Contact: Felicity Roe; email [email protected]; telephone 01962 846374; and Melanie Saunders; e-mail [email protected]; telephone 01962 846364

1 Summary

1.1 This briefing note sets out the issues that will be addressed in planning for the transfer of 16-19 responsibilities from the LSC to local authorities from 2010. It highlights some of the funding and planning issues which will need to be considered on a local, regional and sub-regional basis.

1.2 In addition, the note confirms that, the authority has submitted to GOSE a proposal that the sub-regional group in which Hampshire would want to operate post-LSC will be Hampshire, Southampton, Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight. This has been agreed informally by the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) and will be ratified through a formal decision in due course.

2 Background information

2.1 On 17^th March 2008 the DCSF and the DIUS published the White Paper Raising Expectations : Enabling the System to Deliver, in order to consult on the implementation of proposed reforms to 16-19 and post-19 education and training. That consultation concluded on 6^th June and 443 written responses were received.

2.2 The reforms are built upon a number of principles :-

· Provision is driven by learner choice and funding follows the learner

· Local Authorities will be the strategic lead for outcomes and achievement 0-19

· Local authorities will form sub-regional planning and commissioning groups based upon the travel-to-learn patterns of young people.

· A Young People's Learning agency (YPLA) will be established to support local authorities in meeting their new responsibilities.

· A strong, demand-led Further Education (FE) sector will deliver post-19 skills funded through the Skills Funding Agency (SFA)

· There will be a national funding formula applied at least to post-16 and probably to post-14 provision.

2.3 These reforms sit alongside other related reforms to 14-19 including the introduction of Diplomas and Functional Skills, the roll-out of entitlement for all young people and the raising of the participation age (RPA) to 17 by 2013 and to 18 by 2015.

3 Activity to date

3.1 On 22^nd May, a paper outlining the issues, especially the funding issues, relating to the transfer of 16-19 responsibilities to the local authority was submitted to the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education). The report also sought the views of the Executive Lead Member in responding to the consultation.

3.2 A detailed written response to the consultation was submitted to the DCSF by Hampshire County Council (HCC) on Friday 6^th June. Hampshire Schools Forum also submitted an independent response. The text of HCC's response was shared with Hampshire principals and Hampshire secondary headteachers who were invited to comment and, subsequent to the close of the consultation, with the Children and Young People's Partnership Management Board (CYPPMB).

3.3 A steering group has been established for the South-East region with representation from local authorities in the South-East and from the South-East regional LSC. This group has begun to identify work streams which will feed into local planning, for example provision for learners with learning difficulties and disabilities (LLDD).

3.4 On 30^th July 2008 the DCSF and the DIUS published an Update and Next Steps document in response to the consultation on, Raising Expectation: Enabling the System to Deliver. Whilst this document does not provide answers to the whole range of questions concerning implementation of the reforms, it does offer some further information and an indicative timescale.

4 The role of Sub-Regional Groups

4.1 Local authorities are expected to form sub-regional groupings through which to plan and commission provision. The mechanisms for carrying out this activity are, as yet, unclear but the groupings are expected to be formed in response to two key criteria :-

· The first criterion is a sensible consideration of the travel-to-learn patterns of young people in the area and other existing sub-regional groupings.

· Subsequently, groupings will need to demonstrate that they can develop governance and decision making mechanisms to which all partners are committed.

4.2 The intention of these sub-regional groupings is to make commissioning decisions about individual providers which ensure that the new duties to provide learning places up to 19 (and up to 25 for LLDD) which will sit with local authorities can be fulfilled.

4.3 Local authorities were required to submit their proposed sub-regional groupings to their Government Office by 26^th September 2008 and by the end of the calendar year 2008 they will be expected to provide evidence of how these groupings will operate. The DCSF will approve the proposed groupings.

4.4 Hampshire County Council is bordered by thirteen other local authorities and young people travel across the county boundaries in both directions in order to access learning. However, the greatest percentage of two way cross-border "traffic" is with the following authorities :-

4.5 There are a number of other South-East authorities from which small numbers of learners travel into Hampshire to access 16-18 learning but not to which learners from Hampshire travel in the opposite direction. Portsmouth and Southampton have significant numbers of learners travelling into and out of the authority but almost all of this cross-border "traffic" is with Hampshire. There are, however, individual colleges for whom a significant percentage of learners are resident in another local authority.

4.6 Sitting above sub-regional groupings will be a regional planning group, co-chaired by the Regional Development Agency (RDA), which will be tasked with agreeing the aggregated plans of the sub-regional groupings and ensuring their coherence. This regional planning group will also identify and commission any specialist provision which may be needed on a regional or national basis.

4.7 In a joint submission with Portsmouth, Southampton and the Isle of Wight, Hampshire has proposed a sub-regional grouping the will encompass these authorities. The sub-regional grouping will jointly plan provision, but each authority will retain the responsibility to `commission' the provision from the 16-18 sector within its boundaries. This submission has been agreed informally by the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) and the Leader has been kept informed. It will be subject to a formal decision in due course.

5 Funding implications for the local authority

5.1 The response to the consultation gives no further detail on the proposed approach to funding local authorities. If anything it reinforces the view that there will be no budget and no flexibility for local needs and delivery as it states that "Local Authorities will commission learner numbers and type of provision from each institution, which will drive the allocation through the funding formula."

5.2 In the response to the consultation question on support for a national 14-19 funding system 70% of the 326 respondents agreed, 9% disagreed and 21% were unsure. The last Formula Review Group (FRG) meeting in July brought forward modelling for the impact on schools in authorities of the possible changes, the variances were very significant for schools and local authorities. The concerns are that funding will be redistributed between schools and across local authorities, and that the application of the national formula could mean a net change to the overall finding pot for 14-16 education.

5.3 The response to the consultation gives no further detail on the capital proposals nor on the funding mechanisms for the LLDD proposals.

5.4 An early exercise will be undertaken over the next few months to gain a full understanding of the current LSC funding for 16-18 in Hampshire to establish a baseline and understand the new processes we will be working with.

6 Planning implications for the local authority

6.1 The assumption of powers and duties relating to post-16 provision has fundamental and far-reaching implications for the local authority. As well as the significant impact on finance, other departments of the LA will need to undertake early planning in order to adapt to the range of additional responsibilities.

6.2 The Hampshire sixth form college estate alone houses over 14,000 learners with a further 1,500 in Hampshire school sixth forms and nearly 22,000 in Hampshire FE colleges. The local LSC has significant expertise in terms of planning and commissioning places as well as in capital planning where Hampshire and the Isle of Wight LSC are well-regarded. The LA has worked closely with LLSC colleagues over recent years on a range of capital projects.

6.3 Colleges are independent corporations and negotiate pay and conditions with their teaching and other staff on an individual basis within national guidelines. Hampshire Conditions of Service Working Party (CoSWP) have already expressed concerns about the implications this may have for teachers who are subject to far more favourable terms that prevail in most colleges by the imposition of national terms and conditions for teachers. This suggests a considerable future work stream for the Education Personnel Service (EPS) and the HCC Human Resources (HR) department.

6.4 Learners are free to select which college they wish to attend regardless of location and each college selects students according to different criteria, depending on the kind of institution and the range of courses on offer. Learners with LLDD are "self-referring" and the LSC has a duty to provide appropriate provision. Individual colleges are not, however, under the same obligation and are sometimes unable to meet the complex needs which students have. The transfer of the duty to provide a place in education or training for 16-19 year olds (up to 25 with LLDD) not only transfers to the LA but by 2013 this duty will extend to all 17 year olds and to all 18 year olds by 2015. The implications for SEN , both planning and funding, as well as for the admissions team will need to be considered in preparing for transfer.

6.5 The data requirements of colleges and of the LA in order to monitor performance and commission places will be considerable. 14-19 data has always been a challenge and tracking students from pre to post-16 provision remains very difficult. The LA will need to work closely with both local and regional LSC data teams in order to understand the current data requirements and identify future need in terms of the performance management of colleges and the commissioning of provision.

6.6 There are of course further, unquantifiable training implications particularly in terms of post-16 qualifications, curricula, assessment, accountability, teaching and learning and philosophy. Credibility with the county's colleges will need to be established early if the LA is to influence performance and practice post-16 in the way it seeks to do pre-16.

7 The timescale for implementation

7.1 The transfer of responsibilities is divided into three key phases. Phase 1, "Tracking" runs from September 2008 to August 2009. The LLSC and the LA have agreed a mechanism for the involvement of the LA in the commissioning process for post-16 provision. The LSC will begin planning for 2009/2010 during September `08 and will be undertaking dialogue with providers from early in the Spring Term. The LA will be engaged in this planning process through attending key strategic meetings: - the following commissioning round (in Autumn 2009 for September 2010) will be the responsibility of local authorities.

7.2 Phase 2, "Transition," runs from September 2009 to August 2010. By this time, sub-regional groups must be established with planning and governance arrangements in place. Some LSC staff are expected to be working either alongside or within local authorities and the commissioning round for 2010/2011, the first year for which LAs will be responsible, begins in September 2009.

7.3 Phase 3, "Go-Live," commences in September 2010, by which time Regional and sub-regional structures must be in place and relevant LSC staff should have transferred to local authorities. Pending royal assent in October 2009, appropriate powers and duties transfer from the LSC to local authorities from 1^st September 2010.

84R190908