The Work Programme isn't inspected by Ofsted, or anyone else. Its predecessors, New Deal and FND, were, but either the government had unlimited faith in the power of profit, or the providers made it a condition of taking part, and there is no inspection of the WP. However, the Learning and Skills provision, dealing with apprenticeships and "employability", does fall under Ofsted's remit. It's called Work-based Learning, and the funding comes from the Skills Funding Agency. And the latest inspection of A4e pronounces the company "Inadequate". You can download it here.
A couple of points about Ofsted first. Teachers maintain that the new boss, Wilshaw, ordered that all grades should be lowered, so what had previously been "satisfactory" should now be "inadequate" - I don't know how true that is. And the reports are couched in very careful language, so it's sometimes hard to see why an institution should be blasted. But with all that in mind, there is no doubt that A4e has performed badly.
Three previous inspections said they were only "satisfactory". This latest took place early in February, and noted that things had not improved. The summary says: "This provider is inadequate because -
- Leaders and managers have failed to ensure that a systematic approach routinely improves outcomes and the quality of provision in A4e learning and skills programmes. Three previous inspections noted that arrangements to ensure or improve the quality of provision were in development; revised quality systems are not having a significant impact.
- Outcomes on the apprenticeship programme that A4e has delivered for many years have had consistently inadequate outcomes. Since the previous inspection almost half of the nearly 2500 apprentices who left the scheme did so without their main qualification.
- Too much teaching, learning and assessment is uninspiring or mechanistic. Performance in subject areas has rarely risen above satisfactory or requiring improvement in 10 years of inspection.
- A4e’s self-assessment and quality improvement processes are overly complex. Judgements, especially for learners’ outcomes, are too generous. The process for observing of teaching, learning and assessment is not effective enough to drive up standards."
It's necessary to read the whole report, but one or two things stand out. Under Outcomes for Learners we're told that A4e had outcomes 25% below those of its subcontractors, who deliver 20% of the provision. Later, the report says that "Apparently high-performing subcontractors, working with programmes for unemployed people, will not be working with A4e in the near future." All the grades, for subject areas and for general quality and effectiveness are either 3 (requires improvement) or 4 (inadequate). And note above that they say that "Performance in subject areas has rarely risen above satisfactory or requiring improvement in 10 years of inspection." Overall, it's inadequate.
Suppose this was a school which Ofsted was inspecting. Do you think it would be allowed to stay open?
