Framework for Excellence: A Comprehensive Performance Assessment Framework for the Further Education System

• Summary
• Introduction
• Quality
• Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
• Conclusion

Summary

The TUC welcomes the opportunity to comment on 'Framework for Excellence: A Comprehensive Performance Assessment Framework for the Further Education System'.

The TUC welcomes efforts to boost quality and broadly supports the development of a balanced scorecard approach. However, given the size and diversity of colleges, the TUC believes it will be difficult for any single measure to fully encompass all areas of work carried out by colleges.

There are also a number of other concerns that need to be addressed:

• Trade unions should be included in the development and piloting of the Framework to reflect the perspective of learners and the sector workforce;
• At the heart of the issue of quality is the historic under-funding of the FE sector and urgent steps needs to be taken to address this;
• Competitions, which are in effect privatisation, are one of the potential remedies for under-performing institutions;
• The Key Performance Indicator regarding employers should be re-conceptualised as 'employment' to incorporate the needs of employees; and
• The Key Performance Indicators should specifically include equality and diversity, and good industrial relations

Introduction

1. The TUC welcomes the opportunity to comment on 'Framework for Excellence: A Comprehensive Performance Assessment Framework for the Further Education System'. Framework for Excellence emerged out of the White Paper 'Further Education: Raising Skills, Improving Life Chances'. The Framework takes forward the Government's commitment to boost quality through ensuring there is clearer information on performance. This complements the Quality Improvement Agency consultation 'Pursuing Excellence: An Outline Improvement Strategy for Consultation'.

2. The aim of the Framework is to support learners' and employers' decisions, assist improvements among colleges and providers, and support accountability. The Framework will also aim to provide a basis for colleges' and providers' self evaluation and improvement activities, and the LSC will use the outcomes of assessment against the Framework to inform its commissioning decisions and the need for intervention.

Overall TUC response

3. The TUC welcomes efforts to boost quality and broadly supports the development of a balanced scorecard approach. However, given the size and diversity of colleges, the TUC believes it will be difficult for any single measure to fully encompass all areas of work carried out by colleges. Further, while the proposals cover much of the FE sector, the current plans are not fully comprehensive because they do not include school 6th forms.

4. The implementation of Framework for Excellence will take place over three years and involve consultation, piloting and trailing. It is crucial that trade unions be included throughout this process to reflect both the perspective of learners and the sector workforce.

Quality

5. It is welcome that the Government acknowledges that outright failure in FE colleges is now very rare, while there is 'is still too much poor provision in other training providers'. It is also argued that there is a much larger group of institutions which are barely satisfactory, or satisfactory, but not improving. There needs to be recognition that at the heart of the issue of quality is the historic under-funding of the FE sector that has not yet been remedied. Urgent steps need to be taken to address this.

6. The pay gap between comparable jobs in different areas of the education sector makes the recruitment and retention of high quality staff into further education difficult, and threatens to undermine the Government's goals in terms of skills. This issue also needs to be addressed quickly.

7. The TUC is concerned that the new intervention strategy to address failing and coasting colleges and other providers will see the LSC issue a formal notice with a specified period in which to see improvement, mostly one year. This is a very short period of time, which would not give enough time to effect real change.

8. The TUC is particularly concerned that the introduction of competitions is one of the potential remedies. The TUC has a great deal of concern about competitions, which in effect represent an increase in privatisation. This clearly has the potential to have a destabilising effect on the FE system and the TUC believes this area of policy should be reviewed. If this approach were taken in the schools sector, this would not just mean schools being put in special measures, but also handed over to the local public (ie private) school.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

9. The proposals include the development of a scorecard to describe three dimensions of a college or providers performance: responsiveness; effectiveness of provision and finance. The basis of the Framework will be seven Key Performance Indicators. There is a need for equality and diversity to be properly addressed through the addition of a KPI specifically relating to this issue.

10. The TUC strongly believes that the KPI of responsiveness to employers should be re-conceptualised as responsiveness to the needs of "employment". This approach would properly encompass the needs of both sides of the employment relationship - employees and employers. In developing this KPI, it is important that the consultations should specifically include trade unions, to ensure that the employee perspective is properly recognised and taken account of. For these reasons, the consultations on new standard for 'employer responsiveness and vocational excellence' should also include trade union involvement.

11. Equality and social inclusion have long been at the heart of the work of the FE sector. While the TUC welcomed the move establish a clear mission for further education to focus on the employability and progression of learners, it is crucial that the social role of colleges is retained. Equality and diversity needs to be embedded within organisations and not just viewed as a peripheral issue.

12. It is also disappointing that the seven proposed Key Performance indicators do not mention staff or practitioners. The KPIs should include good industrial relations, including staff turnover and the number of staff with qualifications. The FE White Paper contained a commitment for all providers to have CPD plans in place, which should be reflected in the Framework. The Framework should also take into account the needs of the high numbers of part-time staff delivering learning in the sector.

Conclusion

13. The TUC broadly supports the development of a balanced scorecard approach through a Framework that will result in a single, overall performance rating for each institution. However, given the size and diversity of colleges, it is important that any single measure fully encompasses all areas of work carried out by colleges. It is crucial that trade unions be included throughout this process to reflect both the perspective of learners and the sector workforce. Further, it needs to be recognised that at the heart of the issue of quality is the historic under-funding of the FE sector and urgent steps should be taken to address this. The TUC remains concerned at the use of competitions as a remedy for under-performing institutions. Finally, the KPI on responsiveness to employers should be changed to responsiveness to 'employment', and the KPIs should also include equality and diversity and good industrial relations.