Ofsted

Ofsted
Education, Learning and Skills Statement
Kingston upon Hull
2015 – 2016

Education, Learning and
Skills Statement
Kingston upon Hull
2015 – 2016
TECHNICAL REPORT: Ofsted
REVISION HISTORY
Date of this revision: January 2016
Date of next revision: January 2017
Revision
date
January
2015
January
2016
Previous
revision
date
Version
no.
N/A Version 1 N/A
January
2015
Version 2
Summary of changes
1. Updated Ofsted ratings for providers assessed in
2015.
2. The inclusion of Ofsted ratings for sub-contracted
provision in Hull.
Page 2 of 17

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 4
2. THE NATIONAL PICTURE ...................................................................................................... 5
2.1 General further education college performance ................................................................ 5
2.2 Independent learning provider performance ...................................................................... 6
2.3 Apprenticeships and traineeships ..................................................................................... 7
2.4 Special schools ................................................................................................................. 8
2.5 High needs post 16 ........................................................................................................... 9
2.6 National findings and local implications ............................................................................. 9
3. THE LOCAL PICTURE .......................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Overall provision ............................................................................................................. 10
3.2 Ofsted inspection ratings for Further Education College provision in Hull ........................ 11
3.3 Ofsted inspection ratings for 6 th Form College provision in Hull....................................... 11
3.4 Ofsted inspection ratings for 6 th Form academies or schools in Hull ............................... 11
3.5 Ofsted inspection ratings for independent providers operating in Hull ............................. 12
3.6 Ofsted inspection results for sub-contracted providers operating in Hull ......................... 13
3.7 Special Schools .............................................................................................................. 13
4. BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 16
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Proportion of providers nationally that are good or outstanding for overall
effectiveness at their most recent inspection (%)……………………………………...... 5
Figure 2 Hull based post 16 training provision Ofsted ratings at a glance……………………… 10
Figure 3 Detailed Ofsted ratings for Further Education College provision in Hull.……………... 11
Figure 4 Detailed Ofsted ratings for 6 th Form College provision in Hull.………………………… 11
Figure 5 Detailed Ofsted ratings for 6 th Form academies or schools in Hull……………………. 12
Figure 6 Detailed Ofsted inspection ratings for independent providers operating in Hull……... 12
Figure 7 Detailed Ofsted inspection results for sub-contracted providers operating in Hull…... 15
Figure 8 Detailed Ofsted results of Hull based specialist post 16 providers……………………. 13
Page 3 of 17

1. INTRODUCTION
This document provides Hull City Council and its internal and external stakeholders with an
overview of how education, learning and skills providers within the Hull local authority boundary
are performing against the Ofsted inspection framework.
The providers listed in this document are those that receive public funding from either the
Education Funding Agency or the Skills Funding Agency. The report does not include details of
commercially financed providers or employers with accredited provision.
It contains an overview of Ofsted’s Annual Report on further education and skills and sets this in
context against the local profile of post 16 training provision in Hull allowing readers to gain an
understanding of how Hull is performing against national statistical norms.
It is the second iteration of this document and differs from the original published in January 2015
(Version 1) in two ways:
1. It contains updated Ofsted ratings of Hull based post 16 providers reflecting the outcomes of
recent inspections for the following institutions:
Chamber Training
Hull College
Humber Learning Consortium
HYA Training
Wilberforce College
2. It also contains details of sub-contracted post 16 provision. Sub-contracted provision is
where providers are contracted to deliver on behalf of another organisation. The quality of
this sub-contracted provision is judged by the Ofsted rating of the provider issuing the subcontract
or “prime contract holder”. A detailed breakdown of Ofsted results for the prime
contract holders sub-contracting provision to Hull based post 16 providers is included in this
report.
Page 4 of 17

2. THE NATIONAL PICTURE
2.1 General further education college performance
For the last two years, Ofsted has reported improvements in the Further Education (FE) sector.
This year however, the rate of improvement has slowed and in the case of general FE colleges,
there has been an overall decline in standards. Across England, 77% of all general FE colleges
are good or outstanding compared with 79% last year. This is because one in three of the 48
general FE colleges inspected this year dropped at least one grade. Of particular concern was
that only 34% of 16 to 19 study programmes were found to be good or outstanding.
On this basis, Ofsted will be carrying out a thematic survey of the Study Programme over the next
year to explore the issue in depth. An influencing factor here is the number of learners who had to
study English and mathematics in order to have their study funded rose dramatically and because
many colleges did not have an adequate strategy to respond, the quality of teaching declined. At
the same time, almost half of these colleges were operating a deficit budget, in part because the
sector lost almost 267,000 learners in a single year.
Figure 1: Proportion of providers nationally that are good or outstanding for overall effectiveness at their most
recent inspection (%). Source: Ofsted.
Ofsted cite the quality of apprenticeships remaining of particular concern. Although Ofsted
acknowledges that there continues to be some excellent practice and cite the construction and
engineering sectors as being examples, almost half the provision inspected this year was judged to
be less than good.
Page 5 of 17

The main findings of the programmes on offer were that they failed to give apprentices the skills
and knowledge employers want. Too many low skilled roles were being classed as
apprenticeships and used to accredit the established skills of employees who had been in a job for
some time. In some cases, apprentices were not even aware that the course they were on was an
apprenticeship. Despite the investment by government, the number of 16 to 18 year olds being
taken on as apprentices is almost as low today as it was a decade ago. In 2014/15, 43% of places
went to apprentices over the age of 25. Ofsted consider that this may be due to the fact that many
schools are not promoting them widely as an option for pupils of all abilities.
Eleven University Technical Colleges (UTCs) have been inspected to date, of which six were good
or outstanding. Ofsted will report in more detail on these new providers in future annual reports.
2.2 Independent learning provider performance
Inspections of independent learning providers this year have shown that the key factor in providing
good-quality apprenticeships in these providers is effective management. Ofsted cite that good
managers give priority to monitoring apprentices’ progress with their employers and provide highquality
training and timely assessments to ensure that apprentices achieve within the agreed
timescales. In the 45 providers judged to require improvement and the 12 judged as inadequate
for their apprenticeship provision this year, the training typically failed to help apprentices develop
the higher-level employability skills and vocational knowledge they need to progress in their jobs.
Nationally, independent learning providers have seen a drop in their learner numbers, particularly
from the over 25 age group. One of the reasons that independent learning providers are improving
their inspection profile and continuing to attract learners is that weaker providers that are less agile
and able to adapt are weeded out quickly. Where independent learning providers consistently
perform below expectations, they are very likely to have their funding stopped and to cease
operating as FE and skills providers.
Part of the independent learning providers sector is made up of employers. Ofsted notes in its
annual report that some employer providers maintain very high standards and that the quality of
the resources available to their learners and the prospects they give young people are particularly
impressive. 94% of learners studying with employer providers are in good or outstanding provision
compared with 84% studying with independent learning providers.
Page 6 of 17

This is countered however by underperformance in some parts of the sector. 46% of employer
providers inspected this year were found to be less than good. Ofsted’s apprenticeship inspection
report showed that too many employers, particularly from the retail and care industries were
misusing apprenticeships to fund training for existing, older employees.
2.3 Apprenticeships and traineeships
Based on findings from this reporting period, Ofsted conclude that Apprenticeships have not
sufficiently matched the skills needed by employers. The CBI’s survey of employers found that
20% of employers had difficulty recruiting apprentices with STEM skills and knowledge. This figure
has increased from 12% two years ago. 36% anticipated struggling to fill STEM apprenticeship
vacancies in the next three years.
Apprenticeships should be an aspirational choice for many young people but this is being held
back by the weak quality of much provision. 49% of the apprenticeship programmes inspected this
year were judged to be either “requires improvement” or “inadequate”. Ofsted’s latest report on
apprenticeships found that they did not provide enough high quality training that stretched the
apprentices and improved their capabilities.
Since 2006, the number of new apprentices over 25 has risen dramatically while the number of
apprentices aged 16 to 18 has hardly changed. The weaker provision often had a high proportion
of apprentices over the age of 25 and providers did not make enough effort to recruit younger
apprentices. These older, unqualified employees were more skilled than younger employees and
therefore easier and quicker to assess and qualify. These employers often lacked commitment to
the underlying principles of apprenticeships and did not invest sufficiently in the off-the-job training
needed to raise apprentices’ skills.
High quality apprenticeships were typically found by inspectors in industries that have a long
established reliance on employing apprentices to develop their future workforce such as the motor
vehicle, construction and engineering industries. Most of the apprentices in these sectors were
aged 16 to 24.
It is Ofsted’s view that in too many of the FE and skills providers assessed, progression through
the apprenticeship route was found to be weak. In these cases, traineeships appeared to have
little success in fulfilling their primary role of being a stepping stone to an apprenticeship or other
sustained employment.
Page 7 of 17

Apprenticeships were generally poorly promoted and too few young people in these providers
progressed from level 2 apprenticeships, or other vocational training, to advanced apprenticeships.
Providers often did not have a clear rationale for the apprenticeship provision they offered. Very
few providers had easy access to coherent and up to date information to enable them to plan
apprenticeship provision to meet local, regional and national priorities on economic growth, skill
shortages or youth employment rates. The quality of information made available to providers by
Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) varied considerably. Independent learning providers in
particular had little contact with LEPs to support strategic planning for their apprenticeship
provision.
Over the last three years the proportion of apprentices who successfully completed their
apprenticeship has fallen. In some providers where success rates had fallen, leadership and
management was weak leading to negative factors such as:
Disruption of training provision and staffing because of mergers and acquisitions by
providers
Recruitment of high numbers of apprentices in companies that had no experience of
apprenticeships
Strategic decisions taken with insufficient scrutiny or oversight to expand apprenticeships
and operate out of the local area
Poor management control of subcontracted provision
Ineffective training and assessment of English and maths provision.
Where government reforms to apprenticeships are concerned, Ofsted cite that they must focus on
the quality, rigour and profile of all apprenticeships and not on simply increasing the numbers of
apprentices.
2.4 Special schools
For this reporting period, Ofsted find that standards in special schools remain high but the
achievement of disabled pupils and those with special educational needs in GCSEs, for those who
attain this level, is lower in the North and Midlands. This is even though the proportions of those
who have been identified as having a special educational need are very similar across the country.
Ofsted is currently consulting on a new inspection framework focused on disabled children and
young people and those who have special educational needs. These inspections will identify what
local areas are doing well in identifying and meeting needs but also whether there are local areas
that should take action to deliver better outcomes.
Page 8 of 17

2.5 High needs post 16
Over this reporting period, Ofsted visited 26 providers to look at the early implementation of the
Children and Families Act 2014 on the educational experience of high needs learners in a small
sample of FE and skills providers.
They found that the sharing of important information between these providers and health and
social care providers was fragmented. This situation weakens the effectiveness of support since
the providers are not as prepared as they should be to meet the needs of their learners. As a
result, too little provision focused on preparing learners with night needs for adult life.
Only four of the providers stood out as having exemplary study programmes that prepared learners
very well for their next stage of education, employment and independent living.
Nationally across both schools and FE and skills, the investment in provision for learners with high
needs was nearly £5.2 billion in 2014/15. Ofsted express concern that neither local authorities nor
the providers and specialist services visited by their inspectors were able to show that they
evaluated whether their portion of this investment was delivering the desired impact on the lives of
these learners.
2.6 National findings and local implications
Ofsted summarise that England’s education presents a varied picture and that increasingly, the
quality of education for children before the age of 11 is high, but from age 11 onwards, the picture
is less promising. Secondary schools have not improved as quickly as primary schools and
increasingly general FE colleges are struggling. They cite that these weaknesses are having the
biggest impact in the North and Midlands. As a result, destinations for young people leaving
schools and colleges in these areas are not as positive and a higher proportion of young people go
on to take up apprenticeships. However as shown by their inspections, the quality of the
apprenticeships on offer is often poor.
From September 2015, Ofsted have introduced the new common inspection framework. This
aligns inspection across all the educational remits Ofsted inspects. Inspections are consistent and
comparable, making the same judgments in the same language across all phases and types of
education.
Page 9 of 17

New short inspections for good schools and FE and skills providers have been designed to focus
on the quality of leadership and the capacity of leaders to drive improvement. They emphasise
honest, challenging and professional dialogue. They also start from the assumption that the
school or provider is still good. But because inspections are more frequent it also means that,
where there is decline, it will be identified more quickly so that improvement can start earlier.
3. THE LOCAL PICTURE
3.1 Overall provision
Post 16 education, learning and skills provision in Hull is good and fairs well when compared
against national statistics.
Hull’s post 16 training provision Ofsted ratings (at last inspection) at a glance:
24% are rated as outstanding (9 out of 37)
76% are rated as good (28 out of 37)
Hull has no post 16 providers that are rated as either “Requires Improvement” or “Inadequate”.
9 (24%)
Outstanding
Good
Requires improvement
Inadequate
28 (76%)
Figure 2: Hull based post 16 training provision Ofsted ratings at a glance.
Page 10 of 17

These statistics are an improvement on those in the previous version of this document (2013/14)
when four providers were classed as “Requires Improvement”. Of these four, Wilberforce College,
HYA Training and Chamber Training three were inspected in 2015 and improved their rating from
“Requires Improvement” to “Good”. One provider, Prospect Training, which was rated as
“Requires Improvement” ceased trading in 2015 and is not included in the statistics.
3.2 Ofsted inspection ratings for Further Education
College provision in Hull
Figure 3 below gives a detailed breakdown of Ofsted ratings for Further Education College
provision in Hull.
PROVIDER
East Riding
College (Hull
campus)
Hull College
Last
Inspected
February
2011
November
2015
OVERALL
INSPECTION
OUTCOME
Outcomes
for
learners
Teaching,
learning and
assessment
Leadership
and
management
Good Good Good Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Figure 3: Detailed Ofsted ratings for Further Education College provision in Hull.
3.3 Ofsted inspection ratings for 6 th Form College
provision in Hull
Figure 4 below gives a detailed breakdown of Ofsted ratings for 6 th Form College provision in Hull.
PROVIDER
Wilberforce
College
Wyke College
Last
Inspected
May
2015
October
2013
OVERALL
INSPECTION
OUTCOME
Outcomes
for
learners
Figure 4: Detailed Ofsted ratings for 6 th Form College provision in Hull.
Teaching,
learning and
assessment
Leadership
and
management
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
3.4 Ofsted inspection ratings for 6 th Form academies or
schools in Hull
Figure 5 below gives a detailed breakdown of Ofsted ratings for 6 th Form academies or schools in
Hull.
Page 11 of 17

PROVIDER
Archbishop
Sentamu
Academy
Sirius Academy
St. Mary’s
College
Last
Inspected
February
2014
March
2014
July
2010
OVERALL
INSPECTION
OUTCOME
Outcomes
for
learners
Figure 5: Detailed Ofsted ratings for 6 th Form academies or schools in Hull.
Teaching,
learning and
assessment
Leadership
and
management
Good Good Good Outstanding
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Outstanding Outstanding Good Outstanding
3.5 Ofsted inspection ratings for independent providers
operating in Hull
Figure 6 below gives a detailed breakdown of Ofsted ratings for independent providers operating
in Hull.
PROVIDER
3aaa (Aspire
Achieve Advance
Ltd)
Aspire-Igen
Chamber
Training
(Humber) Ltd
HETA Ltd
Hull Business
Training
(Short inspection)
Hull Training
Humber Learning
Consortium
HYA Training
InTraining Group
Ltd
Kaplan
(Short inspection)
McArthur Dean
Training
YH Training
Last
Inspected
October
2014
March
2014
January
2015
November
2013
October
2015
June
2012
October
2015
May
2015
July
2009
December
2015
December
2012
March
2013
OVERALL
INSPECTION
OUTCOME
Outcomes
for
learners
Figure 6: Ofsted inspection ratings for independent providers operating in Hull.
Teaching,
learning and
assessment
Leadership
and
management
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Page 12 of 17

3.6 Ofsted inspection results for sub-contracted providers
operating in Hull
Where a provider delivers on behalf of another organisation their provision is classed as being subcontracted.
If it is the case that the provider being sub-contracted does not have its own contract
with a funding body, the quality of that provision is determined by the Ofsted rating of the
organisation doing the sub-contracting. Figure 7 on page 15 gives a detailed breakdown of Ofsted
results for providers delivering in Hull on a sub-contracted basis and the organisations to which
they are sub-contracted.
3.7 Special Schools
Hull has three special schools delivering post 16 education, learning and skills:
Ganton Special School
Frederick Holmes
Tweendykes School
As is the case with its mainstream provision, Hull is strong in the area of post 16 provision in
special schools and enjoys excellent specialist education, learning and skills provision. Figure 8
below gives a detailed breakdown of Ofsted results for Hull’s special schools.
The Ofsted ratings for Hull’s special schools has not changed since the last version of this report
(2013/14) as none have been inspected during this reporting period.
PROVIDER
Ganton Special
School
Frederick
Holmes
Tweendykes
School
Last
Inspected
October
2011
September
2013
December
2012
OVERALL
INSPECTION
OUTCOME
Outcomes for
learners
Figure 8: Detailed Ofsted results of Hull based specialist post 16 providers.
Teaching,
learning and
assessment
Leadership
and
management
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Good Good Good Outstanding
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Page 13 of 17

Sub-contracting
organisation
Sub-contracted
provider delivering in Hull
Last
Inspected
Overall
inspection
outcome
Outcomes for
learners
Teaching,
learning and
assessment
Leadership
and
management
Further Education College
East Riding College Airco Centre of Excellence February
2011
Hull College
Hull FC
Case Training Services
Goodwin Community College
November
2015
Selby College Tigers Trust October
2007
Independent providers
Aspire-Igen QPD March
2014
Avant Partnership
Alcrest (Northern) Ltd
DKM
HYA Training Ltd
August
2012
Chamber Training
(Humber) Ltd
HETA Ltd
January
2015
CITB Hull College November
2012
Hull Training
Hull FC
June
Motorvation
2012
North Humberside Motor Trades
Group Training Association
Chamber Training (Humber) Ltd
HYA
Alcrest
QPD
May
2015
Good Good Good Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Page 14 of 17
Page 14 of 17

Humber Learning
Consortium
Airco Centre of Excellence
Construction Works (Hull) Ltd
First Step Education & Training
Ltd
HETA Ltd
Goodwin Community College
North Humberside Motor Trades
Group Training Association
Yorkshire Care Training Ltd
October
2015
JTL Hull College December
2012
SSE Services Plc HETA
November
(Short inspection)
2015
S.Y.T.G. Ltd QPD November
2014
Military Preparation QPD
August
College Ltd.
2014
YH Training
Airco Centre of Excellence March
JC Ready 4 Work
2013
Figure 7: Ofsted inspection results for sub-contracted providers operating in Hull.
Good Good Good Good
Good Good Good Good
Good Outstanding Good Good
Good Good Good Requires
improvement
Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding Outstanding
Good Good Good Good
Page 15 of 17
Page 15 of 17

4. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. CBI/Pearson (2015) Inspiring growth: Education and skills survey 2015. Available from:
http://news.cbi.org.uk/reports/education-and-skills-survey-2015/education-and-skills-survey-
2015 [Accessed Monday 25th January 2016].
2. Education Funding Agency. (December 2014) Dedicated schools grant (DSG) 2015 to 2016
Available from: www.gov.uk/government/publications/dedicated-schools-grant-dsg-2015-to-
2016 [Accessed Tuesday 26th January 2016].
3. Education Funding Agency. 16 to 19 sub-contracted students for the 2014 to 2015 Academic
Year. Available from: http://feweek.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/16_to_19_subcontracted_students_for_the_2014_to_2015_academic_year.xlsx
[Accessed Tuesday 2nd
February 2016].
4. Ofsted (2015) The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s
Services and Skills 2014/15.
5. Ofsted. Inspection reports. Available from: http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/ [Accessed Monday 25 th
January 2015].
6. Ofsted (2015) Apprenticeships: Developing skills for future prosperity. Available from:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/apprenticeships-developing-skills-for-future-prosperity
[Accessed Tuesday 26th January 2016].
7. Skills Funding Agency. (December 2015) List of declared sub-contractors. Available from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sfa-subcontractors-list [Accessed Tuesday 2nd
February 2016].
8. Skills Funding Agency. (March 2014) National Statistics: FE data library: local authority tables.
Available from: www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/fe-data-library-local-authoritytables
[Accessed Tuesday 1st March 2016].
Page 16 of 17

For more information about this publication please contact:
Chris Howell
Provider Manager
Kingston upon Hull City Council | Young People, Skills and Employability Team | 1 st Floor,
Kenworthy House | 98-104, George Street | Kingston upon Hull | HU1 3DT
T: 01482 615 210
E: chris.howell@hullcc.gov.uk
Or visit Hull City Council’s 14-19 education webpage.
Follow us on social media:
All data on young people
collated from:
Do you have an opinion about how things could be better or
improved? Join the People's Panel and tell us what you think.
Page 17 of 17