Anyone who receives daily email alerts cannot help but have noticed that funding or rather changes to the funding methodology is a hot topic at the moment. The recent DfE launch of a consultation on 16-19 funding coincided with an announcement from the Skills Funding Agency(SFA) ,a partner of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, about adult funding. What is striking about both announcements is the similarities in their language and timescales. The DfE consultation is “to reform and simplify the ‘16-19 funding formula’, for implementation in 2013/14” whilst the SFA announced the implementation of a “simplified adult skills funding system in 2013/14” which is a year later than expected. What is going on? I remember demand-led funding (DLF) being promoted as a truly simple methodology. And who dared disagree when faced with the following “simple” funding formula which you may recall was:
Standard learner number x national funding rate x provider factor + additional learner support = total confusion for many?
Anyway, a mere two years later , there now appears to have been a change of heart. In its October announcement of the consultation the DfE stated “Proposals in the consultation include moving away from the current complex system of funding on the basis of ‘payment per qualification’ to introduce a much simpler system of funding at the level of the learner” and thereby “supports the Government’s aims of reducing bureaucracy for education providers and making the funding system simpler, more transparent and readily understood by all.” Indeed? Some have commented that the proposed change may well be easily understood by schools with sixth forms because it signals a move towards funding 16 – 18 year olds in a similar way to pre-16s however FE colleges may not find it any simpler or more transparent.
The SFA proposals about changes to adult funding include a simplified rate and funding formula , simplified data returns and removal of the provider factor ( which we recall was as complicated to work out as to explain). Reaction to the SFA’s proposed changes to the funding has been mixed. Nick Linford, Managing Director of Lsect has” no problem with a complex funding methodology …because in order for the funding to be ‘fair’ in an innovative and complex sector like FE, it simply can’t also be simple.” However, Beej Kaczmarczyk, Director of Funding at Sector Training, has been quoted as questioning whether “this delayed 19 plus funding reform is worth implementing” In his view “in places it adds complexity, others inconsistency, and many questions remain unanswered.” My feeling is that if the simplification is anything like DLF then Nick and Beej’s services are going to be in more demand than ever.
One can’t help wondering how simple and cost effective it is to have a funding system for 16 – 18 years olds and another one for adults. Perhaps the upcoming review of the SFA will consider how negotiating and understanding funding post 16 education could be made truly simple for education providers. You never know, it might conclude that establishing a simplified system for young people’s and adult funding would be helped by the creation ( recreation) of a single funding body. Anyone old enough to remember the Further Education Funding Council ??
Lindwe Mokeona, Educational Consultant, Smart Development Group
Lindwe is highly experienced in working in Further Education, with schools, colleges and work-based learning providers. She has a particular specialism in advising on ways to maximise funding and analysing data to inform funding and commissioning decisions. She has recently worked in a local authority as part of a 14–19 partnership team focussing on improving students’ results and performance at post-16. Lindwe can provide organisations with briefings, workshops and a range of other forms of support to organisations to ensure they understand the use of data and how to maximise funding. Please contact us for more information.