Children, Young People, and Education Committee

Welcome back, and we will move on now to agenda item 3, which is the tenth evidence session in our inquiry on routes into post-16 education and training. So, I would like to welcome David Hagendyk, chief executive of ColegauCymru, and Lisa Michelle Thomas, principal of Merthyr college and chair of ColegauCymru. Welcome this morning. Members have a series of questions and we'll start, please, with Carolyn.

Thanks, Chair. Bore da.

Bore da.

We've heard there's a variation in the quality, content and nature of the careers advice that's being offered to learners, especially for vocational education routes and apprenticeships. So, why do you think this is, and what's the impact of this on learners when they're making decisions about their options after year 11, or even before, on their pathway through their route of education?

Okay. I think there's a recognition by ColegauCymru of the importance of young people having impartial advice and guidance in relation to the options that are available to them at 16 and beyond. I think, unfortunately, there's a huge variation across Wales in young people's experience. I think reports that have been produced by Estyn, for example, identify that, where a school may have a sixth form, it is often very difficult for colleges to be able to speak to young people and make them aware of the options that are available in their local college, whether that be A-levels or vocational qualifications.

Often the college's experience is that they will be provided with a small group of young people who have already indicated to the school that they do not wish to continue on into the sixth form. I think that's then in stark contrast to those local authorities in Wales that are tertiary. Perhaps if I can just draw on my own personal experience at Merthyr; over the years since the local authority went tertiary, the college has built up a very strong relationship, working closely with the local authority and the secondary and primary schools in the borough, to support that high-quality advice and guidance for young people, not just at 16, but acknowledging that that advice and guidance needs to begin much earlier. We've also worked very closely with the schools and the local authority, particularly working with those young people who the schools identify as being at risk of dropping out. I think if we just draw on sixth—

Can I just interrupt you? At what sort of age do you think, then? You said 'much earlier'.

So, we work with young people at primary age. I think, again, it's making them aware of what opportunities are available to them, what careers are available, what higher education opportunities are also available, so it starts to sow that seed in their minds much earlier so that, when they're making those choices at year 9, for example, they have got sight of their longer-term ambitions.

And do you get the opportunity to meet with parents as well, because they seem to have such an influence? Well, parents do have an influence.

Yes. What we do—. Again, if I draw on the Merthyr experience for a moment, we have hubs in each of the secondary schools. We have staff on hand every day, not only to be available if young people have questions about their options, but also parents are able to drop in at the end of the day to ask questions. If you take the science, technology, engineering and mathematics sector, the type of employment that is available in that sector is very different, perhaps, to some of the heavy industry that grandparents or even parents may have had experience of. So, it's making them aware of that.

But, if we talk about impact, then, if we look at September 2004 progression in Merthyr, 85 per cent of year 11 learners in Merthyr progressed on to the college this September and are continuing their education and training. Others have progressed on to our subsidiary company, where they're able to take up traineeship opportunities as well. So, I think it really shows the value and the impact that those young people having access to that impartial advice and guidance can make.

Can I just add a little bit? I was, for four or five years, on the board of Careers Wales, so I understand a little bit about some of the pressures that are on that part of the sector, that part of the system. I think it's an ecosystem, a lot of this, so there's a role for schools, there's a role for colleges, a role for parents, but it's the independent bit of the advice and guidance that's really key. I don't see how a tertiary system works unless you have far greater access to independent advice and guidance. I think, in Lisa's example there, you've got lots of learners who are really clear where they want to go—the A-level route, that's what they want to do. There are lots of learners who are supported at the bottom end of that who are at risk of dropping out, and Careers Wales do a lot of work with that group. It's that group in the middle that concerns me as much, really—the ones who've got genuine choices between vocational or academic—if you want to use that phrase—options. I'm not sure they are necessarily being well served by the level of advice and guidance they get. Because they're not at risk of dropping out, perhaps they're not getting that access.

You've just divided to me vocational and academic then as well, so how do we overcome that so pupils can understand, and the parents as well, that there's not a choice between vocational and academic? They can come together, can't they?

I think, for us, it's about that independent advice and guidance. It's about Careers Wales understanding what the vocational options are, but it's also about colleges being able to go into schools at an earlier stage, and that's where there's a disparity. We've got some great relationships with schools where there's a really good partnership between the college and the school—they will go in, talk early to them—but it's absolutely not universal. Thinking of your own constituency, I bet if you went to see 20 or 30 secondary schools in north Wales, you'd get different answers from those pupils as to the level of engagement of a college.

It's also not universal across a whole college. Merthyr is different, because it's got one local authority. But where you've got three or four, maybe five, local authorities, there'll be different approaches between different local authorities and between different schools, which means young people are getting a different level of service in terms of the advice and guidance they're getting from the school and access to a college.

Okay, thank you. I think I wrapped up both questions in the same one there, really, didn't I—I'm being better with time.

Thank you. Questions from Vaughan, please.

Bore da. Good to see you both. Thank you for coming in. It goes directly on. This point about there being a conflict of interest between schools, colleges, education and training providers: your paper, understandably, talks about how the funding model helps to drive some of that competition. I don't know if you heard the WLGA and ADEW evidence this morning, but there was some acknowledgement of that, about bums on seats driving behaviour, and, at the same time, the WLGA was saying that they wanted to look at collaboration for the future, with the needs of the learner in the centre, which sounds like a good place to be.

So, I'm interested in not how much of an issue there is in raising awareness of vocational and apprenticeship options, but how you get from where we are, where there is competition in different parts of our system. So, not—. It's simpler in Merthyr, because there's a tertiary system, with a clear route. But even when there are sixth forms and colleges either across a region or within a local authority there are different behaviours between schools—so, all part of the same local education authority; your points about standards, leadership, going back to LEAs as well, so, there isn't a lack of clarity in that, but about how we understand what 'better' looks like and then how you get what 'better' looks like being a consistent expectation. Because it isn't the case that every school that has a sixth form has an entirely antagonistic relationship to its local college. So, what we're trying to get to is: where does 'better' exist, and then how do we get our different stakeholders to be committed to delivering that?

I think it's about putting the learner absolutely first, and it's about opening doors, so that these young people have got the information to make that informed decision. If you talk about vocational qualifications in particular, it's making them understand, for example, that vocational qualifications can support progression on to HE. And, sometimes, that's a communication that needs to be had with the parent as well as the young person. So, it's trying to—. They are different, but the one is of no less value than the other. The mode of study is different. So, it's having that conversation with the young person about, 'How do you learn most effectively?' A lot of young people we know today are struggling with anxiety and mental health challenges. They are attracted by opportunities for that continual mode of assessment, as opposed to high-stakes examinations at the end of a programme. So, again, it's about the learner first, and having those honest conversations about what programmes are available, how they support progression, and the learner making that choice for them. But they have to have that information to make that informed choice.

So, in terms of how that happens, England has the Baker clause, a statutory clause, which isn't effective, because we've got lots of evidence that it doesn't guarantee access. And it's not just access for training providers and colleges—I see that as access for the learner. We know we have some of that here as well—so, even if we recommended that the Government changes the law, the evidence is we could not be confident that it would be consistent, and, in fact, we could be certain that it wouldn't be consistent. So, it's down to who needs to do what, and, if it isn't the law, then how do we deliver some of that? Because there's leadership at schools, at local authorities, there's leadership across regions, leadership in colleges, and there's Estyn. When we did a college visit recently, they were very clear, on the point about advice and guidance, it's there, in an Estyn report, for an LEA and for a school, but I bet hardly any parent looks at that section when they're thinking about, 'How good is this school?', if they're reading it and making choices. So, it's still about at what level of leadership do we need to do this. Because if you're going to come back and say, actually, on each of those levels, if we're making recommendations we want the Government to take seriously, and the whole sector, how do we get around those different tiers of leadership, to get them to do what lots of witnesses have said, when they're sat in your seats and talk about the needs of the learner, when, the behaviour, it comes back to sending staff out on results day to stop the colleges putting up their adverts outside the school? That's exactly the behaviour that we don't want to see, because that is about competition, not the learner.

I think it is a bit of everything. So, I think that one of the most important areas is that local collaboration between heads and college principals, or the leaderships of schools and the leadership of the FE sector. That is where a lot of these decisions around curriculum planning and working with learners to make sure they are accessing the most appropriate place are. So, that local element is really key—so, the LEAs, the WLGA, ourselves, really have to step into that space, I think, and get that local collaboration working. There is a role—. I think we've got lots of the elements to make this work. So, you have an independent advice careers service, which we don't have in lots of parts of the UK. You've got that here, and that can work really well. We have a post-16 regulator, so you can maybe sort out that 16 to 19 a bit better. Where I think we've got a risk is where, for us, it's about that transition from pre to post-16. Does the establishment of Medr make that a bit greyer, a bit sort of jagged edge, potentially? So, there's a role for Welsh Government here, I think, as well, to say, 'We are spending significant amounts of money on this part of the system. What do we expect from local leaders, what do we expect from local authorities, and what do we expect in terms of behaviours from educational institutions?' So, I think you're right: it's at every level of leadership and every level of the system that has to work better.

There is a bit there about funding driving behaviour as well, and it is a challenge that, when bums on seats matter, then that is difficult for the system to be able to change, if that funding is lost. There's a bit for us as well, a challenge for FE: you have a tertiary model where Merthyr does everything in that space, and that works really well, and works really well in lots of other places. If that's not the direction of travel a local authority wants to go in, how do we make sure that we're planning together and being really clear who's doing what within the system? We know there are examples of sixth forms with very, very small numbers in an A-level class, and they are taking taxis from one school to the other in order to make that class viable and to make sure it's a proper educational experience. Now, that can't be a good use of public money, clearly, but we need to make sure there's proper learner choice and proper planning. So, I think there's a bit there for colleges about saying, 'Well, maybe you do that and we do this', and work through that together. But you have to have that local planning. I think a recommendation is: how do you ensure that local planning happens within a local authority system?

Can I bring Cefin in here, please?

If I can just follow up on Vaughan's line of questioning, just specifically on this point; I think you've probably touched on part of the answer that I was looking for. I mean, better collaboration, local partnerships, putting the learner at the centre of the decisions and pathways, I think we're all in agreement around that. So, I think many stakeholders have told us that the funding model is a barrier to creating that better cohesion between providers. So, what needs to happen in terms of changing that funding formula? Whose responsibility is that, do you think?

This is a difficult one, because it sits partly with Medr, partly with Welsh Government on some of this, because the funding is funding for post-16, but actually the transition happens pre 16, so it is a challenge. There's a question there about how do you incentivise schools to value progression to a vocational programme and to a college as something that is to be celebrated. I mean, a number of times I've seen a school rightly celebrate someone going on to Oxford or Cambridge, or a university, and achieve brilliant things, and that's fantastic. You don't often see the same level of celebration for a learner who's gone on to get a level 3, level 4 in aerospace, in aeronautical engineering or something. So, I think there's a bit there about schools understanding the vocational options and valuing them in their own right.

Also funding for innovation is difficult. If I was a headteacher and you said to me, 'I can take these learners off your hands for an afternoon and then give them a fantastic vocational experience, but it's going to cost you money, and you still have to teach everybody else', I would be thinking, 'Well, how am I going to afford that?' But if we could fund innovation—. So, an example in your own patch, Coleg Sir Gâr takes nearly 1,000 learners a week to do vocational provision, like half a day, a day, from local schools. Llandrillo Menai does exactly the same; lots of other colleges do that. That's hard to fund and hard to sustain, because it comes from mainstream budgets. If we could fund innovation and find a way to really incentivise partnerships and for it not to penalise schools financially—that's certainly one of the barriers. Schools say they would like to do some of this innovative work, but it costs them money, and they still have to teach everybody else back in the school. So, there are things we could do differently there, I think.

Okay.

I agree. In the context of A-levels, where Dave mentioned you've got small group sizes in some sixth forms, there's a real opportunity, through the funding model, to incentivise that collaborative model of delivery between colleges and schools, in order to retain that breadth of curriculum offer.

Yes. Better co-operation.

And to give a good learner experience as well. Because, on the face of it, a small class size, a parent might think, 'Well, that sounds quite nice, actually, because they've got all that teacher time just on a small number of pupils.' But it's not a great learner experience if you haven't got, particularly at A-level, that breadth of discussion, as you know from your own teaching experience. So, you need, I think, some of that as well.

Okay. Thank you.

Earlier, we heard about the Cardiff Commitment; Anglesey are looking at a model as well, working with what businesses are there at their colleges, sixth forms. So, we've got the growth deals. In north Wales, there's the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, which is going to move into a corporate joint committee. It's a bit big. I think if you could split it into two to work with different schools and colleges in those two regions. They've got funding that's not being spent at the moment, so if they, maybe perhaps as the growth deal or whatever they're doing, could use that money, because part of that remit was to provide jobs—to grow jobs—perhaps that could be a vehicle going forward. Do you know about that model? Have they—

Yes. So, it would be the same in lots of places, I think, around Wales, where colleges do engage with sort of growth deals, city partnerships, et cetera—

The regional skills partnerships.

The risk is a little bit that that becomes short-term funding. I think some of that would be great, and I think if you were a college, you would really use that funding to incentivise vocational and job-related training. If it's available for one year, two years, it then becomes a little bit harder to retain the staff, harder to recruit staff—

Most funding is one or two years, though, isn't it, unfortunately.

It is, but with a college, you've got an element of, you know your core budgets reasonably there because you know the numbers you've got coming through, but if you know that money is there this year and maybe not there next year at all, that becomes hard. So, our argument around sustainable long-term funding is key.

It could be worth exploring in the context of the 14 to 16 vocational pathways that we've alluded to in the likes of Coleg Sir Gâr and Cardiff and Vale.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll now have some questions from Joel, please.

Thank you, Chair. Thanks ever so much for coming in this morning. I just want to have a—. Well, I've got two questions, really. One is about NEET—not in education, employment or training—and also, then, about junior apprenticeships.

You've mentioned in your earlier evidence the patchiness of support that exists around Wales, really, for them, and I just wanted to get an idea, in your opinion, to what extent is that poor support, that lack of support in some cases, contributing to those people, you know, becoming NEET then, if that makes sense.

I think there's some—. You know, sort of picking up perhaps on the previous comment, where we've seen some real successes within the post-16 sector is in the likes of Cardiff and Vale, which is one of about five colleges that have engaged in the junior apprenticeship programme. But also, as Dave mentioned, the likes of Coleg Sir Gâr, Grŵp Llandrillo Menai, where they have quite extensive 14 to 16 vocational pathway programmes. And I think the evidence of those programmes clearly demonstrates that, for the young people engaging in those programmes who were at risk of becoming NEET, their attendance has significantly improved, but also, at the end of the programme, at 16, there are high levels of progression rates on to further study at post 16 and apprenticeships.

So, I think they've proven to be a very successful programme. I think the challenge, once again, is that it's variable across Wales. So, in some local authorities, there are no 14 to 16 vocational pathways available in partnership with the local authority; in other local authorities, they're just starting to sort of re-emerge at a small scale, but it's a really mixed picture.

Why is that, then?

Unfortunately, it's back to funding again, and that funding is driving behaviours, in that, in some cases, the cost of paying the college to deliver those programmes is passed on to the schools to fund, and there are obviously pressures with their budgets.

It wouldn't be a case of a lack of leadership or a motivation to pursue this on a local level, then.

I think it could be patchy. Where ColegauCymru and the FE sector are looking is that perhaps, in a lot of instances, those vocational programmes are only available to those young people who are at risk of dropping out or who may be demonstrating perhaps challenging behaviour. I think what the sector would like to see is that those vocational options at 14 are available to all learners.

Okay. Hang on. Sorry, it's a loop system, so it feeds back into my hearing aids when I talk and it's quite disconcerting, actually, to hear how you sound, I suppose—not you, as in me; how I sound. Sorry. [Laughter.]

That's okay.

Yes, I had to cover myself there. Sorry, Chair.

If we go on then to junior apprenticeships, obviously we’ve heard, and I infer from yourselves there about the success of them and how, really, we would like to see them rolled out right across the board, and I think you mentioned it in your written evidence. Putting funding aside, what sort of other barriers would there be? You mentioned patchiness again, or the leadership, and maybe the motivation to pursue it on a local level. But should there be someone driving this, do you think? Should the Welsh Government take a more hands-on approach, or should a corporate body get involved, or maybe the WLGA, or something like that? Should they be pushing for this then?

I think it does need leadership to resolve, really. I think, if you’d have said a year ago, I’m not sure many people knew a lot about the junior apprenticeship programme. It’s because it’s now rightly high profile, and we’ve dragged you all, I think, into a college to come and see the provision, but also to see the impact on learners. That’s the thing that strikes you, I think, when you go to the programme, isn’t it, the transformative impact on those learners for whom school wasn’t really working, and so they’ve come in.

And I think one of the things we’re pretty bad at in Wales, sometimes, is scaling up the good. We’ll have lots of these meetings and we’ll say, ‘This is really good’, and then we’ll go away and I don’t think we necessarily scale up particularly well as a country. So, some central leadership and central drive, I think, are absolutely key.

It is a challenge for us to work a bit more closely with the WLGA, actually, to make this happen, and I think it’s local authority leaders and education leads that are key to this as well. Because I know we are leaving funding aside from this conversation, but, in some ways, it will come back to that school budget. If you say to a school, ‘You’ve got 15, 20 children in your school who are having real behavioural challenges, or at risk of dropping out, and we have a solution for them’, but, like I say, if you take three young people out of class, you still have to fund the teacher to teach the rest of the children, and if you then have to pay several thousand pounds on top of that to fund the college provision, it’s difficult on a school budget. So, it does have to be, I think, a centralised pot of money that local authorities can draw on, otherwise it’s not going to work, I don’t think.

But leadership as well—absolutely, leadership. And our role in keeping on promoting the value and the benefits, really.

Thank you.

Thank you. We now have some questions from Cefin, please.

Thank you very much. I’m going to ask this question in Welsh. We have heard evidence from a number of bodies who have mentioned the fact that choices are limited in the post-16 sector through the medium of Welsh. Can you give us an explanation for why that is the case?

I'll start if you want.

Yes.

I think that’s right. And I think there is a real challenge around recruiting staff through the medium of Welsh. I think that’s one of the biggest challenges we face. Where I think we do work very closely with the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol on training staff to really upskill the existing teaching workforce to use the Welsh they have, and to build on that Welsh so they can deliver bilingually, that’s been a real success. I think Coleg Gwent is a good example of where they’ve had a big increase in the level of bilingual provision on some of the vocational programmes that are public service facing, so specifically in the care sector as well. So, there are some good examples of where it’s working well.

I think where the coleg would probably say we’ve done well is the triangle of provision at that lower level, where we’re raising awareness and there’s more Welsh being used in the college, and we’ve got more of a bilingual feel to it, we’ve done very well as a sector. Where I think we haven’t hit the target yet is delivering bilingual and Welsh-medium provision. Part of that is definitely down to workforce. Some of it is learner choice, I think; they come into the college for a different experience, and there’s a conversation there about the opt-in or opt-out when they come in. But some of it is around workforce. So, there’s one college in a strong Welsh-speaking area and I think it’s been out nine times to try and fill the post of a bilingual, I think it was electrical engineering, but I could be wrong. It’s difficult, particularly in the vocational subjects, to get staff who want to leave industry, where they can probably get paid more, to come into a college to deliver, teach, and to do that through the medium of Welsh. So, staff recruitment, I think, right across the board in the education sector, is challenging.

Where I think the positive is, is there’s a really, really strong commitment from the FE sector to do better, and to improve, and to increase. So, it feels like we’re on a bit of journey, I think, on the Welsh medium. We’re absolutely not there yet, but one of the things I’ve been impressed with, working with the sector for a couple of years, is just that level of commitment to try and improve from where we are. But, certainly, we wouldn’t say, I don’t think, here, that everything is where it should be, or where we want it to be, at least.

I think that the learners have benefited through the Coleg Cymraeg Cenedlaethol funding in the vocational programmes, but I think also the English-speaking staff within our organisations have also benefited through having those Welsh-speaking colleagues working amongst them. And that is supporting that growth in staff's use of the Welsh language where they are not first-language Welsh speakers. But I think it's further investment through training to support that move to more bilingual and Welsh-medium provision there. But I think, like Dave said, we are very much on a journey and the sector is very committed to it.

Thank you very much. On to my next question. It is good to hear a positive attitude, that you're on a journey. I'm someone who tries to look for solutions. I know that there are problems, but I want to hear from you about how we can solve some of these challenges, especially in terms of recruitment. Is there some sort of inventive approach that we could find in order to get better partnership in terms of recruiting between different sectors, perhaps? Because there is a Welsh education Bill going through the Senedd at the moment and the aim over the next few years is to grow Welsh-medium education, to see more people learning the language through the education system. So, we need to see that continuity going through to the post-16 sector. So, there will be more pressure in the future to provide more Welsh-medium courses, so we need to find the solutions now for the future. So, do you have any ideas about that, regarding how to achieve this?

Again, perhaps picking up on a theme we talked about earlier on, I wonder if there are opportunities, again, to incentivise collaboration and partnership working between Welsh-medium secondary schools particularly and their local college in supporting, potentially, bilingual delivery but also in supporting that upskilling of staff within colleges.

Yes.

Yes, I'd agree with that, and I think that the continuing investment in the coleg to be able to do that work with colleges in the sector, to be able to upskill existing staff, is absolutely key. And there's some real success there, I think. But it does come back a little bit to recruitment, particularly from industry. Particularly on those vocational courses, you want a lecturer in front of learners who's got that industry experience, and that is a challenge. I don't think it's one that's going to go away easily. But if we can deal with some of the workload issues, potentially, which we are working with the unions on, we could have a different offer, potentially, for people coming in from industry.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. We now have some questions from Natasha, please.

Thank you, Chair. Good morning, both. One issue and area of interest that has come up lots within this committee, particularly in relation to this inquiry, is the barrier of transport being a problem in relation to accessing post-16 education and training. In your experience, how much of a consideration is transport and the cost of travel to learners when choosing whether to attend a college or to take part in an apprenticeship post year 11?

Yes, it's a huge barrier. It's probably the biggest single financial challenge and practical challenge that a lot of learners face. It's a real patchwork of arrangements in Wales at the moment, even within existing colleges where they cut across more than one local authority. So, there isn't a single solution, I don't think. We certainly found this year—. So, we had a big rise in recruitment this year in the college sector, so we're back above pre-COVID levels, and a lot of those learners are actually lower level learners, so there are challenges, but colleges have had to dip very quickly into their reserves,—well, into their financial contingencies fund—to be able to pay for the extra increase in learner travel as a result of those numbers. So, it is a real financial pressure on the sector, but, as for learners, it comes up as one of the biggest challenges, one of the biggest barriers. I don't think we're moving in the right direction, either, on it. I know we've had the £1 scheme—

I was going to ask you about that, so I'm glad you're touching on it.

Yes, I'll come back, but we're not moving in the right direction generally, I think, on this. It's getting harder. Local authorities are retrenching a bit with their own cost pressures, which is probably putting more of a burden on learners and colleges to meet some of those costs.

So, David, can I then ask you: how do we get it right? What can veer us in the right direction, then? If £1 is not the answer to all our prayers, what is?

Well, £1 might be the answer to some of the prayers where we have those buses, and if you could extend it to private bus operators as well. So, lots of colleges will have arrangements with private operators to bus learners into college, but if that costs those learners £3 a day, for example, or £2 a day—. If you had a single system where it's £1, that might help, and extended to trains as well. So, it's not just a bus issue. For lots of colleges, learners come in on the train. I do think that a more consistent, national approach is needed, otherwise you have learners in some parts of Wales able to access provision cheaply or in a more cost-effective way, and others who don't. The £1 won't solve the issue in lots of rural parts of Wales or in the Valleys actually, in lots of places, because those bus operators just don't exist.

Lisa, did you want to say something?

Just to echo, really, what Dave said. Where the transport infrastructure is strong, learners will benefit from that £1 charge, but the reality, I think, for the large proportion of learners and for the majority of colleges, is that, under the current arrangements, they would still need to be funding that private transport through the financial contingency fund or through their core funding.

I'm glad you touched upon FCF, because that's going to be my next question. Your paper actually highlights a number of learners in the colleges who are using the FCF—the financial contingency fund—to be able to eat, in fact, during the college day, and how some colleges have already exhausted their pots for this particular year. So, could you please provide some more information to the committee about how the use of FCF has changed over recent years and what you'd like to see done about the pressures on this particular area of funding?

I think, particularly this year, again, because the sector has seen a huge growth in learner numbers, that fund, at a local level, has come under huge pressure because of increased demand not just for transport, but also for young people needing other financial support. It's my understanding that that fund has remained quite static for a number of years. So, I think the sector has welcomed the review that was undertaken in regard to the education maintenance allowance. So, I think what the sector would be asking really is for the financial contingency fund to be reviewed as well in light of the increased demand, because it's not just young people from deprived backgrounds who are increasingly needing to access that fund, it's other learners as well. So, I think that needs a review.

Okay. Did you want to add anything to that?

No, I think that's right—I think Lisa's spot on, really. And the point is that it isn't just about the poorest learners, it isn't just about the lowest income families; it is lots of people who are struggling with the cost of living amongst other pressures as well. And I think that the FE sector takes a greater proportion of learners from the most deprived backgrounds and the poorest households than, say, compared to school sixth forms, for example. So, there is always going to be that slightly greater pressure on that budget. And it is used for a whole range of things. If you're a learner and you are not able to access that one thing that you absolutely need or you need to work if you have to contribute towards your family's income, it's a real barrier. If we can have a bit more money in the FCF that we can use to just remove those small barriers for learners sometimes, that would make a huge difference to them. And this does contribute to your question, Joel, about the level of NEETs as well—this does make a difference, and once they're in college, we want to keep them, we want to make sure that they're supported.

Okay. So, do you feel that it's actually realistic for the FCF to be used to subsidise transport costs for learners who cannot afford to travel to college? I know that we talked about transport, then we went to eating and now I'm back to transport again, but do you think that that's the way forward—should it be carrying on or not?

It's what we're doing at the moment. I think the key thing with the FCF, I suppose, is that colleges can apply flexibly to respond to their own circumstances and the needs of their own learners, so it's not prescriptive necessarily, is it—you're able to meet the needs of individuals or a particular challenge in the cohort that you have. There is always going to be an element of that, I think, but a nationally funded system around learner travel, which I know feels very difficult to do, is definitely part of the solution to some of the barriers. So, that would take some of that off the FCF and you could actually have a national funded system.

Okay. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. I have some questions around the role of the Welsh Government. So, we've heard how important destinations data is for tertiary education providers to plan future provision and concerns around the lack of timely published data. In your view, who should be responsible for taking forward work on improving data in this area? Should it be the Welsh Government or Medr, for example?

I'm not sure we've got a view on who it should be, but someone has to do it, I think. And it feels to me like that should be Medr's role in terms of the post-16 data; that's what they're set up for. It is a real challenge getting access to timely data. Lisa can talk about her own college in this, but we do put a lot of data into the system. Getting it out quickly enables us to understand, enables colleges to benchmark against each other—where is good quality, what are the challenges that the sector's facing in common? I do think getting some of that data out—. There's also the transition data as well, and I think the other thing I would talk about in this context is—and I think Lisa has her own experience in a tertiary environment—that it is much easier to get that data from schools where there's not that element of competition, potentially, at post-16, so that that transition data comes across much quicker, much easier, and that's really crucial to making sure that you are picking up the needs of individual learners and the challenges they might face, and maybe the top-up learning they might need to go through. If we can get that earlier, that makes a huge difference to transition and retention. I know it's a slightly different question, but I thought it would be useful to put it there.

I think the first thing to say as well is the sector is hugely grateful for the support and the funding that the sector has benefited from over many, many years, particularly as the sector has undergone huge changes. I think our big ask, and we will continue to keep asking for it, is that vocational education and training strategy that really considers what the skills are that the economy needs, and how the qualifications that we are delivering through our colleges and schools are actually supporting the development of those skills to grow the economy. So, I think that remains our big ask from Government.

Thank you. Now, your paper states that not enough urgency has been given to addressing these recommendations made by Dr Hefin David and Sharron Lusher in the summer of 2023. Which recommendations in particular would you like to see more progress on?

I think the one Lisa's just touched on there, with the VET strategy. And I know that, sometimes, there's a frustration in Government that organisations like ours come and say, 'We need a strategy for something,' and the Government will think, 'Well, another strategy, and it'll sit on the shelf and we'll spend 18 months developing it and then someone will tick a box and say, "Well, that's done."' The reason why we think a more coherent, strategic approach is needed is because the VET sector is really fragmented. So, you have colleges, you've got schools, and we spend a lot of time talking about independent training providers, and you've got awarding bodies, you've got Qualifications Wales, Careers Wales—you've got lots of organisations that are all important in this space, and if they're not working to the same end and the same goal, then I think you end up with what we've got at the moment, which is a system we're all trying to make work, and it's quite effective in some parts, but it's not effective for every learner. So, I think if we had that strategy behind it—. It's difficult now because we're getting quite close to an election, but we're certain that one of the things we'd want to see political parties do for 2026 is have that commitment to a strategy. And it isn't just so we can tick a box with our members and say, 'We've got a strategy'; it's because we think it's needed in that coherent piece of work.

On this, you're right—there are loads of strategies, but is this about a new strategy or is it about trying to join up? For example, there's the Careers Wales remit letter, and if it isn't in their remit letter and there's another strategy somewhere else, what's in the remit letter trumps everything else. So, is it about the coherence of a system and the different actors, and how something goes into all of that, and then are you going to get rid of some strategies as well, because otherwise you're just adding all the time, and then you have got a series of doorstops or digital files that are never printed off, apart from for their launch date. So, I'm interested in not just, 'Let's have a strategy', but how you then make it effective and how you then go into what other stakeholders do and how it's coherent across the system, rather than another strategy over here that people can wave and say, 'We've delivered a strategy.'

Can I jump in on what Vaughan just said there, and ask should that strategy focus on academic routes too, not just vocational routes, because that's something we've heard time and again?

I think we're arguing for a vocational education and training strategy, because we think that's the bit of the system that lacks that coherence and needs quite a focus. I'll let Lisa come in on this because of her own experience as a principal, but, just on that, a really good example would be that Qualifications Wales, as an arm's-length regulator, has the power to do certain things. Now, if they make, as they have in the past with some qualifications, some vocational qualifications, put in what we would argue is too much academic content that is inappropriate for the learners who are coming through, that actually makes it very difficult for those learners to progress into work. And we've seen the impact on health and social care, for example, in recent years. So, this is why it matters, I think.

So, we have that piece of paper, additional file, whatever it is, but we're all clear about what we're trying to achieve. And part of that will come down to data as well. So, there's a really good example in Australia of the way they collect data to understand labour market needs. That has to be part of this as well. I don't think we do that particularly well in Wales, around understanding what are the future labour market trends, what are the barriers in different sectors and occupations. I think there's a piece of work around that, so that that labour market intelligence sits alongside a vocational strategy. So, I get your concerns and your reluctance around a strategy, because we've had this conversation many times, but I think this part of the system isn't coherent, and it does matter, then, for the remit letters for Medr, for Careers Wales, whoever it happens to be. I think it does matter.

I think the Chair's point about whether it makes sense to have a vocational strategy or a post-16 strategy—. Because, you know, Universities Wales have written in talking about application data and that the gap between our least advantaged and most advantaged quintiles is widening not lessening in terms of HE participation. And HE participation, some of it takes place in further education as well, through degree apprenticeship programmes and others, and it's good to hear you make the point earlier that there are different routes to higher education. I'm trying to understand whether, if we're looking for coherence, it would make more sense to have someone that goes through the post-16, about how you have different routes and to understand that coherence, so that Medr don't have one strategy for further and a different one for higher, as opposed to how you get learners to the right point in the system and get the different pieces to actually interlock with each other, rather than pretend that they're in entirely different universes.

Universities do that as well. So, I think there is a coherent pathway that we could be thinking about there. I think focusing on vocational makes more sense. I think that's the bit of the system where it's weakest in terms of the understanding of parents and stakeholders. So, I think that's where we probably do need to focus. I understand the point around wouldn't it make sense to have a broader, but, actually, we think this is the area where you could make greatest progress and fill some more gaps quickest.

I certainly take on board the point that, in terms of the socioeconomic cohort, FE does most of the heavy lifting; that's recognised.

Could I just add one small point?

Yes.

I assume any vocational strategy would start earlier than 16—14 to 19 pathways, that that would be the kind of strategy, yes?

Yes.

Perhaps if I can come in there as well, I think where ColegauCymru and the sector is coming from in the context of the strategy is that we hear regularly from employers that they don't have a workforce that have the skills that they need. I think part of that is ensuring that we have vocational qualifications that deliver the skills that employers need for a buoyant and vibrant economy. I think one of the challenges with our qualifications currently is often the size of the qualifications. Employers need a workforce that they can call on to meet demand, and I think one thing that struck us, certainly when we went to Helsinki as part of a Taith visit, is that flexibility that they have in Finland in regard to vocational qualifications, and, through the microcredential approach to training, that there are far more fleet-of-foot mechanisms by which individuals, young people and adults, can upskill to be able, then, to progress into the workforce. So, I think that's the context in which the sector is coming from as well, that, currently, the qualifications are not really meeting the demands of industry and it's how do we change that. And I think a strategy is a key driver in supporting that work.

And just on the 14 to 16 as well, absolutely, that 14 to 16 bit of the strategy is really important, as is adult participation as well. There is an opportunity with the VCSEs. We don't think they will solve all the problems, but if they are delivered in partnership with colleges and at industry-standard facilities with industry-qualified lecturers what an inspiring opportunity it could be for those young people. So that's where we need to solve some of the transport issues and some of the resourcing issues. So, yes, starting at 14, maybe a bit earlier—absolutely—but all the way through to adults as well, because the needs of the workforce are changing so quickly, the economy changes, that we can't just pretend that we can frontload all spend onto 18-year-olds; we've got to have that adult provision as well.

Yes, okay.

Thank you. Thank you for joining us this morning. We really appreciate your time. You'll be sent a transcript for checking in due course. Thank you, again.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I will now move on to item 4, which is papers to note. We have 11 papers to note today, the full details of which are set out on the agenda and in the paper pack. Are Members content to note the papers together? Yes. Fab.

Moving on to item 5, I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(ix), that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of today's session and for item 1 of next week's meeting. Are Members content? Yes. Great. We will now move to private.