Supplementary evidence submitted by the
Association of Colleges
SFA 20A
I am writing to clarify a few points made during
the recent evidence session your Committee held with Geoff Russell,
David Cragg, Peter Lauener and Kevin Brennan MP as part of the
inquiry into the SFA.
Q130/131
Julie Kirkbride MP asked about funding for young
people beginning a course aged 18, but finishing after their 19th
birthday and was told that the YPLA will continue to fund a person
in this position. This is a complicated area but we are not certain
the witnesses gave a wholly correct answer. As we understand it,
the Skills Funding Agency takes over the funding of young people
once they reach their 19th birthday but funds them using the rates
and rules established by the Young People's Learning Agency. With
high youth unemployment, this makes it possible that a rising
share of the SFA budget will be spent on young people aged 19
and 20 completing their sixth form education.
Q135/136
You asked about virement between different budgets
and Colleges' ability to be flexible. The virement flexibility
mentioned by Geoff Russell allows Colleges to take their own decisions
about how to spend the funding allocated to them. In addition,
the SFA will allow Colleges to adjust funding and targets within
two main adult areas (Adult Responsive Learning and Employer Responsive
Learning). However, Colleges are unable to move funds between
the two areas and are held accountable for a long list of detailed
student number targets, defined in terms of the number of people
taking particular qualifications. We do not think it is really
accurate to say that Colleges "manage the money pretty much
in the way they want".
Q170
Brian Binley MP asked about the costs of the
reorganisation. The fact that the people heading YPLA and SFA
are confident about the effectiveness of their organisations perhaps
reflects the fact that their budgets have been protected. As the
Minister explained, the reorganisation is cost neutral. This means
that DCSF/BIS will continue to spend £200 million on the
two national agencies and on administration in local councils
(£50 million a year). Meanwhile the SFA will be cutting a
similar amount from the budget for adult education and training
in the 2010-11 academic year.
Q174
Brian Binley MP asked what was meant by "re-prioritisation"
within the skills system. Responding, Kevin Brennan MP talked
about a 2.9% growth in adult learning funding. The Minister was
referring to the overall increase in funding for the 2010-11 financial
year (comparing the year starting 1 April 2010 to the year starting
1 April 2009).
This is the most favourable presentation that
can be put on the figures. If capital funding is included, there
is a decline in expenditure comparing the two years. The department
has brought forward other expenditure into summer 2010 which means
that the comparison across the two academic years (year starting
1 August 2010 compared to 1 August 2009) is much less favourable.
Furthermore a considerable sum is allocated in the 2010-11 academic
to new training programmes for the unemployed. If these are excluded,
there is a 6.5% decline in revenue spending on adult education
and training. The department has protected various budgets (for
example for adult apprenticeships, offender learning and informal
adult learning) with the result that the full impact of the budget
reduction falls on the adult learning responsive budget. This
is the £200 million reduction outlined in AoC's briefing
to the Committee. The important point to understand is that the
budget cut applies to basic skills courses and to work-related
education provided by Colleges to individuals.
15 March 2010
| 
