Consultations & Submissions

YPLA Review of Statutory Guidance on 16-19 Funding

The Young People's Learning Agency is required to review the statutory guidance it issues to local authorities on Funding Arrangements for 16 - 19 Education and Training.  As the guidance was put together relatively recently, this is a light touch review which the YPLA says should focus on "the clarification of any areas of uncertainty rather than ... any major changes in roles and responsibilities ...". 

As a national stakeholder, TSNLA has been invited to feed through its thoughts on the guidance document and identify any areas which would benefit from further clarification.  Please send comments to jane@foyer.net by the 17th June - we have until end June to get back to them.  Here's a link to the guidance:-

http://www.ypla.gov.uk/aboutus/ourwork/16-19-statutory-guidance/

Impact of MCLs

The TSNLA will be involved inthe review of the impact of the implementation of MCLs on third sector learning providers. Any formal submissions will be circulated. 

Review of Informal Adult and Community Learning

Any formal consultation papers will be circulated as and when available.

Letter to Skills Funding Agency on ESF procurement

Due to widesprea concern from members and the sector the following letter has been sent to Geoff Russell:

9 February 2011

Geoff Russell

Chief Executive
Skills Funding Agency
Chief Executive's Office
5th Floor
Kingsgate House
66-74 Victoria Street
London SW1E 6SW

Dear Geoff

Re: European Social Fund procurement

As agreed, I have had a discussion with Mike Bell about the proposed Skills Funding Agency approach to procuring for ESF-funded 19+ learning & skills provision by allocating funding based on ACTOR rather than a process involving a degree of contestability. Mike was very helpful in explaining your plans and the rationale. He has also promised a meeting in April to review the impact of the planned process which is very welcome. However we do still have serious concerns about the potential impact on of your approach on the ability of voluntary sector providers to continue to make a vital contribution to the delivery of learning & skills, particularly to the most disadvantaged groups.

As you know, there has always been a higher representation of voluntary sector providers in ESF-funded delivery compared to mainstream delivery. This is in part because ESF was one of the few funds distributed by open competition allowing entry to the market not open through most other mainstream funding routes. More importantly, this genuine contestability allowed voluntary sector organisations to demonstrate in the bidding process how their skills and capabilities made them well-placed to meet the needs of the groups and communities targeted by ESF. There is plenty of research evidence, from LSC, ESF, Third Sector European Network and others that confirm what an important role the voluntary sector has played in delivering ESF priorities.

We have always had reservations, which we raised with you at our meeting last week, that ACTOR, while providing an enhanced due diligence process, will not necessarily provide sufficient and adequate information to select the best providers, particularly where these providers have a more limited involvement in mainstream learning and so do not necessarily have such a strong showing in certain areas assessed by ACTOR.

I understand that one of the factors influencing this decision is the need to make funding available for work with the unemployed as soon as possible to avoid a funding gap when the current Programme for the Unemployed finishes in April 2011. I can also appreciate that there would be administrative savings to be gained from a streamlined process.

While recognising these factors, we are disappointed that your intentions in relation to ESF procurement had not been made clear earlier and thus we had not been given the chance to be adequately consulted on this important matter.

Even at this late date, we think there may be ways in which the potential effect on voluntary sector providers can be ameliorated. This could include aiming to achieve a similar proportion of providers from each sector based on the last ESF tendering round. Alternatively, some of the funding could be held back to be bid for by those not receiving allocated funding under the proposed allocation system. Finally we could discuss some sort of support from the sector to assist in the awarding of funding (as already happens with Community Grants).

I cannot stress enough what a critical issue this is for us and how important we regard it to ensure that voluntary sector providers have a real opportunity to continue make their vital contribution to supporting unemployed people back into work through learning and skills programmes. It does seem to us that contrary to the emphasis in Government Big Society policy on increasing the contribution of the voluntary sector in public services, there is a real danger here that there will be a permanent reduction in voluntary sector involvement in delivering learning and skills.

We found our meeting with you last week very encouraging and positive and I hope we can find a constructive way to address these particular concerns around ESF procurement.

Yours sincerely

Tim Ward

Chair TSNLA