ARE0022

 

 

Written evidence submitted by the Workers’ Educational Association

 

 

Introduction

 

The Workers' Educational Association (WEA) is a charity and the UK’s largest voluntary sector provider of adult education. In 2015/16 we delivered around 8500 part-time courses for 60,000 students in England and Scotland, with classes in almost every local authority area. Our work in England was assessed in 2014 as ‘Good’ by Ofsted.

 

The WEA delivers learning close to where the students are by working in partnership with over 350 local organisations and offering courses in community settings rather than on a college campus. The provision is largely non-accredited and much of it aims to reach adults with educational disadvantage. We deliver our education in over 2500 community venues with 42% of students travelling less than a mile to their course. Volunteers play a significant role in the WEA. Their contribution is valued at least £5.6 million, and we have over 400 volunteer-led branches organising courses on a huge range of subjects.

 

As a national organisation with local delivery, the WEA has a challenging relationship to the Area Review and devolution process. We recognise the need to adapt to local need and deliver in a way that is driven by what communities want and in partnership with other organisations known and trusted at a local or regional level. On the other hand, as a national organisation, much of our ability to deliver so effectively at a local level comes from having a single national funding arrangement and with this, the ability to act within a national strategic framework. If the WEA were to operate within a fully devolved framework rather than, as now, having a national funding agreement, the additional administrative costs of negotiating with each individual devolved authority would amount to an estimated £400k-£500k.

 

 

Scope of our evidence

 

We would like to provide evidence against the following headings in the inquiry’s terms of reference:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The area review process so far and the impact of recommendations from local steering groups

 

  1. Although the WEA’s provision is not directly in scope for area reviews, it forms an important part of the broader education context across all LEP and area review areas and we have therefore sought to engage indirectly in the review processes by providing information and case studies about our impact in the local area. Where possible we have engaged with organisations representing a range of adult and community learning providers and local authorities delivering adult and community learning in order to have some input to the Reviews.

 

  1. In areas where skills funding is being devolved it has been made clear to us that the Area Reviews will form a key part of the evidence base for decisions about future allocation of skills funding and the development of local outcome agreements. This has created a significant issue for providers of adult and community learning (ACL) such as the WEA, since the risk has been that ACL provision is overlooked in future funding on the basis that it has not formed part of the Area Review process.

 

  1. In London, following extensive consultation with Adult and Community Learning providers, an agreement was made with the Greater London authority that a separate review of ACL provision should take place. The ACL review in London has been a very effective route for us and other ACL providers to demonstrate our impact. This has not however happened in other combined authorities. We feel however that a more consistent approach to the mapping of ACL provision would be helpful.

 

  1. The Joint Area Review Delivery Unit (JARDU) reviewers we have spoken to have provided us with helpful advice and have recommended that we do submit evidence to the review process and seek to engage in Reviews, however it is clear that the scale of the review activity has been very significant. While we were encouraged to submit data and case studies, in some cases we did not receive any follow up and it has been very difficult to engage in the review process or determine the extent to which our input is being regarded.

 

 

 

The potential of area reviews to deliver savings and their likely impact on the financial sustainability of the further education sector

 

  1. The current state of flux in adult education funding, which the area review process is informing, poses considerable risks to WEA as a provider of adult learning and for other adult and community learning providers, especially small, voluntary sector providers.

 

  1. Devolution of adult skills is planned for 2018/19 but the most significant review of provision is focused on FE institutions and 6th form colleges only – not on ACL providers or school 6th forms

 

  1. Much ACL provision is below the radar – WEA for example delivers much of its adult education with partner organisations. Over 40% of our students travel less than a mile to their courses and we deliver in over 2,300 partner, community and workplace venues. Our flexible model means that we are responsive, innovative and able to respond to the needs of students, partners and employers.

 

  1. Current impact measures focus on sustained further employment or learning. These are not broad enough to capture the wealth of impact which adult education achieves for individuals furthest from the labour market, including on their confidence, self esteem and willingness to engage with finding work.

 

  1. For example, our most recent impact evidence, carried out in July this year and based on responses from learners who attended a WEA course in the autumn of 2015, indicates that seventy-seven percent of unemployed students looking for work felt more confident about finding a job in the future and 72 percent knew better what to do to get a job as a result of the WEA course. Forty-six percent of students who were interested in finding a job in the future increased their motivation to find a job as a result of the course. Among BAMER students this proportion equalled 91 percent, 53 percent among White British students on benefits, 68 percent among students with no qualifications and 87 percent among students on basic skills courses.

 

  1. WEA evidence to Area Reviews has focused on several key indicators:

 

 

 

 

  1. Our concern therefore is that the Review process and its influence on the financial sustainability of the FE sector will be too narrowly focused and will overlook (and subsequently under-fund) provision which is more difficult to map and measure – particularly where it is organised at a national level - but which nevertheless is reaching people in deprived areas and can be shown to have a positive impact.

 

 

 

 

 

September 2016