West Midlands Leps and FE Colleges

The West Midlands LEPs and the skills agenda: The role and contribution of FE Colleges

An update to research undertaken in 2012/13

Mick Feloy and Andy Phillips West Midlands Regional Observatory for AoC West Midlands

1. Introduction

In Autumn 2012, AoC West Midlands (AoCWM) commissioned the Regional Observatory to undertake a series of interviews with college Principals and individuals in a range of roles in Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in the West Midlands, to assess how relationships between the two sets of organisations were developing and to identify some of the significant factors which were impacting on the ability of colleges and LEPs to develop a joint approach to meeting skills needs. We published a report of the research in Spring 2013 .

Since the publication of Lord Heseltine’s No Stone Unturned report which pressed for funding for local growth to be passed to local decision makers, devolution and localism have become clear policy objectives of all major political parties. LEPs agreed local growth details with Government in July 2014 and already have responsibility for skills capital funding together with significant influence over spending of European Structural Funds. We are now seeing the further implementation of localism policy with the agreement to devolve further powers to Combined Authorities in Greater Manchester and other parts of England and this devolution is set to continue whatever the outcome of the May 2015 General Election.

Having worked within a national framework of funding and overall national accountability, colleges are having to adapt to working within these new more localised governance structures. At the same time colleges’ core mission – to educate and train young people and adults for work and life – is as important as ever. Baroness Sharpe’s 2012 report, Colleges in their Community , set out clearly the role of colleges in relation to meeting the needs of their various local communities, employers, stakeholders and partners, and the subsequent report from the Commission on Adult Vocational Teaching and Learning presses the case for a new relationship between colleges and employers based on the principle of a two-way street.

Against this back drop we wanted to refresh and update our understanding of the relationship between colleges and LEPs and the extent to which it was helping to achieve shared strategic goals around local growth and economic development. In Autumn 2014, AoCWM asked the Regional Observatory to update the previous report to assess how things have moved on. In particular we wanted to get a view on how relationships were developing, not just between colleges and the six West Midlands LEPs but also between colleges themselves and between LEPs – specifically are colleges coming together to offer a collaborative response to LEP skills priorities and are LEPs working together to address some of the more significant sectoral priorities that they have in common.

The report begins with some comments on how well the operation of the skills system and, in particular, how funding is allocated to and within colleges to meet skills needs is understood. System complexity was a key finding from the previous survey, so were interested to know to what extent the system is better understood by LEPs or indeed whether this is still viewed as a constraining factor.

We look at how LEP governance structures are changing and whether there are signs that the increased involvement of colleges in LEP governance is having an impact on both the provision available and skills strategy.

We go on to look in more detail at the set of relationships between colleges and LEPs and how effective these are in meeting skills needs in the context of local economic growth. We go on to look at how colleges and LEPs are working to develop and deliver provision which is well-matched to LEP skills priorities and comment on how this fits with the wider responsibilities which colleges have to meet skills needs across the entire local economy and labour market. Sound labour market information as an evidence base to support the

2 further development of skills provision is critical and we in noted in our previous report that there is a general feeling of inadequacy in this regard – both in terms of understanding what information is available and perhaps more importantly how to analyse and use it to build a rich picture of current and future local economic conditions.

Finally, we look at how success is measured drawing on information set out in the strategic economic plans (SEPs). We go on to draw some conclusions and identify some implications for further action.

Report structure

Findings from the consultation are set out under the following headings:

1. Introduction 2. The skills system 2.1 LEP understanding of the skills system 2.2 Employer control over funding 3. Relationships and collaborative working 3.1 The adequacy of LEP governance arrangements and potential improvements 3.2 Views on the current relationship between local colleges and the LEP 3.3 College to college collaboration 3.4 LEP to LEP collaboration 4. Strategy and provision 4.1 LEP Strategic Economic Plans (SEPs) 4.2 The match between LEP priorities and FE College provision 4.3 Different approaches to aligning provision with LEP sector priorities 4.4 Measuring alignment 4.5 Employer and college links 4.6 The use and adequacy of labour market information (LMI) 5. Outcomes from desk research 5.1 Quantitative outcomes 5.2 Qualitative outcomes 6. Overall conclusions and implications for action

1. Introduction

5 further development of skills provision is critical and we in noted in our previous report that there is a general feeling of inadequacy in this regard – both in terms of understanding what information is available and perhaps more importantly how to analyse and use it to build a rich picture of current and future local economic conditions.

Finally, we look at how success is measured drawing on information set out in the strategic economic plans (SEPs). We go on to draw some conclusions and identify some implications for further action.

2. The skills system

2.1 LEP understanding of the skills system

There was general agreement amongst all those interviewed that the funding of skills support is complex and quite difficult for those not working directly in this environment to understand.

One LEP Skills Lead commented that the process could be likened to pushing a big rock up a hill, commenting “I find it frustrating as a private sector person how difficult it is.”

There is some anecdotal evidence that at an executive/secretariat level rather than Board Member level understanding of the skills system and the role of FE Colleges within this is growing.

It was also pointed out that the level of understanding tends to vary according to which aspect of the skills system is considered.

Views on the overall level of understanding members of the LEP have of the way the skills system works were mixed, although in general it was felt that most Board members tended to have a fairly low level of understanding.

In this respect it was commented that although LEPs are employer led in terms of LEP Board composition they are heavily dependent upon local authority officer input for support and there was a perception, certainly amongst some LEP Skill Leads that local authorities were not very well placed to understand employer skill needs.

However, it was also pointed out that knowledge levels tend to vary according to the background of the particular LEP representative.

While understanding of the intricacies of the skills system was identified as generally fairly limited at an LEP Board level it was also pointed out that this is not necessarily a problem in that it is for colleges or providers to interpret that system and required outcomes. It was commented:

“I don’t think sharing the circuitry is of benefit.”

2.2 Employer control over funding

In practice there is little evidence that employer control over funding of skills related initiatives has occurred to any significant degree.

Where this has occurred it tends to be in relation to certain larger employers. For example, Jaguar Landrover indicated that they have directly accessed funding to support certain programmes including use of the Regional Growth Fund to support their growth strategy.

However, in general, feedback from interviews is that employers do not want the responsibility of administering skills related funding and in the case of SME’s do not have the resources and expertise to be able to take on this role. As one LEP Skills Lead commented:

“I just can’t see how micro businesses are going to engage with such programmes. As an HE provider, I find it hard enough to engage them in business development programmes which we are literally giving away free of charge...The concept of them taking on apprentices or trying to go and sort out a particular training programme with a provider is not going to happen.”

Although some of those interviewed indicated that there is at least some merit in more control by employers over apprenticeship funding it was recognised this would often not be appropriate for SME’s. One LEP Skills Lead suggested there needs to be two models for apprenticeships, one for those with 250 or more employees that might have the capacity to directly administer the funding and other aspects relating to the direct administration of apprenticeships and one model for those with less than 250 employees that would need to rely directly on colleges.

3. Relationships and collaborative working

3.1 Governance arrangements

Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP has had FE representation on the Employment and Skills Board (ESB) since it was formed and now has a formal FE representative nominated by all FE colleges on the Main LEP Board. Solihull Council provides secretariat support.

Worcestershire LEP – There is FE representation on the Main Board and ESB – FE representation is voted through the Worcestershire Principals Group.

Feedback is that the FE sector is well represented on the Worcestershire LEP in terms of the skills agenda.

The Marches LEP – Professor Ian Oakes (University of Wolverhampton) is the Skills representation on the main Marches LEP Board and also chairs the Marches Skills Board, which has FE representation. There is currently no FE representation on the Main LEP Board.

The perception from the FE sector is that it would still be useful to have direct FE representation. It was argued that this would help the LEP Board fully understand some of the issues relating to the curriculum, student progression, choices students are making and efforts FE Colleges are making to address these issues.

In addition to the Marches LEP Board, within the Marches LEP there are Business Boards established for each County which are also represented on the LEP Board.

To date the Marches LEP has operated on a very ‘lean’ model with one person seconded from Shropshire Council to provide secretariat support, but at the time of the interviews an additional 2 posts were being recruited to support LEP activities.

The Black Country LEP has an FE College representative on the Main LEP Board and the ESB. Having an FE College representative on the Main LEP Board is viewed as an important step forward, although it was pointed out the extent of FE college influence on the LEP skills agenda is still limited.

In Stoke and Staffordshire LEP following an operational review undertaken by the Stoke & Staffordshire LEP, the Chair of the Association of Staffordshire Colleges Group, has a place on the Partnership Board and full voting rights. Colleges also have a full Membership on the ESIF Committee.

There are two FE College representatives on the Education Trust which in Stoke and Staffordshire assumes a similar role to that of ESBs in many other LEPs. One FE College representative is from North Staffordshire and one from South Staffordshire.

In Coventry and Warwickshire LEP there is no direct FE College representation on the Main LEP Board (The skills lead is an HE representative) but two FE colleges are represented on the Skills Business Group which is chaired by an FE College Principal. The activities of the Skills Business Group are reported back to Main LEP Board by the HE representative who sits on both groups. It was pointed out that representation on all key groups feeding into the Main LEP Board has improved and that this has been a deliberate strategy of the FE Colleges.

Overall view of current Governance arrangements and potential improvements

A number of Principals indicated they thought that current LEP Governance arrangements were not very accountable and could be improved.

Questions were also raised about how representative those employers active with the LEP are as a voice for all local employers.

At the time of interviews governance arrangements were being examined in a number of LEP areas in order to identify improvements including Coventry and Warwickshire, Greater Birmingham and Solihull and Stoke and Staffordshire LEP areas.

A number of suggestions were made in relation to improving governance arrangements including:

 Improved communication from the Main Board to FE Colleges

 Ensure there is an FE representative on the Main Board.

3.2 Views on the current relationship between local colleges and the LEP

There were differing views of the extent to which LEPs are in practice influencing FE College provision. For example:

 In relation to Dudley College it was argued that a relatively good match of provision with LEP priorities is not necessarily associated with the activities of the LEP. It was pointed out that Dudley College has always had extensive engineering/manufacturing provision which the College has been trying to grow further recently which is also a major sector priority for the Black country LEP.

 However, within Coventry and Warwickshire LEP a more active role in terms of the LEP influencing FE provision was identified. It was pointed out that Executive Members of the LEP structure have been part of the strategic planning process in the majority of colleges in the sub region. In relation to North Warwickshire and Hinckley College which straddles both Coventry and Warwickshire and Leicester and Leicestershire LEPs it is clear that in response to priorities established by the LEP significant realignment of provision has taken place.

The extent to which FE Colleges can in practice align themselves with LEP sector priorities was questioned. The view of some FE College Principals is that while there is a willingness to respond in relation to designated LEP sector priorities, this has to be linked to availability of funding.

It was argued further that there needs to be more of a dynamic dialogue between Colleges and the LEP over priorities for provision in the context of a clear understanding of the availability of funding.

The increasing representation of FE Colleges on Main LEP Boards is cited by a number of FE College Principals as a factor that has increased influence of LEPs in relation to the skills agenda. Where FE colleges have a direct place on the Main Board they are also perceived by other stakeholders to have increased their influence within the LEP.

However, there is little evidence that FE Colleges have to date influenced LEP skills priorities in practice. In many cases FE Colleges identify themselves as responding to LEP priorities that have already been determined.

The fact that skills as an issue has to compete with a range of other broad priorities such as infrastructure projects was also highlighted as an issue. In some cases the perception was that the LEP to date had concentrated on other priorities rather than skills, in particular infrastructure and transport. However, set against this, in a number of cases skills was identified as one of the key strategic priorities of the LEP.

Views on the extent to which colleges are working in partnership with the LEP in relation to the skills agenda are mixed.

In the case of Stoke and Staffordshire the view of the Principal of Stoke College is that although there is significant engagement with the colleges the Education Trust that has been established in Stoke and Staffordshire LEP to lead on skills and education is focussed in particular on schools rather than FE college provision. A case study of the work of the Education Trust is set out below.

Stoke and Staffordshire Education and Skills programme – Case study

The Stoke and Staffordshire LEP Education Trust is currently implementing a project linking schools and local businesses. The objective of the Education and Skills programme is to bring out changes in culture and practice in schools/academies in Stoke and Staffordshire in the areas of Enterprise, Employability and Skills. In September 2014 it was reported that as part of the Pilot:

 19 secondary schools/academies had completed surveys on enterprise, employment and skills, with analysis of these survey results used to devise outcomes and outputs for four locality projects and to identify preliminary development priorities for each school – This work is centred on four clusters of schools in Stoke, Newcastle, Tamworth and Cannock respectively  45 business partners had agreed in principle to partner with one or more secondary school/academies.

Seven principal outcomes are identified for the Education and Skills programme over the period 2014-2019, these being:

 Enterprise is embedded in the school curriculum in 100% of pilot schools/academies (the number of lessons per term/annum recorded by schools backed up by lesson plans)  80% of students in pilot schools/academies are competent in a range of universal and transferable skills that add value to local industry and support them to be successful in their first job (online assessment through a programme accredited by an existing exam board)  The employability of student/college school leavers is increased to a level that is attractive to employers and enables successful integration into their first job - (evidence collected via employer surveys but starts with a baseline)  95% of provision of independent careers advice and guidance meets agreed standards of good practice as specified by the Education Trust (checklist data communicated to the Education Trust)  Growing student participation on industry-led competitions and challenges: that develop student knowledge, skills and aptitude for in-demand jobs ( data collected from pilot schools once baseline is established)  Pilot schools will have in place a whole school policy that describes the school’s offer to students on enterprise, employability and skills development  Skills and qualifications pathways will be accessible on a single platform and portal that provide information on the route from year 7 in secondary school through to employment, training and further education (these pathways will be for key jobs in industry and the public sector)

However, the impact of capital funding through City Deal in relation to advanced manufacturing and engineering provision were identified as having a significant impact on the quality of FE college provision within Stoke and Staffordshire LEP area, in particular, through £2.9 million investment in advanced manufacturing and engineering provision. This has led to upgrading of automotive renewable engineering facility equipment within Stoke on Trent College and South Staffordshire College have reconfigured some of their campus to expand their automotive engineering robotics provision and improve their vocational offer.

Examples cited of colleges working effectively with the LEP in relation to the skills agenda include the following:

Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP – HS2 and the Local growth Fund Capital Pot

Key initiatives where colleges and the LEP have collaborated effectively together in relation to advancing the skills agenda were identified as the National College for High Speed Rail (HS2) and the allocation to the LEP from the Local Growth Fund – a £2bn national capital pot of funding:

 On the 30th September 2014 it was announced that the home of the new National College for High Speed Rail will be located in Birmingham (with a site also in Doncaster). It will provide specialist vocational training to engineers working on the High Speed 2 (HS2) project and beyond.  In the Greater Birmingham & Solihull Growth Deal, GBSLEP secured £357.4m from the Local Growth Fund to fund 34 projects. The Deal capitalises on the opportunities that HS2 will brings to the area and also focuses on key priority sectors including advanced manufacturing and life sciences.

Coventry and Warwickshire LEP – North Warwickshire and Hinckley College – Redesign of college offer to reflect LEP priorities

The Principal of North Warwickshire and Hinckley College indicated that the entire College offer has been redesigned over the last 18 months to reflect the sector priorities of both Coventry and Warwickshire LEP and the adjacent LEP of Leicestershire. It was commented:

“We have completely re-engineered our college learning offer to meet (LEP sector priorities) and it is now described in the language of the LEP, so each of our learning areas has got a LEP familiar line...I think that we're probably unique in that in the sub region, but it’s a living example of how one of the larger colleges of the sub region is responding to the agenda.”

In particular the college has ‘downsized’ those areas which are not identified areas of LEP demand and ‘positively grown and re-invested’ both in relation to investment in capital and human resources in the growth areas identified by the LEP, such as engineering, manufacturing, logistics, transportation, health and life sciences.

The Black Country Skills Factory – Case study

“One of the things I think that the college's and the LEP have done collaboratively...is a project called the Skills Factory.”

The Black Country Skills Factory is an employer-led education & training initiative coordinated by the Black Country Consortium Ltd (the enabling arm of the Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP)) with funding via UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES).

The stated objectives of the initiative are:

 To address the shortfall in the High Value Manufacturing (HVM) skills in the Black Country for both large and small employers  To increase the pipeline of suitably skilled staff to exploit growth in the HVM sector  To establish the initiative as a self financing first point of contact for skills development

Planned outputs from the Skills Factory are stated as the following:

 Creation of 'bite-sized' skills training courses / materials in 'gap' skills areas.  Creation of manufacturing "work-ready" skills matrix and materials.  Development of employer recognised Skills Passport covering relevant disciplines.  Trial of 'shared' apprenticeship schemes aimed at SME companies.  Increase provision and take up of apprenticeships and industrial placements.  Changed perception and awareness of manufacturing with schools, FE and HE through the Ambassador scheme, 'Take a Teacher to Work Day', new website, etc.

IAG to schools in Worcestershire – Case study

The LEP and Colleges were keen to address deficiencies in the information, advice and guidance at schools to ensure choices and alternatives were being considered. In order to address this deficiency a number of tailored career factsheets have been produced for use in schools and colleges in relation to different career options.

The LEP’s Employment and Skills Strategy Group has also developed a web portal to match work experience students with opportunities from employers. All Worcestershire’s State High Schools have signed up to the initiative and more than 100 county employers have agreed to take part. The portal was piloted in autumn 2013 with full roll-out underway. This is being funded by Worcestershire County Council as part of the Connecting Schools and Business Programme

In terms of colleges, the LEP and other stakeholders working jointly to actually plan provision, in most cases the feedback was that collaboration had not got to this stage.

3.3 College to college collaboration

FE Colleges recognise there is always going to be a tension between collaboration and competition.

However, it was also pointed out that the competitive nature of colleges is often over stated, given the quite localised geographies of colleges that means in practice there is a lot of similarity in provision between different Colleges, although this will reflect particular local differences.

It was also commented that competition tends to be more intense in relation to adult provision and employer based provision rather than 16-19 college based provision associated with more localised travel to learn patterns.

A number of those interviewed indicated that in practice the extent of collaboration between colleges is strongly linked to the nature of the relationships between local College Principals.

There are well established College Principals forums in most LEP areas, but in terms of collaborative working this, to date has tended to be in relation to specific projects or funding bids.

Specific examples of joint working include:

 Within the Black Country LEP the Black Country colleges have set up an engineering and manufacturing steering group which comprises all colleges in the area developing a joint strategic plan for the development of engineering and advanced manufacturing across the colleges including a joint investment plan and identification of complimentarity of the existing curriculum in areas where there are particular concentrations of provision. The Engineering and Manufacturing Group have a dataset for each individual college and for all colleges combined which enables identification of the percentage of apprenticeship provision in each specific sub-set for manufacturing/engineering sectors.

 Within Stoke and Staffordshire LEP area, in addition to jointly undertaking a mapping exercise of 19+ provision against LEP sector priorities as part of the Skills Pilot Initiative, the colleges have agreed that for European funding purposes in the future they will submit joint bids. To facilitate this, a partnership group, under the banner of Skills Staffordshire, has been established that includes all of the Colleges within the LEP area and the local Chamber of Commerce. In addition, talks are underway with key private training providers who it is hoped with join the group.

 Within the Marches LEP the Employer Ownership of Skills project comprising a consortium of FE college providers is identified as a good example of joint college working.

A case study of the collaborative work of colleges within the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP is outlined below.

Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP Skills Hub – Case Study

Within Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP area, The Skills Hub was formally launched on the 23rd September 2014.

This has been developed by the FE Chamber Consortium comprising Bournville College, Birmingham Metropolitan College, Burton and South Derbyshire College, Heart of Worcestershire College, Kidderminster College Solihull College, South and City College Birmingham, South Staffordshire College and University College Birmingham.

The Skills Hub provides employers with a single point of access when searching for courses suitable for their employees across the GBS LEP area. It is based on a formal partnership with the Chamber, which hosts the service, with the idea of ensuring effective engagement with the business community across the city region.

The concept of the Skills Hub was formed to ensure that the FE Colleges in the GBS LEP area demonstrated that they spoke with one voice and collectively supported the LEP in addressing the skills needs of the area. .

The Marketing Directors in the GBS LEP area had already demonstrated the significant benefits for working together as Premier Colleges at the Skills Show. They then capitalised on the strong collaborative approach to work together to create The Skills Hub.

The FE Consortium also agreed that Business Development Directors from each of these Colleges should work together to help develop the concept of the Skills Hub. This group has subsequently worked on a number of initiatives including bidding for ESF funding and High Speed 2.

The Consortium continue to explore a range of opportunities including common ways in which services can be marketed, relationships with schools and the extended participation age.

Michele Sutton, Interim Principal at Bournville College said:

“Our college along with others in the GBS LEP area has a history of embracing the opportunities presented by our LEP. We have established a truly collaborative approach to combine our strengths and demonstrate the quality of what we do as well as our collective ability to meet the needs of our employers. Our colleges still compete but we are collaborating within a competitive framework.

This approach ensures that we have a strong voice, that we influence decisions and that we don’t miss out on the big opportunities to support the growth of our region.

We envisage that one of the wider advantages of the Skills Hub initiative will be making the case for increased investment in skills development to the LEP and to the business community.”

There are mixed views on the extent to which the LEP is driving these changes, but the existence of LEPs is certainly identified as one factor helping to galvanise closer College collaboration, particularly the increasing importance of LEPs as the conduit for specific funding streams. For example:

 Within Coventry and Warwickshire LEP a trend towards much greater joint working is identified as being explicitly linked to the need to respond to LEP priorities. As a result of this increased collaboration driven by the need to respond to LEP priorities collectively the colleges in the area are discussing the possible need for a joint resource to be the collective LEP interface acting on their behalf, although nothing has yet been decided.

 Within Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP the Skills Hub has certainly been developed in the context of the need to respond to LEP priorities as was the FE college consortium formed in relation to the Employer Ownership of Skills project within the Marches LEP.

 Within Stoke and Staffordshire LEP area the Skills Incentive Pilot is identified as a mechanism enabling a more informed discussion between colleges and the LEP in relation to respective contributions towards the LEP agenda.

While levels of collaboration amongst FE colleges appear to have increased and in some cased markedly, particularly in relation to collaboration to access funding, there is no real evidence that this collaboration has got to the stage of serious discussions of potential areas of agreed rationalisation of provision.

Barriers identified to increased levels of collaboration between colleges include:

 Turnover of College Principals in some areas;

 Levels of trust between Principals in some cases and in some instances clashes of personalities;

 Competition between individual colleges; and

 Limited resources available.

3.4 LEP to LEP collaboration

A picture emerges of a matrix of piecemeal often issue or project based collaboration between LEPs within the West Midlands in relation to the skill agenda.

This contrasts with transport issues for which a Cross LEP Transport Group was formed in January 2012 as a forum for LEP transport leads within the West Midlands, delivery partners and key stakeholders.

Often cross LEP discussions in relation to skills appear to be through informal channels. For example, in the case of one larger employer whose business activities straddle a number of different LEP boundaries discussions relating to cross LEP skills issues mainly occur in an informal context with other colleagues involved in their respective local LEPs rather than through more formalised channels. Similarly discussions of the work of different LEPs sometimes occur informally when the representatives of different LEPs meet at unrelated forums.

However, some more formalised links have been established including the following:

 There is a West Midlands wide LEP Chairs forum chaired by the LEP chair of Worcestershire LEP;

 Within Stoke and Staffordshire LEP links were identified with GB&S LEP in terms of City Deal - Part of the City Deal is financially tied-in with parts of South Staffordshire;

 Coventry and Warwickshire LEP (CWLEP) and Leicestershire LEP (LLEP) are working closely on cross border shared priorities, particularly around Mira on the A5. The Chair of the CWLEP Skills Board also chairs the LLEP Skills Board; and

 GB&S LEP and the Black Country LEP Boards have established links.

Attempts have been made to involve all Employment and Skills Boards across England as part of the National Skills Show. This is identified as a useful collaborative event at which good practice across LEPs can be shared and common challenges identified.

The potential for more cross LEP collaboration was identified by a number of those interviewed. In particular it was pointed out:

 That there is a clear overlap in terms of LEP sector priorities in a number of cases, most notably, advanced manufacturing where the advantages of avoiding duplication and the advantages of more collaboration was identified;

 LEP geographies are not enclosed labour markets, with flows in and out of different LEP areas in terms of commuting; and

 LEP geographies can cut across political boundaries such as in Southern Staffordshire which is within Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP, but sits within Staffordshire County Council which straddles this and Stoke and Staffordshire LEP area.

Key barriers to increasing cross LEP collaboration were cited as the different stages of development of LEPs and differing resources to support such activities, given the very different capacities of the respective LEP secretariats.

It was pointed out that for increased collaboration to occur there would also need to be a willingness to prioritise these activities against other competing priorities and stressed that any further cross LEP collaboration needs to be clearly focussed in terms of outcomes. One Skills Lead commented:

“I suspect that there aren’t any actual barriers, it’s more perhaps the willingness to spend your time on that to try and generate some outcome really...I think it’s more just whether you think your time would be better spent doing that or making sure you’ve got your next raft of projects for the next call of Local Growth Funds which come out perhaps later this year.”

4. Strategy and provision

4.1 LEP Strategic Economic Plans

Following the Heseltine Review, which made a number of recommendations for policies to support local economic growth including a further transfer of funding and responsibilities from central government, all LEPs were required to produce Strategic Economic Plans (SEPs). These set out a strategic vision for their area, detail how partners and stakeholders will work together and align their resources to support growth and make a case for support from the Government’s Local Growth Fund.

While all of the SEPs produced by LEPs in the West Midlands consider the skills agenda in some detail, they vary widely in their breadth, depth and relevance to the FE sector – notably in terms of the extent to which:

 Skills related priorities are specifically linked to LEP priority sectors. This is a key feature, for example, of the approach in Greater Birmingham and Solihull, the Black Country and Stoke and Staffordshire but only broader, higher level priorities have been proposed in Coventry and Warwickshire, Worcestershire and the Marches.

 SEPs propose specific activity to link economic priorities with skills requirements and investment in FE provision:

o In Greater Birmingham and Solihull, for example, the ‘Birmingham Trained Me to Compete’ Programme involves FE colleges and employers will work together to identify skill needs and develop pre-employment and in-work training while the Black Country Skills Factory will seek to identify skill gaps, support the development of bite sized, modular and work-based provision, promote apprenticeships and develop experienced staff as trainers in priority advanced manufacturing industries.

o However while in Worcestershire the SEP at least includes priorities with relevance to FE such as apprenticeships and other vocational training, college capacity building and careers advice and guidance, the SEPs for the Coventry and Warwickshire and Marches do not go beyond high level, generic statements.

 FE capital projects are proposed that build on these priorities, with investment to take them forward confirmed from the Growth Deal:

o Again in Greater Birmingham and Solihull a significant number of projects have been proposed, notably academies focusing on provision linked to skill needs in priority sectors such as advanced manufacturing, life sciences and digital media, as well as capital investment in specialist equipment. Investment has been confirmed via the Local Growth Deal for the advanced manufacturing and life sciences projects plus additional projects linked to the food and aviation sectors. In the Black Country, meanwhile, Centres of Excellence linked to priority sectors such as Advanced Science, Engineering and Technology and Advanced Building Technologies and Construction have been proposed. Investment has been confirmed for both of these

via the Local Growth Deal along with the development of an Elite Centre for Manufacturing Skills.

o While progress has been made in other areas this has been more limited. In Worcestershire Local Growth funding has been secured for an engineering Centre of Excellence and there are also proposals for facilities to support the agriculture and horticulture sectors. In Coventry and Warwickshire, meanwhile, only a few FE capital projects have been proposed, focusing on basic and employability skills for young and unemployed people and apprenticeships in advanced manufacturing and engineering (Local Growth funding has been secured for the latter). Although it has been announced that a £3.3m Skills Capital Programme for the Marches will be funded by the Local Growth Deal no specific FE projects have been confirmed to date.

Appendix 1 provides further detail on the skills priorities, FE capital projects and links to skills issues, Skills related ESIF priorities and specific FE investment supported by the Local Growth Deal in each LEP area.

4.2 The match between LEP priorities and FE College provision

Amongst all those interviewed there was an acknowledgement that current FE College provision did not mirror LEP sector priorities, although the extent of this perceived mismatch varied quite widely.

The most frequently cited area of provision where a close match to LEP sector priorities was cited was Engineering/Advanced Manufacturing, but this appears to be closely linked to the propensity for this to be an LEP sector priority across all LEP areas.

Perceptions of particular areas of mismatch identified by Skill Leads included:

 A relative under representation of provision at NVQ levels 3, 4 and 5 compared with employer needs

 An over abundance of relatively low NVQ level provision such as ‘hair and beauty’ compared with more technical based provision

In terms of the direction of travel in relation to alignment of provision there was general agreement amongst LEP Skill Leads that there had been some improvement in the alignment of provision with employer needs. For example feedback from interviews in different LEP areas included the following:

 That provision is now ‘smarter and more aligned’ in relation to LEP priority growth areas within the GB&S LEP area;

 Allocation of the European Structural Fund is being distributed in relation to the priorities set out in the LEP Skills Plan within the Marches LEP; and

 City Deal has impacted on advanced manufacturing and engineering sector support through capital investment within both Stoke on Trent and South Stafford Colleges.

However, it was also pointed out that there is some distance still to travel and progress has been quite slow in some instances. One Skills Lead commented:

“I think things are changing and changing for the better, but it’s like turning around the proverbial oil tanker to be honest.”

More generally, the extent to which different colleges have become involved with their respective LEP’s in addressing priority skill needs is identified by LEP Skill Leads as very variable and linked to the respective leadership, drive and ambition of the respective principals involved. One Skill Lead indicated that in their own area there had been quite a lot of upheaval with some colleges in distress and a certain amount of ‘churn’ of college principals. In this context it was commented:

“The ones (Principals) that get it tend to be the ones at very good colleges that are already quite deeply imbedded with employer, see the bigger picture, are on board and trying to do things. Others are either completely absent or far too busy sorting out their own problems.”

It was also perceived that while some colleges are working with employers to try and identify future employer skill needs this process is not being undertaken collectively. A weakness in mechanisms for gauging employer needs amongst colleges was also perceived by some LEP Skill Leads.

A number of particular challenges in addressing perceived mismatches in provision were acknowledged by LEP Skill Leads including the challenge:

 Of addressing SME skills issues. It was pointed out that it was much easier to try and address the needs of larger employers such as Tier 1 suppliers/OEMs in the case of manufacturers than the majority of employers further down the supply chain that tend to be SME’s and in some cases second or third generation owners lacking the requisite skills base to expand. In the case of SME’s it was argued that flexible provision that can accommodate small group sizes is often required which can present problems for colleges that often require minimum numbers in order to make provision economic.

 For the FE sector of keeping abreast and responding to changing demand in more capital intensive industries. In the case of the engineering sector in the Midlands it was pointed out that demand has picked up rapidly recently but this has followed a relatively long period in which investment by employers in the sector has been constrained by the recession, which in turn has constrained investment in hardware and training support by colleges, presenting significant challenges for the FE sector to catch up with recent growth in demand. In this scenario, FE colleges not only have to try and upgrade equipment but source appropriately skilled lecturers in the context of increasing competition for similar skill sets from industry.

Views were mixed in relation to the extent to which LEPs were identified as influencing the alignment of provision in relation to designated sector priorities, but all those interviewed acknowledged limits of the LEP in this respect.

In terms of increased LEP influence on provision, while still limited in nature, an increase in LEP control over certain funding is cited as a driver of increased LEP influence. One LEP Skills Lead commented in this respect:

“It’s slowly starting to come together and I think the LEP is slowly being seen as something which is now starting to influence development across the region, because funds are starting to flow through it.”

LEP control over Skills Capital funding is identified as particularly important in this respect.

However, the severe constraints on LEPs to significantly influence provision in practice was also underlined by one LEP Skills Lead who indicated that while the LEP Skills Board can provide ‘market signals’ in terms of the importance of different sectors this is all at quite a high level. It was commented:

“They can give off signals, but they have no power to determine where resources ultimately go and the other part of that is the LEP really don’t have the resources or the power to monitor anything.”

In practice LEP influence in relation to determining the shape of local provision is identified as being far outweighed by a number of other drivers of change, in particular changes in Government funding, with reductions in the adult skills budget, overall resource constraints and changes in apprenticeship funding priorities cited as having far more influence than local LEP decisions.

Further constraints on the influence of LEPs in relation to the shape of local provision were identified as:

 The current lack of sophistication in terms of available information on specific employer needs. It was commented: “I don’t think that we’ve got the degree of sophistication in terms of labour market information...to say actually we need more level 3 or level 4 in X, Y and Z”.

 The cost of being led entirely by employer needs. One Skills Lead highlighted University Technical Colleges as an example of a provider that is entirely employer led but acknowledged at the same time that “It’s not cost effective to do so and I’m not sure whether the main colleges can really afford to do that.”

It was clear from the interviews that underlying the issue of relative alignment of current provision to LEP sector priorities lies a fundamental divide between those that do not really question the logic of provision following the perceived market needs of employers in designated priority sectors to the exclusion of other considerations and those that argue that provision needs to reflect the market needs of the entire economy and the longer term needs of learners. While some (though not all) Skill

Leads started from the perspective of the former position, college Principals tended to argue that FE colleges should perform a much wider role than this. In particular:

 A number of FE College Principals questioned the logic of trying to align FE College provision with LEP sector priorities given that the LEP sector priorities have been defined in terms of potential of areas of business growth (although not always employment growth), rather than in terms of where most people work.

 The whole concept of devising course provision on the basis of employers expected future skill needs was also widely questioned by some Principals. In particular the notion that it is possible to predict this in detail.

 Given these uncertainties the logic of equipping young people with the skills and qualifications that enable businesses to provide more specific training was underlined, rather than trying to provide very specific job related skills as part of FE provision.

A wider set of issues relating to the assumptions behind the ideas of closely ‘aligning’ provision of quantified demand was also raised by a number of those interviewed. In particular the need to equip students with the skills to progress into further learning, pursue areas of learning they are interested in and provide a basis to enter employment and progress wherever they may choose to locate, rather than provision simply reflecting the employer needs of the local business base.

With respect to alignment of provision with overall labour market needs, the argument put forward by a number of Principals was that their college provision tends to automatically be aligned with overall labour market demand because people tend to choose courses with good employment prospects and veer away from areas with declining employment prospects.

4.3 Different approaches to aligning provision with LEP sector priorities

A number of different approaches have been adopted by LEPs within the West Midlands to try and increase alignment of provision with LEP sector priorities. The section below sets out examples of some of these different approaches. The examples are not intended to be comprehensive but rather to highlight some of the different ways in which LEPs have tried to encourage closer alignment of provision with strategic priorities.

Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP – Working with FE Colleges to lobby Government to enable FE Colleges to be more responsive

The overall approach highlighted in the case of the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP in terms of working with FE Colleges was to recognise that FE Colleges were trying to move provision closer to employer needs but there were a number of obstacles confronting FE colleges in relation to how this could be achieved. It was commented:

“I sense a lot of frustration within the colleges that they'd like to do more to align themselves with what business really wants, but they don't get enough support from Government to do it.”

Given this the LEP has worked with FE colleges to try and lobby Government through vehicles such as the Heseltine Report or involvement in initiatives such as City Deal to try and remove road blocks preventing FE colleges being more responsive to changing skill needs. It was commented:

“I don't think the LEP has really tried to get an influence (over FE colleges), I think it's trying to support FE with canvassing and trying to move road blocks out the way.”

Coventry and Warwickshire LEP: Aligning College Strategic Plans with LEP Strategic priorities – Case Study

Within Coventry and Warwickshire LEP the LEP secretariat has attended college staff and Governor away days in order to share future plans and discussions on curriculum needs. All FE Colleges in Coventry and Warwickshire have responded positively to working with the LEP on shared plans and priorities.

The LEP secretariat are careful to emphasise this has not been a formal ‘approval’ process but a useful dialogue.

Two colleges have also asked the LEP to get involved in facilitating business involvement on their governing bodies and another college has sought help from the LEP in setting up Employer Boards.

Stoke and Staffordshire LEP – Skills Incentive Pilot

Skills Funding Incentive Pilots were announced by the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills in July 2013. Their aim is to encourage provision to align to local skills needs as identified by Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) and to forge active partnerships between skills providers and LEPs. Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire LEP was selected to develop one of three pilot models.

The broad principle underpinning the funding model is that the Pilot LEP will instruct the Skills Funding Agency to reduce by up to 5% a Providers future Adult Skills Budget (excluding Apprenticeships) funding allocation on the basis of performance against the priorities set out by the LEP and the Plans agreed with providers. This funding would be redistributed locally through negotiation with SFA to providers delivering priority provision in the LEP area in their plans.

It is envisaged this model would operate as an incentive to colleges and training providers to respond to LEP priorities and over a planned period move to a system in which those qualifications matching LEP priorities would be a priority for being funded.

The LEP have reported that over the period from 12/13 to 13/14 providers have already made changes to their curriculum delivery in line with LEP priorities and development of the first year of the Pilot, in part, initially driven by the focus brought about by the reductions in the Adult Skills Budget.

The key advantage of the Pilot is identified as a mechanism by which the LEP and FE Colleges can now have a structured dialogue about how provision is aligning with LEP priorities and how colleges are contributing to meeting local skills needs. It was commented:

“I think the pilot is helpful in that respect because you can have a much more structured conversation...You can begin to tie up the level of investment and talk sensibly about what is supporting growth and ask questions about what value non priority provision adds to the local economy ?”

Marches LEP – Providing strategic direction to FE colleges and others by establishing clear skills priorities for tendering for European Funding

The approach adopted within the Marches LEP has been to use work initially undertaken in order to develop the Skills Plan for the Herefordshire Enterprise Zone (which was the Enterprise Zone for the Marches area) as the basis for a Skills Plan for the whole of the Marches area, which in turn has been used to underpin the European Structural Investment Framework (ESIF) and the skills element of the Strategic Economic Plan.

The Marches Skills Plan includes an extensive action plan which those organisations tendering for European Social Fund monies will need to reflect.

4.4 Measuring alignment

There are a number of practical challenges in measuring alignment of FE provision with LEP sector priorities. One of the challenges highlighted relates to the issue that much provision does not map directly to sectors but is either occupationally based or in some cases relates to more generic employability skills.

All sectors also have a wide range of different occupational areas employed making the mapping of provision directly against sectors potentially highly misleading.

In two LEP areas significant work has been undertaken attempting to map the extent of existing FE provision with LEP Sector priorities. The examples of Stoke and Staffordshire and the Black Country LEP are set out below.

Stoke and Staffordshire LEP alignment analysis - Case study

Within Stoke and Staffordshire LEP colleges in partnership with local authority officers working for the LEP have undertaken their own analysis as a group using ILR data. Each College has undertaken the analysis of their own 19+ provision in a consistent manner as part of the Stoke and Staffordshire Skills Pilot initiative and a composite analysis has also been undertaken that provides a picture of all FE provision delivered within the Stoke and Staffordshire LEP area. The analysis has been divided into four areas:

Priority growth (relating to LEP priority growth sectors)

Significant sector based on significance of numbers employed in Stoke and Staffordshire

Generic Employability which comprises mainly Foundations for Learning and Life and Preparation for Life

Non Priority which are all those activities falling outside the above

What the analysis indicates is the within Stoke and Staffordshire, while only a relatively small proportion of Level 1, 2 and 3+ provision is designated ‘Priority Growth’ almost all provision falls within the ‘Priority’ designations of Priority Growth, Significant Sector or Generic Employability, with Generic Employability provision accounting for over 70% of provision.

Non Priority provision based on this definition accounts for only 3% of all provision.

In terms of this approach it was commented:

“The LEP in agreement with BIS and in agreement with us, believes that this is a workable model and a fair model and a very transparent model. First of all we're clear about the baseline we've taken directly from the ILR, so it's a clear measure. You can see the volume of starts of the funding; it's classified in terms of LEP priorities down the side. It may be quite superficial, but we're down to what's called SSA tier 2, so you've got a clear indication of the areas we're delivering...we've cut it by percentage of provision and by what it means in financial terms.”

Black Country LEP alignment analysis – Case study

Within the Black Country LEP colleges commissioned a range of data analysis which was carried out by the Responsive College Unit to examine the current alignment of provision with LEP sector priorities.

The analysis is designed to answer the question “how much provision do we have in LEP priority areas, what is the trend of that and what is driving that trend?”

The analysis pointed to a good match, particularly in relation to apprenticeship provision. Analysis of historical trends also points to a growing participation in LEP priority areas including a growing proportion of STEM subjects. It was commented

“So, in the Black Country I think we would argue that the alignment is strong and getting stronger.

It was also pointed out that the Black Country LEP have got quite a narrow set of priorities which means that despite a strong ‘match’ in some areas about 50% of the college based provision and about 40% of apprenticeship provision isn't directly in the LEP priority sectors.

In particular it was pointed out that while Engineering, advanced manufacturing, business, health and social care and construction were quite closely aligned, other areas of FE provision such as creative, performance, media, digital, childcare, hair and beauty and sport were not priorities of the LEP. It was commented:

“Then you've got all this swathe of level 1 provision, which has got a vocational flavour to it, but it's about functional basic skills and people's attitude..., which doesn't (on a qualification by sector) match well. (These areas) could be about 45% of our apprentice provision and about the same of the college basis; it's not a direct match.”

4.5 Employer and College links

Most FE Colleges stressed that they had extensive links with employers and that this has been the case for a number of years. For example:

 The Principal of Bournville College indicated that the College had developed links with over 3,000 small and medium sized businesses as part of the delivery of an ESF funded project providing free training to employers. It was also pointed out that in terms of larger employers established linkages include Jaguar Land Rover, Kraft, Tesco and University College Birmingham (UCB)

In a number of cases there is a certain amount of frustration that key members of their respective LEPs do not appear to understand the extent of existing college linkages with employers.

It was also pointed out that LEPs tend to view employer linkages through a private sector lens, rather than appreciate that the skills agenda needs to relate to the private sector, public sector and the voluntary sector.

A somewhat different picture was painted by a number of LEP Skill Leads whose view tended to be that FE colleges needed to get closer to business and understand the needs of businesses more fully. A number also viewed FE Colleges as very ‘protective’ of their existing business links and networks.

In practical terms in a number of LEPs, more emphasis appears to have been placed on developing structured links between schools and businesses through the work of different Employment and Skill Boards rather than focussing on the links between FE colleges and businesses.

There are mixed views on the extent to which these links have changed over the last 1-2 years:

 In the case of North Warwickshire and Hinckley College an increase in the Colleges links with employers is identified. The College now run two employer focussed studio schools, which are feeder schools to the main college.1 In terms of specific employers where the College are involved with in relation to the planning and design of provision these include the Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC), MIRA, Triumph and Toyota amongst a range of others;

 However, another College Principal detected no real change in the extent of such employer linkages as a result of the formation of LEPs;

1 Studio Schools are designed by employers. The approach adopted by Studio Schools includes teaching through enterprise projects and real work to ensure students' learning in is rooted in the world of work.

 For a number of other colleges the influence of the LEP on employer/college links does not appear to have been great.

 One College Principal indicated that although employer links were now higher up the agenda than previously this was more to do with overall Government policy than the local LEP, in particular the move towards work placements, identified as firmly linked to national policy rather than linked to LEP initiatives.

Key factors enabling successful collaboration with employers identified by FE College Principals included:

 The quality of the offer: “The quality of our product is number one.”

 The way in which the College responds and communicates with businesses: “Speed of response, flexibility of response, the ease of communication with us and how easy it is to access the named person and not have to go through layers and layers of people.”

 The particular relationship the College has with the MD/CEO is considered particularly important in this respect: “The other thing I'm learning more and more, even though I've been in the job 10 years, it's about my relationship with the Chief Executives. If I can keep that very close and direct and just be very organised about regular contact, it is really very deeply powerful.”

 Ensuring core employability skills alongside more technical skills: “I think the other thing is really recognising that all our employer partners want to set core skills as well as their technical specialism’s and doing things to really develop those core skills in young people, so that when they hit the floor they've got those.”

The key barriers to increased employer collaboration by colleges are identified as time and resources. Other barriers cited included:

 The need for colleges to constantly adapt to changing funding criteria and government policy;

 The need for employers to increase investment in training;

 The message employers are constantly receiving from LEPs the Government and elsewhere that FE Colleges are not responding to employer needs is also identified as not helpful by some College Principals; and

 Bureaucracy linked to funding.

4.6 The use and adequacy of LMI

A number of inadequacies in LMI were identified

In terms of the data on provision and student uptake provided to LEPs in the form of what is known as the ‘Data Cube’, concerns were expressed in relation to the inability of some LEPs to use this data.

In a number of cases, colleges have been involved in undertaking their own analysis of provision including Dudley College who commented:

“We've done our own data analysis because interpreting the ILR's of colleges and also providers who are outside the area working in the Black Country is a real art.”

More generally, in terms of LMI issues identified included:

 LMI is always out of date;  The problems of using current data to extrapolate into the future;  The need to be realistic about the limitations of LMI and identify broad directions of travel rather than try and be too precise

A number of more specific inadequacies of LMI were identified including:

 Information on NEETS. It was pointed out that one of the priorities of most LEP's is to reduce the number of young people not in employment, educational training, but the data on this is identified as particularly poor.

 Limitations on ‘drilling down’ within particular localities – The need to develop more sophisticated information on major sites was highlighted in terms of the likely impact on job growth and skill needs. In this context work undertaken in relation to i54 was identified as a useful model. It was commented:

Work that was done around i54 for instance; can you begin to replicate that on some of the big strategic sites across the county where you’re going to get 3,000 or 4,000 jobs? What might it look like and what does that mean for the local area?

Views on the overall strength of the evidence base underpinning LEP strategies were mixed

In some cases perception is that a reasonably thorough job has been done of identifying the main skill issues. One Skills Lead commented:

“My view is we don't need any more information to tell us how critical it is that we invest in growth and jobs. I don't think we need any more information to tell us where we should put our energy in terms of sectors that we can influence most. I think we just need to get on with it!”

However, the strength of the evidence base was also questioned by some Principals, in particular that LEP sector priorities tend to be based on aspirations of future growth goals rather than a clear analysis of the overall current needs of the economy.

It was argued that what the evidence indicates is that the bulk of skills currently demanded are actually for relatively low skilled occupations rather than higher level skills, but LEPs tend to focus attention on low volume higher level skills that may be critical for attaining future growth but do not account for the high volumes demanded for lower level skills.

By concentrating on future potential growth areas rather than the vast majority of skills currently demanded it was argued that LEPs are ‘missing a trick’

This lies at the root of objections raised by some Principals when questioned about the focus of some of their provision in certain low skilled areas, with the most often quoted area being provision for hairdressers.

As highlighted in more detail in the next section the level of internal resource and capability of each LEP in relation to ongoing analysis of LMI varies substantially. For example:

 In the case of the Black Country the resource base provided by the Black Country Consortium is identified as quite strong with a proven capacity to analyse labour market information over a number of years.

 Within Coventry and Warwickshire LEP support in relation to LMI access and analysis has been provided by Warwickshire County Council.

 However, this contrasts with The Marches LEP with no developed LMI capability internally, which commissioned the development of the LEP Skills Plan to external consultants.

Questions were raised by some not so much about the quality of the LMI available but about the ability to interpret this data.

Doubts were also raised about the adequacy of LMI that is available as a tool for designing /directing provision. Particular issues were raised about the quality of demand side information on employer needs, particularly in terms of interpreting what perceptions of employer skill needs mean in practice.

The inadequacies of demand data presented at a broad sectoral level was also emphasised. It was pointed out that in order to be meaningful the analysis undertaken needs to get below the surface of broad sectors to particular sub sectors and specific occupational areas.

In terms of looking forward the need to understand the OEM skill demands and how they drive down through the supply chain was emphasised. In this respect it was commented:

“And so for me, with the colleges, it's about that advance knowledge of where the business direction is going for these companies.”

The importance of ensuring up to date information on changing career structures was also emphasised.

Even if the quality of LMI was improved some doubts were raised about the usefulness of this as a tool for influencing provision, particularly in terms of those aged 16-19 where broad employability skills were emphasised.

It is quite clear that even if some perceived inadequacies in LMI are addressed there remains a major challenge in matching demand side with supply side data in order to inform practical action in terms of provision. As one interviewee commented:

“I think we’ve got the information on demand side...where the growth sectors are, what the broad make up may be in terms of the 50,000 odd jobs created...But to then translate that into information about courses and curriculum’s is very difficult and we’re nowhere near that.”

Given the inadequacies of current LMI and the ad hoc nature of the use of different sources of LMI it was argued by one Principal that there needs to be an overall strategy towards LMI adopted by the LEP and key stakeholders involved and turn it from an ‘academic’ exercise to a ‘real’ exercise leading to tangible results.

Part of turning LMI analysis from an academic to a real exercise it was argued is the need to link LMI analysis and funding availability and use, with the results of LMI analysis actively feeding into the planning process in the context of available funding.

4.7 Measuring outcomes

As mentioned in the previous section research and LMI capabilities of each LEP varies substantially – and this is reflected in their approach to assessing the outcomes of the skills element of their Strategic Economic Plans

Some LEPs are relatively well resourced and have identified a range of key outcomes which are tracked on an on-going basis. For example:

 In Greater Birmingham and Solihull Birmingham City Council’s Economic Strategy and Information Team, assembled a detailed evidence base to underpin the SEP. Quarterly updates on the following key economic and labour market indicators are provided to the LEP Board:

o New job creation o GVA growth o Reduction in unemployment o Increased GVA per head o Increase in % of people with NVQ3+

 Similarly the Black Country Consortium’s Economic Intelligence Unit provide comprehensive data and intelligence to inform the SEP and provide regular intelligence updates based on the following employability, education and skills outcomes:

o New job creation o Business assists o Learner assists o The % of people with degrees o The % of pupils achieving 5+GCSEs at A*-C o Income levels

 In Worcestershire research capacity is in place to track outcomes of LEP activity via the Worcestershire County Council Research team. A detailed evidence base was assembled to underpin the SEP, a monthly economic update is produced and the following skills outcome measures are tracked on a regular basis:

o New job creation o GVA growth o Apprenticeships o SMEs investing in skills o STEM qualifications

 However while in the past in Coventry and Warwickshire there has been research capacity in place to track outcomes of LEP activity via Warwickshire County Council and the Warwickshire Observatory, and a detailed evidence base was assembled to underpin the SEP, quarterly updates have not been produced since March 2014. The outcome measures tracked were:

o New job creation o GVA growth o Business assists o Employment outcomes o Skills assists leading to a qualification

 In Stoke and Staffordshire research capacity is in place to track broader outcomes of LEP activity via the Staffordshire Observatory, a detailed evidence base was assembled to underpin the SEP and a monthly Stoke and Staffordshire economic update is produced. However monitoring of skills related outcomes is very limited, the only relevant measures being: o New job creation o GVA growth

 The Marches LEP has no internal capacity to track outcomes of LEP activity. While a skills plan, with an associated evidence base, was developed alongside the SEP, this was contracted out to external consultants. As a result there is no on-going monitoring or evaluation of skills outcomes.

5. Overall conclusions and implications for action

 The relationship between FE Colleges and LEPs

While governance arrangements specifically in relation to the administration of major funding streams such as City Deal were generally viewed as robust this was not always the case with respect to other aspects of LEP governance. A number of Principals indicated they thought that overall LEP Governance arrangements were currently not very accountable and could be improved.

Questions were also raised about how representative those employers active with the LEP are as a voice for all local employers.

The increasing representation of FE Colleges on Main LEP Boards is cited by a number of FE College Principals as a factor that has increased influence of LEPs in relation to the skills agenda. However, there is little evidence that FE Colleges have to date influenced LEP skills priorities in practice. In many cases FE Colleges identify themselves as responding to LEP priorities that have already been determined.

Although there are a number of examples cited of colleges working effectively with the LEP in relation to the skills agenda, in terms of colleges, the LEP and other stakeholders working jointly to actually plan provision, in most cases the feedback was that collaboration had not got to this stage.

Practical suggestions for improving governance arrangements included improving the communication from the Main LEP Board to FE Colleges and ensuring direct FE representation on the Main LEP Board where this is not already the case.

 College to college collaboration

FE Colleges recognise there is always going to be a tension between collaboration and competition, although it was also pointed out that the competitive nature of colleges is often over stated, given the quite localised geographies of colleges that means in practice there is a lot of similarity in provision between different Colleges.

There are well established College Principals forums in most LEP areas, but in terms of collaborative working this, to date, has tended to be in relation to specific projects or funding bids.

There are mixed views on the extent to which the LEP is driving these changes, but the existence of LEPs is certainly identified as one factor helping to galvanise closer College

35 collaboration, particularly the increasing importance of LEPs as the conduit for specific funding streams.

A number of examples of college collaboration are cited in the report with the most structured example being the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP Skills Hub, developed by the FE Chamber Consortium. This model would appear to provide a number of significant advantages for both FE colleges and the LEP in terms of advancing the skills agenda including:  Enabling streamlined searches for FE course provision across the whole LEP area by both learners and employers;  Providing a mechanism for marketing collectively;  Ensuring effective engagement by FE colleges with the business community across the whole LEP area; and  Providing a structured framework for making the case for increased investment in skills development to the business community.

Learning from this example and encouraging the adoption of similar approaches within other LEP areas would seem to offer significant benefits.

 LEP to LEP collaboration

A picture emerges of a matrix of piecemeal often issue or project based collaboration between LEPs within the West Midlands in relation to the skill agenda.

Set against this the potential advantages of more structured cross LEP working to advance the skills agenda are clear. In particular it was pointed out:  That there is a clear overlap in terms of LEP sector priorities in a number of cases;  LEP geographies are not enclosed labour markets, with flows in and out of different LEP areas in terms of commuting; and  LEP geographies can cut across political boundaries.

At a West Midlands level developing a skills focussed collaborative forum involving the different ESBs would be a practical step forward, although given the time constraints of participants this would need to have a very practical focus rather than be viewed as a ‘talking shop’.

The establishment of a virtual forum for the exchange of information/good practice should also be considered.

 The match between LEP priorities and FE College provision

Amongst all those interviewed there was an acknowledgement that current FE College provision did not mirror LEP sector priorities, although the extent of this perceived mismatch varied quite widely.

The most frequently cited area of provision where a close match to LEP sector priorities was cited was Engineering/Advanced Manufacturing.

In terms of the direction of travel in relation to alignment of provision there was general agreement amongst LEP Skill Leads that there had been some improvement in the alignment of provision with employer needs, although it was perceived there was some distance still to travel and progress was quite slow in some instances.

More generally, the extent to which different colleges have become involved with their respective LEP’s in addressing priority skill needs is identified by LEP Skill Leads as very variable.

This goes to the heart of the issue of how FE colleges position themselves strategically in relation to LEPs. Do they simply respond to predetermined LEP priorities with respect designated ‘priority sectors’ or do they play a far more proactive role by developing and presenting evidence of overall labour market needs to LEPs in order to influence priorities for provision?

At the moment the relationship is predominantly characterised by the former approach.

 Measuring alignment of provision with labour market needs

There are a number of practical challenges in measuring alignment of FE provision with LEP sector priorities. In particular, much provision does not map directly to sectors but is either occupationally based or in some cases relates to more generic employability skills.

All sectors also have a wide range of different occupational areas employed making the mapping of provision directly against sectors potentially highly misleading.

While significant work has been undertaken in some LEP areas attempting to map the extent of existing FE provision with LEP Sector priorities, most notably in Stoke and Staffordshire and the Black Country, a more sophisticated approach is still required in order fully understand the current impact of FE provision on the local labour market and the potential impact of different changes in the shape of local provision.

 Employer engagement

Most FE Colleges stressed that they had extensive links with employers and that this has been the case for a number of years. In a number of cases there is a certain amount of frustration that key members of their respective LEPs do not appear to understand the extent of existing college linkages with employers.

This poses the challenge of how FE colleges can use these linkages to maximise intelligence on changing employer skill requirements and strengthen the collective voice of colleges in relation to influencing their respective LEPs?

 LMI

Views on the overall strength of the evidence base underpinning LEP strategies were mixed, together with the internal capacity of LEPs to utilise and interpret this information to inform decision making, although a number of innovative initiatives to improve local LMI were cited, including tailored career factsheets within Worcestershire.

Irrespective of this a wide range of inadequacies in the quality of current LMI were identified. It is quite clear that even if some perceived inadequacies in LMI are addressed there remains a major challenge in matching demand side with supply side data in order to inform practical action in terms of provision.

Given the inadequacies of current LMI and the ad hoc nature of the use of different sources of LMI it was argued that there needs to be an overall strategy towards LMI adopted by the LEP and key stakeholders involved in order to turn it from an ‘academic’ exercise to a ‘real’ exercise, with the results of LMI analysis actively feeding into the planning process in the context of available funding.

 Strategy and provision

The ability of FE colleges to adopt a more strategic role with respect to their respective LEPs would appear to depend upon a number of criteria including:  The strength of local FE college collaborative arrangements  The strength of evidence on changing employer needs and wider skill requirements  The ability of FE colleges to influence LEP strategic decision making, which in turn is linked to issues of representation on the Main LEP Board and the strength of the local FE college collective voice  The ability to present clear evidence of the current match between provision and labour market needs including both generic/employability and vocational skill requirements

 Being able to identify the trajectory of change in terms of labour market requirements and the implications for local provision  Being able to position the above analysis within the context of an understanding of current and forthcoming funding opportunities.

More effective strategic engagement of FE colleges with their respective LEPs implies addressing all of the above issues.

Appendix one ‐ LEP Skills priorities, FE capital projects, ESIF priorities and specific FE investment supported by the Local Growth Deal

Greater Birmingham and Solihull

Skills related priorities in the SEP linked to priority FE capital projects and links Skills related ESIF priorities Specific FE investment sectors to skills issues supported by the Local Growth Deal A ‘Skills for Growth Hub’ with a sustained focus is made The LEP is working in The Skills for Growth Hub: Investment in a range of specific in sectors identified as having the maximum growth partnership with the provision linked to growth potential consortium of FE colleges to Provide training and job opportunities for workless young people sectors including: develop industry standard (aged 16‐24); Apprenticeship programmes and traineeships facilities – with a coordinated Solihull Aviation Engineering Workforce development training provision approach maximizing the Improve the take up of apprenticeships Training Centre to support impact of capital investment Develop employer‐led occupational route ways for the workless aerospace technologies Birmingham Trained Me To Compete programme ‐ Develop workforce development and career progression pathways Employers and FE working together to: A £1m capital investment Accrediting the skills individuals acquire through lifelong learning (£1.2million) programme in specialist Provide data and information to inform careers advice, training Skills Excellence Hub for Food Identify skill needs and design pre‐employment and in‐ equipment to enable the and support work training delivery of employer led Technology at University College provision in identified growth Key initiatives: Birmingham (£0.4 million) Identify specific sectors and qualifications where sectors funding rules are a barrier to delivery A skills gateway service to improve access to skills for SMEs Inter‐disciplinary Centre of Specific projects: Immersion Projects in the advanced manufacturing and Excellence for Advanced Investing City Deal monies in specialist equipment for FE cultural/Creative sectors with providers and employers working Technologies at Birmingham collaboratively to develop skills solutions Investment in skills Metropolitan College (£11.2 Development of advanced manufacturing skills expertise development in rail million) via Aston University Engineering Academy, EEF engineering and construction FE employer focused activities: Technical Apprenticeship Training and MTC Skills Life Sciences Centre Academy at Academy Life sciences academy as a Dedicated Employability teams delivering pre‐employability Bournville College (£3.5 million) feeder to new HE provision pathways and working with prospective employers in specific Digital and creative academy of academies programme sectors Expansion of the Jaguar Land – joining up education, training and research to improve Creative digital media centre Presenting the NEET ‘offer’ through the delivery of flexible up‐skilling and knowledge transfer workshops Rover Engineering Centre for There is also a proposal to Partnership with Tier 1 automotive companies, to target and Manufacturing Support at South Greater Birmingham Professional Services Academy – host the planned HS2 college encourage young women to take up employment opportunities and City College (£0.6 million) offering A‐levels, diplomas and professional quals

Black Country

Skills related priorities in the SEP FE capital projects and links to skills issues Skills related ESIF priorities Specific FE investment supported linked to priority sectors by the Local Growth Deal Black Country Skills Factory – Infrastructure improvements at Birmingham Met (formerly Investing in up‐skilling the workforce: Centre for Advanced Building currently a pilot project to: Stourbridge), Sandwell and Walsall colleges to improve Technologies & Construction Skills curriculum development and delivery Work based learning at Dudley College (£7.9 million) Identify skill gaps in advanced/high Graduate placements Basic skills training value manufacturing and shortfalls Development of specialist centres of excellence: Advanced Science, Engineering and in provision Higher level skills (level 5) and unit accreditation to support gaps in current Technology Centre at Halesowen Centre for Advanced Science, Engineering and Technology Skills knowledge College (£1.1 million) Brokering provision of bite size and at Coombswood Business Park – focusing on higher level IAG / Employability and wraparound support for those modular courses in the workplace apprenticeships furthest from the labour market Science, Technology and

Promoting the uptake of Centre for Advanced Building Technologies & Construction Prototyping Centre – part of the apprenticeships via business Skills at Dudley College –to enable the sector to benefit from Investing in improving employability and skills of Black Country Skills Factory (£10.3 engagement and a wage incentive opportunities presented by HS2 young people who are unemployed or NEET: million)

Master craftsman trainer Advanced Manufacturing Training and Education Centre and Traineeships / Apprenticeships wrap‐around Development of an Elite Centre for programme to develop experienced Construction Centre ‐ additional capacity to deliver Bespoke training packages for learning / Manufacturing Skills (£7.6 million) staff as expert workplace trainers apprenticeships, and training for the existing workforce with a employability skills focus on graduate retention and the unemployed Activities to bring young people back to or towards Sport based workforce development formal learning programme to improve sport Specialist Equipment for High Value Manufacturing Sector Enterprise hubs development programme specific and generic skills Employer engagement activity IAG / Careers support

Coventry and Warwickshire

Skills related priorities in the SEP FE capital projects and links to skills Skills related ESIF priorities Specific FE investment supported by the linked to priority sectors issues Local Growth Deal Sector specific skills initiatives are not FE capital projects had yet to be Developing skills to tackle unemployment: Skills Centre at Coventry City College proposed. Wider skills priorities are to: confirmed when the SEP was published. focusing on basic and employability skills Proposals for the HE sector include: New approaches to training for the unemployed, including for young and unemployed people (£0.3

Increase the take up of basic Maths and English and intermediate and high level million) apprenticeships places in priority Establishment of leading Games design vocational provision sectors and occupations courses at Coventry University, Apprenticeship Centre at Warwickshire Warwickshire College and the University Skills and training packages in response to redundancies College focusing on advanced Improve the take up of STEM of Warwick manufacturing and engineering subjects Using skills to drive and support growth: The Serious Games Institute at Coventry

Increase the supply of high quality University Supporting low skilled people in low paid work to help them work placements for FE and HE progress students The International Institute for Product and Service Innovation (IIPSI) at the University Support for up‐skilling and retraining for industries in priority of Warwick Engage employers more closely in sectors the design, delivery and assessment of innovative provision, The Institute of Digital Healthcare (IDH) at Enhancing access to lifelong learning, the establishment and embedding more work experience the University of Warwick development of work‐based learning and apprenticeship in courses and developing an employer driven ‘kite mark’ The Health Design Technologies Institute schemes such as dual learning systems (HTDI) At Coventry University Improve FE and HE strategic Work to promote interaction between business and Higher planning and skills capital funding Skills 4 Growth graduate programme for Education and Further Education providers to meet local bids through use of LMI and more the advanced manufacturing sector business needs direct employer engagement Developing better links between business and schools, Further Map existing employer and Higher Education providers and other education partners engagement, identify gaps and to equip students with the skills to start and grow a business promote available work opportunities and employer facing provision

Worcestershire

Skills related priorities in the SEP linked to FE capital projects and links to skills issues Skills related ESIF priorities Specific FE investment supported priority sectors by the Local Growth Deal While sector specific skills initiatives have not Upgrading the FE estate to deliver effective Worcestershire Employment and Skills Programme: 0.8m of investment in the Centre been proposed key programmes focusing on training and education and attract employer of Excellence for Engineering wider LEP proprieties include: and learner co‐investment, notably: Support to improve the employability of unemployed Training and economically inactive people Young Worcestershire ‐ mapping pathways into Rotec Training Academy for Engineering; £250,000 funding for business employment; increasing apprenticeships; Support for access to lifelong learning, skills upgrading support co‐ordination including the connecting Vocational and Educational pathways Redditch Engineering Skills Academy and workforce training Worcestershire Skills Hub

Worcestershire Skills Hub ‐ increasing private Worcestershire Group Training Association Improved collaboration between employers and sector investment in skills; building the capacity education and training systems; of training providers, FE and HE to respond to Centre of Vocational Excellence for employer needs; understanding skills gaps Engineering Training Enhanced Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)

‘Opt in’ programme Worcestershire Apprenticeship Clearing House – University Technical College (UTC) or elite support for unsuccessful apprenticeship college Enhanced Skills Funding Agency (SFA) ‘Opt in’ candidates to secure other apprenticeship opportunities National Centre of Excellence for Horticulture Programme within the University of Worcester Level 4 apprenticeships and working with schools and The Worcestershire National Careers Service Trailblazer 14‐19 year old project – a cohesive Centre of Agricultural Innovation to include the National Careers Service to establish clear pathways local careers service for young people aligned to an engineering training workshop; classroom into work the needs of local employers. based teaching facilities and design studios and a 14‐24 integrated training programme Ensuring SMEs can access support for apprenticeships, WLEP will also be seeking Government support and teacher development in STEM subjects skills, training and development to Employment and skills programmes to support social In addition, it is also seeking Government support inclusion to extend the eligibility for the National Careers Service to offer an integrated service in There will continue to be a focus on developing higher Worcestershire for 14 to 24 year olds. level skills and on the FE and HE contribution.

Marches

Skills related priorities in the SEP linked to priority FE capital projects and links Skills related ESIF priorities Specific FE investment sectors to skills issues supported by the Local Growth Deal Sector specific skills initiatives are not proposed. Wider Specific FE projects have yet Training to address skills shortages in new/growth sectors A £3.3m Skills Capital Programme skills priorities are to: to be confirmed. has been announced. This will Skills support for the unemployed facing a skills barrier to entering support delivery of capital Improve sharing of labour market information with Key existing HE projects the labour market projects to increase the skills schools, colleges and training providers include: base across the Marches through Promoting social innovation through skills for ICT, climate change improving infrastructure and Promote awareness and uptake of apprenticeships and social enterprise capacity to deliver world class Marches Business Graduate training. Ensure that employability and functional skills are Scheme: a two year pilot Supporting enterprise and access to employment embedded in local education and training provision project which aims to Specific FE projects have yet to improve SME engagement Skills support to new and growing businesses in priority sectors be confirmed. Link with the National Skills Academies operating in with a higher and the Hereford Enterprise Zone LEP priority sectors to offer sector specific skilled/graduate workforce, management training Embedding and promoting enterprise in education and training A New University for the Improve availability of work experience and work Marches: offering the trials, working with FE and HE partners opportunity for a city based Innovative engagement and re‐engagement activities with NEET institution from elsewhere young people Review of Entry and Level 1 current offer, to diversify their offer particularly around transition for school leavers Activities to improve the employability, personal and functional skills of young people Develop Traineeship model with appropriate progression routes into apprenticeships Flexible programmes that enable young people to progress into further learning Develop supported internship opportunities for young people aged between 16 and 25 who have Provision for young people who need specialist support and complex learning difficulties and / or disabilities training in alternative learning environments

Create a business and provider Compact/Accord Vocational training and qualifications linked to key employment where both sides of the skills system formally agree sectors and local employment opportunities that they share a common interest and responsibility for skills Advice and support on self‐employment and business creation

Stoke and Staffordshire

Skills related priorities in the SEP linked to FE capital projects and links to skills issues Skills related ESIF priorities Specific FE investment supported by priority sectors the Local Growth Deal The Education Trust has been established to Centre for Vocational Excellence in Basic Skills Training, including literacy and ICT £1.9 million investment in an provide strategic leadership, working with engineering and advanced manufacturing at Advanced Manufacturing Skills Hub schools and FE colleges and encouraging Newcastle College ESOL Provision that will provide traineeship and collaboration between business, public apprenticeship opportunities for Development of new facilities at South Activities to bring young people back to learning sector, third sector and educational Staffordshire College (Rodbaston Campus) priority sectors organisations. Key initiatives include: Employer engagement

Investment at Leek College, now a campus of Education trust skills pilot – giving a greater the University of Derby Growth and Innovation Fund projects influence over the Adult Skills Budget to align skills provision and delivery with skills Stoke‐on‐Trent University Quarter – Employer Ownership Skills model th required for growth in priority sectors – investment in Stoke‐on‐Trent 6 Form Higher level skills (including levels 5, 6 and 7) and unit removing up to 5% of funding from College and Stoke‐on‐Trent College, the new apprenticeship academy at Goodwin accreditation to support gaps in current knowledge providers and colleges that did not make International and the new ceramic the shift in provision as planned and programme proposed by the Ceramic Engineering Hub – offering training and higher providing an incentive to colleges and Development Group apprenticeships training providers to respond to LEP priorities Promote the Centre of Refurbishment Develop and resource Staffordshire Education Partnership Excellence (CoRE) as the leading provider of and Young Enterprise programme Education Trust skills events – focusing on training in refurbishment techniques and LEP priority sectors with employers and qualifications. Support for a comprehensive LEP area apprentices sharing their experiences in Apprenticeship Programme their respective sectors, “Have a Go” FABLAB model where colleges and SMEs can Supporting delivery of Higher Apprenticeship activities, competitions and the provision of share access to latest technologies Frameworks information advice and guidance from the

National Careers Service. Promoting Supporting transition into work programmes vocational learning pathways, Apprenticeships, FE and HE.