16-19 Participation in education

Written Evidence Submitted by Central London Connexions

Central London Connexions covers the central London 7 boroughs. All CLC LAs have a history of strong 14-19 partnerships working together sub/regionally to ensure support, tracking and provision in a context of 49% average mobility from home to EET at ages 16-18. Connexions services in all CLC LAS have remained consistently high performing.

Collaboration and high quality services and provision have led to a dramatic reduction in NEET levels across central London and a consequent increase in EET to above national averages.

There are 2 RPA pilots in central London to test approaches to IAG and inclusion. The responses below capture much of the learning from those pilots.

1. The impact the Education Maintenance Allowance has had on the participation, attendance, achievement and welfare of young people; how effective will be the Discretionary Learner Support Fund in replacing it

1.1. Many young people did not qualify for the EMA – or qualified for only for a small element. Those who did quality for a significant payment told their Connexions PA that the EMA was central to:

· raising their awareness about staying learning after school – it opened up otherwise remote options of studying

· keeping their attendance high – it drove them to attend fully when otherwise they may have been distracted with other pressures

· helping them learn money-management skills – they need to manage the allowance carefully to spread it across various spending needs.

1.2. For some young people the £30 weekly was an important part of their family income. Some needed it for lunch, travel (students get support with bus fairs and tube season tickets but not less-frequent tube travel of a partial week), equipment for courses, books, or for clothes to wear to college.

1.3. There is considerable financial hardship in the lives of about 40% of our young people.  The loss of this income will affect their access to EET and their retention.

1.4. Part time jobs are usually now taken up by HE students (we have many universities in London). FE students can seldom get part time work now, to stand alone financially.

1.5. We worry that the extended DLSF will not meet the needs of young people from poorer backgrounds studying post 16 in central London, and will not support access or retention.

2. The preparations necessary, for providers and local authorities, for the gradual raising of the participation age to 18 years and their current state of readiness

2.1. more flexible post 16 provision, flexible in terms of start dates and of content and more level 2 provision

2.2. increased understanding of the cohorts coming through, using combined Connexions data with LA data on prior attainment levels

2.3 increased access to additional maths and English tuition at KS4 – otherwise the learning routes to 18 will not be accessible to young people

2.4 jobs with training, and Connexions brokerage to source them – apprenticeships are often for higher achievers and are highly competitive. Many young people want to access work at 16 and cannot sustain a classroom-based route until 18.

2.5 training with a training allowance, to help yp access vocational skills areas on accredited programmes relevant to the trades

2.6 IAG in colleges and other post 16 provision for yp in year 12 on one year courses – their route forward will be harder to source and access. Current cuts are taking these workers out, and there were to few to begin with given the emphasis on progression from KS4

2.7 IAG at KS 4 - under threat currently given reduced budgets

2.8 Local authorities should have:

· a well communicated strategy are essential along with an Implementation Plan that has broad ownership from the 'top' and across all Children's Services

· plans to measure the impact and sustainability

· leadership and governance to ensure full engagement from the wider local authority and other partners

· engaged employers

· data tools providing self assessment frameworks to ensure a full understanding of their cohorts, discussed and debated the data locally with providers

· identified particular young people critical to RPA, with mapped interventions, support and provision

· a Risk of NEET Indicator (RONI)

· clear future delivery models within the changing financial climate and developments such as the all age careers service.

3. The impact raising the participation age will have on areas such as academic achievement, access to vocational education and training, student attendance and behaviour, and alternative provision.

3.1 RPA will have a strong long-term effect on skills levels and life chances but access to vocational learning will need to improve, as will financial and learner support and career IAG. We currently see a reduction in these aspects of provision.

3.2 The impact doe to financial constraints of reduced IAG services and limited 14-19 strategies would be shown in behaviour, attendance and achievement levels.

3.3 It is expected that RPA will curtail the number of young people leaving EET before they turn 18. Key conclusions from our local data analysis of early leavers at age 17 specify that: 

· we will need ongoing work with Year 11s to maintain high levels of EET at transition alongside ongoing support once they are in post 16 opportunities

· we will need more focus on young people on Entry Level, Level 1 courses, with increase 16-19 provision of these courses

· Schools, colleges and 6th forms must be influenced to increase IAG support to improve transition of young people into EET.

25th March 2011