23 year olds on Level 3 and 4 courses  Financial strategy and planning  Sixth form colleges given an option to convert to academy status as an outcome of an Area Review  The Area Review programme will continue

 The Policy – Reviewing post-16 Education and Training Institutions (July 2015)Reviewing post-16 Education and Training Institutions  The Guidance – Reviewing post-16 Education and Training Institutions: Guidance on Area Reviews (Sep 2015)Reviewing post-16 Education and Training Institutions: Guidance on Area Reviews And  Joint Review of Further Education Costs (BIS, DfE, Treasury, c.June 2015)  Current Models of Collaboration – post 14 further education (BIS, June 2015) Current Models of Collaboration – post 14 further education  FE Commissioner letter to Chairs and Principals (BIS, Oct 2015) FE Commissioner letter to Chairs and Principals