1419 Quality

1
14-19 Quality Improvement Conference

• Funding The 14-19 Phase
• Mick Fletcher

2
Overview

• 14-16 currently subsidised by FE
• The IFP model is unsustainable
• No clear thinking on delivery costs
• The options are
• Increased investment
• Improved efficiency
• Marginalised activity
• Currently moving towards option 3

3
Evidence Base

• Provision for Learners aged 14-16 in the FE
  sector LSN Fletcher Styles 2006
• Implementing 14-19 provision a focus on schools
  LSN Fletcher, Styles Valentine 2006
• AoC risk analysis of diploma programme
• DfES regional conferences and website
• Nuffield 14-19 Review
• Size Matters Fletcher Owen LSN 2006
• Do post 16 structures matter? NFER 2006
• York Consulting 14-19 Pathfinder Costing Study
  2005
• LEACAN Challenges facing partnerships July 2006

4
Aim of the Initial LSDA Research

• To establish baseline data about the nature and
  scale of college involvement in 14-16 provision
• To gather college perceptions on benefits and
  concerns
• To gather evidence on the costs and funding of
  provision

5
Income versus Expenditure
6
Aim of LSDA stage 2 research

• To identify school perceptions of vocational
  options for 14-19 year olds
• To identify how schools could organise themselves
  to participate efficiently
• To identify the savings that schools might
  realistically make by collaborating

7
Key Messages

• Broader choice at 14 seen to have real benefits
  for motivation, skills and progression
• Effective vocational programmes cost more to run
  properly than GCSEs
• Currently provision is cross subsidised from ESF,
  IFP and colleges
• Schools cannot make sufficient savings to meet
  the real costs of colleges
• Schools and colleges dont understand each others
  funding constraints

8
Typical Cost Profile

• College Costs - 2300 per pupil
• School Contribution - 4-500 per pupil
• ESF Contribution - 4-500 per pupil
• College subsidy - 13-1500 per pupil
• Contribution from IFP reduces as nos. rise

9
(No Transcript)
10
Types of Cost

• Set up costs
• Capital
• Staff Development
• Partnership Costs
• Transport
• Co-ordination
• Running Costs
• 14-16
• 16-19

11
14-19 Pathfinder Costing Study

• Generic Collaborative Working
• Small (18) 198,000
• Average (3 18) 312,000
• Large (7 27) 476,000
• Most of these costs are ongoing (e.g. management,
  placement co-ordination)

12
14-19 Pathfinder Costing Study

• Developing Collaborative Provision
• Costs vary considerably
• Developing materials 560 - 113,390
• Curriculum development 2514 - 242,250
• Enterprise learning 770 - 10,000
• Targeting groups 3000 - 53,760

13
14-19 Pathfinder Costing Study

• Delivery of Collaborative Provision
• Teaching 44 per hour (29 - 65)
• Transport 3.20 mean weekly cost
• York Consulting 2002- 2004
• App. GCSE Health Care 1,377 - 1,716
• Engineering NVQ 2,123 - 2,755

14
Option Patterns

• Vocational options not equally popular
• 19 in engineering for every 1 in retail
• Modelling suggests
• 18 schools needed to make all groups viable (ie
  15 in retail)
• 5 schools needed to make groups viable overall
  (ie average of 15)
• BUT who will run the loss makers?

15
Patterns of Provision

• No evidence that choice of providers improves
  participation
• No evidence that having a 6th form improves post
  16 participation (rather the opposite)
• No evidence that provider type or provider system
  type affects achievements

16
Scale EffectsRange of subjects by cohort size
17
Economies of Scale
18
Scale and A Level Performance
19
School College 2
20
A marginal activity?

• If
• For 2 out of 5 years
• 2 out of 10 pupils
• Take 1 day out of 5 on voc. options
• Of which half are in FE
• Then
• 2/5 x 2/10 x 1/5 x1/2 1/125 or 0.8

21
Funding Choices

• Fund schools
• Fund Local Authorities
• Fund Colleges
• Fund Partnerships
• Fund Vouchers