The deal is done. The machinery of government reforms leaves 16-19 education where it belongs – in a department for education.
We must not forget that the Spending Review announced extra resources for post-16 education and skills, with up to £1.2bn extra per year promised.
Much of this has been allocated to 16-19 education but a better deal is still needed. And the Autumn Budget, just short of three months away, is the place for the Government to signal a better deal is on its way.
Ask 1: Raise the rate
The first ask of the Sixth Form Colleges Association can be summed up in three words: raise the rate.
Raising the rate of core funding is the only way to ensure that funding is made available in a way that enables colleges and schools to tailor resources to meet the individual needs of young people.
Linking funding to favoured subjects or qualifications has no impact on the vast majority of students. Politicians have targeted funding at a range of eye-catching policy initiatives over the last decade, but the mundane reality is that institutions simply need a higher rate of core funding and the freedom to get on with the business of delivery.
Recent increases to 16-19 funding have been very welcome, but the rate of £5,105 per student is still not enough to ensure that all young people receive the world-class education they deserve. That’s why our primary ask in all fiscal events is to raise the rate - it is impossible to overstate the importance of this message.
Ask 2: Places and buildings for 16-19-year-olds to reduce NEET
Our second ask has two parts.
The first part is linked to revenue funding. The demographic boom in the 16-19 age group has led to a sharp increase in student numbers, particularly in colleges.
But the lagged funding model and annual uncertainty that surrounds in-year growth arrangements mean that many colleges face an increase in unfunded costs and uncertainty over how they will be met.
The government should make a long-term commitment to meeting these additional costs in-year, without making reductions to other elements of 16-19 funding.
The second part is linked to capital funding. Rising demographics mean that colleges are squeezing more and more students into already overcrowded classrooms or turning students away.
In June, the government made a commitment in its Industrial Strategy to make available “£375 million of capital investment to support post-16 capacity to accommodate additional learners entering the system”.
This is very positive news, but at the time of writing, we are no closer to understanding how and when colleges can access this funding. The government should accelerate this announcement and ensure that if bids are required, colleges are given more time to navigate a much more streamlined assessment process.
Sixth form colleges face the additional challenge of being excluded from meaningful formulaic capital funding.
They are currently unable to access formulaic capital funding through School Condition Allocations (which is limited to larger multi-academy trusts) or the FE Capital Transformation Fund (which is limited to FE colleges). Addressing this anomaly should also be a priority.
Providing more funded places for 16-19-year-olds and the classrooms to teach them in will be essential if the government is to achieve its key ambition of reducing NEET (young people not in education, employment or training).
We know that reducing the number of 16-24-year-olds who are NEET is the top priority of Pat McFadden, the new Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.
But it must also be a priority for Bridget Phillipson, the continuing Secretary of State for Education.
Enabling more 16-19-year-olds to participate in full-time further education will reduce NEET, which in turn will benefit both young people and the economy.
Ask 3: Adequate funding for 16-19-year-olds with additional needs
Our third ask is linked to the system for funding students with additional needs - this requires immediate attention.
The government should support a move to allocate all funding for students with high needs directly to institutions, with increases in student numbers fully funded in-year. This is essential if we are to ensure that the most vulnerable students receive the support they need and receive it in a timely manner.
The growth in SEND students that do not meet the high needs threshold is something that also must be addressed. The government should explore the introduction of a third disadvantage funding block in the 16-19 funding formula, specifically for these students.
It is important that the forthcoming schools and post-16 white papers provide a joined-up policy framework for the future, informed by the final report of the Curriculum and Assessment Review. But that has to be accompanied by meaningful and sustained investment in 16-19 education to ensure that every young person receives the education and support they need to flourish.
James Kewin is Deputy Chief Executive, Sixth Form Colleges Association
Our regular guest policy views are written by senior leaders and thinkers. They aim to stimulate discussion, identify issues and contribute to debate on post-16 education, skills and employment policy. The opinions expressed are the authors' own and do not necessarily express the views of the Campaign for Learning