PLANNING PRINCIPLES, METHODOLOGY AND …funding-model.pbworks.com/f/ELWa_NPFS_Sect-e.pdf · iii. reflective of the current and future needs of individuals, employers, communities

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDEPLANNING PRINCIPLES, METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE

VERSION 1 : JANUARY_06

2. PLANNING PRINCIPLES, METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE

Planning Principles

2.1 The National Planning Framework (NPF) complements the National Funding System (NFS) andtogether they form the NPFS. The NPF has been designed to inform and improve decisionmaking and to highlight strategic priorities for post-16 learning and education to be supported byELWa and its learning providers at national, regional and local level.

2.2 The framework is underpinned by the following principles. It is intended to be:

i. learner-centred - ensuring learners have access to a wide range of available, high qualitylearning opportunities;

ii. demand led – informed by demand intelligence from Sector Skills Councils (SSCs),Community Consortia for Education and Training (CCETs), other key stakeholders andELWa’s own quantitative and qualitative research;

iii. reflective of the current and future needs of individuals, employers, communities and thewider social and economic needs of Wales;

iv. transparent and evidence based;

v. flexible enough to respond to changes in the short to medium term, whilst focused upon longterms goals;

vi. able to allow providers to plan on the basis of security; and

vii. responsive to the Welsh Assembly Government’s priorities and related policy initiatives.

2.3 It also seeks to:

i. demonstrate a direct link between the priorities articulated within the ELWa business plan andassociated NPF documents and the strategic, provision development and delivery plans offunded learning providers;

ii. promote a quality agenda aimed at raising standards and ensuring that post-16 education andtraining funded by ELWa is of excellent quality;

iii. identify gaps in provision that need to be addressed for logical, evidence based reasons;

iv. introduce strategic flexibility into the funding allocation process in order that funding may bemore effectively targeted at identified priority areas; and

v. inform the WAG budget planning round.

Section 1:NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK OF THE NPFS

2.4 The framework has not, however, been developed to:

i. micro manage learning provision; nor to

ii. be supply driven.

Planning Methodology

2.5 The NPF supports an administrative light touch by managing an indicative planning methodologythat aims to:-

i. identify and alleviate some of the weaknesses of the current arrangements (e.g. duplication,segmentation and exclusion); while

ii. allowing the providers of learning to retain their strengths in flexibility and responsiveness; and

iii. intervening selectively where there is clear evidence that providers are not responding toidentified needs and priorities, and to deliver a learning network fit for the 21st century.

2.6 Three separate approaches to planning were considered when developing the NPF and linking itto the four funding streams that make up the NFS, and thus the NPFS:

i. Directive Planning - which is all about command, control and administrative regulation. This approach may support the introduction of targeted/ring fenced Credit Equivalent Unit(CEU – see Chapter 7.5) allocations to providers within the Learner Provision (LP) fundingstream to address specific priority areas and instances where providers are demonstrably notresponding to priorities, or directed funds to steer significant infrastructure changes within theStrategic Investment stream (SI);

ii. Incentive Planning - which is about setting monetary rewards without coercion in order toachieve desired outcomes. This might lead to the inclusion of incentive funds within the SIstream (such as funding to promote and encourage collaborative working between providers);and

iii. Indicative Planning - which is forecasting and consultation, providing better information (e.g. inthe form of a National Learning Assessment (NLA), Regional Statements of Needs andPriorities (RSNPs), CCET Annual Recommendations for Learning (ARLs) and ProviderPlanning Guidance) with the expectation that learning providers will use it to make betterdecisions. The NPF is designed primarily with this approach in mind, but it should be notedthat even indicative planning can borrow some of the features of directive and incentiveapproaches if it enhances the relevance and effectiveness of the process and outcome.

2.7 With regard to the LP stream, subject to the determination of priorities for intervention, directiveplanning may be considered appropriate for approximately five per cent of allocated funding, withthe balance of LP funding determined via an indicative planning approach. This accords with theissuing of planning information at designated points in the cycle, ongoing consultation and theprovision of provider planning guidance which encourages learning providers to prepare strategic,provision development and delivery plans that respond to appropriate priorities contained withindesignated NPF and other related documents. This allows providers to maintain flexibility andresponsiveness to changes in their local market place and client base, whilst honouringcommitments to learners already on programmes, and maintaining continuity.



2.8 A combination of directive and incentive planning approaches are considered appropriate for theSI stream and an indicative approach for the Workforce Development funding stream (WDS).The planning framework influences the allocations under the LP funding stream and, to someextent, SI stream and WDS funding streams. The Support for Learners (SfL) funding stream maybe brought on board at a later stage. In the meantime the framework will gather data on SfL tosupport the WAG budget planning round and business continuity will ensure that services tolearners, such as those with learning difficulties and/or disabilities, are maintained.

Scope

2.9 The NPF has been designed to enable ELWa to continue to fulfil the main duties outlined insection 31 and 32 of the Learning and Skills Act 2000 (LSA), which requires the National Councilfor Education and Training for Wales (operating as ELWa) to secure the provision of properfacilities for education and training (other than higher education) suitable to the requirements ofpersons aged 16 to 19, and reasonable facilities for persons aged 19 and above.

2.10 It seeks to inform funding allocations within and between the four funding streams that make upthe NFS and to influence the strategic planning and provision development decisions made by allproviders of post-16 learning funded by ELWa. There will be an evolutionary approach toimplementation; for example, as Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) develop and sector skillsagreements are entered into, their influence on planning will grow proportionately.

2.11 Against this backcloth the framework will enable ELWa to:

i. gather information on learning needs;

ii. inform the WAG budget planning round;

iii. recognise national, regional and local needs;

iv. influence budgetary allocations;

v. inform funding allocations to providers;

vi. influence the pattern of delivery and range of provision; and

vii. enable providers to make informed decisions on their curriculum offer.

At the time of writing (November 2005), arrangements for Community Learning provisionare subject to revision and the method of allocating WBL funds beyond July 2007 has yet tobe determined.

2.12 The framework is not designed to enable ELWa to micro manage provision down to curriculumlevel; that is the function of local demand and providers. ELWa will only seek to intervene atmicro level if there is clear and robust evidence that providers are not responding to priorities.The NPF does offer a framework for a combination of macro and micro level management,with a range of roles and functions undertaken by relevant interested partners. In other words,the framework describes the “what” needs to occur, but is not prescriptive on “who”undertakes the functions.

2.13 ELWa’s starting position in this process is that it will maintain an overview of the framework,and play a high level role in bringing about the involvement of the demand and supply sidestakeholders, and encourage their participation within the policy and strategic direction



determined by WAG. To this end, at national level, ELWa will work with key partners toprovide mainly broad, evidenced based, strategic indicators (e.g. to widen participation, raisethe quality of learning, promote parity of esteem and equality of opportunity, raising demandfor learning in the workplace). In terms of addressing skills gaps and shortages in key sectors ofthe Welsh economy, ELWa will seek to provide a steer and set priorities to be addressed at theSubject Area (SA) level. The National Learning Assessment of Needs, Demand and Supply (NLA)provides high level, broad strategic indicators which, when translated into RSNPs and CCETrecommendations, allow priorities by SA to be identified for funding purposes. (A list ofdesignated Subject Areas can be found at Annex 7c)

2.14 The following chapters describe the framework and how it is intended to operate, withparticular emphasis on how the outcomes will inform the operation of the funding elementof the NPFS.

3. THE NATIONAL FRAMEWORK DESCRIPTION, PRIORITY SETTINGAND DECISION MAKING

Framework Description

3.1 Paragraphs 3.2 to 3.26 describe one complete cycle of the NPF. The next full cycle is due tocommence in January 2006 and a number of refinements have been incorporated.

3.2 The timing of the various elements of the NPF has been changed. This was driven by the needfor the NLA to inform the WAG budget planning round and, in turn, subsequent allocations fromwithin the post-16 budget quantum. This means that, generally, information gathered in thespring of each year will not affect funding allocations until the autumn of the following year.

3.3 The first stage of the process is a circular issued to partners and stakeholder bodies in January,prior to the start of the planning cycle in order to provide an early indication of key milestones,opportunities for their involvement and guidance on the detailed implementation of the NPF.Annex 3a refers to the suggested structure and content of the circular.

3.4 Figure 1, located towards the end of chapter 3 is a summary of key milestones in the framework.Figure 2 in the form of a flowchart, provides a visual representation of the NPF milestones andlinks them, at key stages in the planning cycle, to the budget setting process and ongoing policyinitiatives and developments. It is important to note that the following, although describedsequentially, is not a top down model. Each of the elements must have interaction with theothers. The key features are as follows:

i. the NPF recognises agreed ELWa/WAG strategies, associated policy developments, objectivesand related action plans. It is informed by specific policy imperatives arising from suchinitiatives as the Workplace Learning Review (WPLR), pathfinders, the bilingualism agenda,race relations and equal opportunities;

ii. it provides for widespread consultation at local, regional and national level in order to aid theidentification of current and future skills requirements;

iii. national, sector and regionally based partners and stakeholders, including the WelshDevelopment Agency (WDA), 22 LEAs; 25 SSCs, 21 CCETs and other representative

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDEPLANNING PRINCIPLES, METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE / THE NATIONAL FRAMEWORK DESCRIPTION, PRIORITY SETTING AND DECISION MAKING


employer and voluntary sector organisations are consulted at the start of the planning cycle.All have an opportunity to contribute to the planning process and to feed into the NLA;

iv. regional and local stakeholders, including CCETs, 14-19 Networks, Regional Economic Fora,LEAs, learning providers, Young People’s Partnerships, employer, voluntary and communitygroups are consulted during the preparation and submission stages for the RegionalStatements of Needs and Priorities (RSNP) and CCET Annual Recommendations for Learning(ARL); and

v. the NPF is informed by available research, management information and expert opinion.

3.5 Annex 3b contains a recommended list of partner organisations and stakeholders to be consultedduring the planning process.

3.6 The NLA is scheduled to be published in early summer each year, up to 16 months in advanceof the academic funding year. This document is the launch pad for the rest of the planning cycle.It contains the context, rationale and evidence base used to set strategic priorities at the nationallevel, priorities that will need to be taken forward and addressed at national, regional and locallevel by ELWa and its providers. It is produced in time to inform the WAG budget planninground. The NLA will provide a three year forward look in terms of target setting and priorities tobe addressed, updated annually in future planning cycles. (In 2005 ELWa published its AnnualLearning and Skills Assessment in June).

3.7 The RSNPs covering North, Mid, South East and South West Wales will be completed by ELWaofficers at the end of each July. Their publication is timed to inform the CCET recommendationsand the start of the internal high-level budget setting process which commences in August andinforms the overall quantum for each of the four funding streams that make up the NFS. ELWa expects LEAs to take responsibility for the involvement of schools and community learningin this process. (In 2005 RSNPs were completed at the end of Augusthttp://www.elwa.org.uk/rnsp

3.8 The RSNPs set strategic priorities for learning within each of the four regions. They are a regionalresponse, on the one hand, to the national picture, having taken their lead from the NLA, butinformed, on the other hand, by stakeholder input and demand intelligence at the local level. The content and scope of RSNPs will be reviewed to reflect the need to inform the NPFS morefully than at present. Consideration will also be given to how RSNPs can be adapted or, if deemedmore appropriate, replaced by a different statement to reflect the emerging spatial plan areas.

3.9 No later than mid October, the 21 CCETs submit their ARLs. These contain recommendationsfor how to operationalise, within the CCET area, the priorities contained within their RSNP.Recommendations endorsed at regional level are then fed into the budget setting process byregionally based staff, liaising with the all-Wales funding and policy teams. During December toFebruary budget holders consider CCET recommendations, and resulting financial implications,when determining individual budget lines and final allocations within each of the funding streams.Regional officers feed back to CCETs, by letter, on the outcome in February, including, whenavailable, a three-year forward look.

3.10 LEAs are informed of their forthcoming financial year funding allocations each December, inrespect of all schools and community learning. It is the intention of the NPFS to continue with this

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDETHE NATIONAL FRAMEWORK DESCRIPTION, PRIORITY SETTING AND DECISION MAKING


practice. However, there is also an intention to announce CEU allocations on an academic yearbasis. This will make operational management of curriculum planning and delivery fit the schooland adult education year. Notional funding on an academic year basis will be calculated andannounced to accompany the CEUs. This will enable LEAs and schools to benefit from theoutcome of the planning framework at the same time as other sectors.

3.11 Priorities contained within the NLA, RSNPs and approved CCET recommendations all informthe ELWa Business Plan, the first draft of which is produced in January and finalised in March forthe following three years. The Business Plan, and the associated budget setting process, alsotakes account of ELWa’s programme and project commitments, performance data, policydevelopments and related action plans.

3.12 These documents are the prime means of communicating current and future learning needs,demands and priorities to partner organisations, stakeholders and learning providers. They areproduced at points in the cycle that allow providers to take them into account when preparingtheir own local strategic, provision development and delivery plans. A more detailed specificationof the planning tools is contained within Annex 3c.

3.13 The quality framework is an integral part of the NPFS. The outcome of the Provider PerformanceReview (PPR) process, completed during each autumn term, will directly inform the content ofthe provider planning guidance and funding allocations issued to individual learning providers.

3.14 Provider planning guidance will be issued to all funded providers in February via circular letter,almost six months in advance of the start of the academic year. The guidance will convey therequirement for a direct link between the NPF planning documents and provider plans. It willalso draw upon decisions taken with regard to supported priorities and other factors thatcontinue to inform decision making throughout the cycle (including marketing strategies,Sector Skills Agreements, PPR, related WAG strategies, Pathfinders and on-going policydevelopments). With regard to sixth form provision, guidance will be issued to LEAs andcopied to individual schools.

3.15 The planning guidance will outline the requirements for providers to submit no later than May,three-year strategic and provision development plans together with one academic year CEUdeployment proposals. It will also include the requirement for the submission of 1-yearoperational planning documents in July (for FEIs and WBL providers).

3.16 A protocol for obtaining and conveying relevant sixth form information/plans is being developedfor sharing with LEAs, schools and the Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA). The WAGis also undertaking a consultation exercise on the rationalisation of planning requirements onLEAs. The outcome of this exercise will inform the format and content of future guidanceto LEAs and their plans in relation to sixth form and CL provision.

3.17 As far as possible, the planning guidance will promote a consistent generic approach to providerplanning. It will, however, be tailored, where appropriate, to reflect different planning anddelivery circumstances of the FE, WBL, CL and LEA sectors. It will also define, where there isclear evidence to do so, priorities to be considered and addressed by specific providers. Providerspecific information may be included only exceptionally, to address clearly evidenced gaps inprovision and priorities for learning in a particular region or subject area (e.g. land based review),or the exploitation of areas of expertise (e.g. centres of excellence). Annex 3d considers the likely



format for provider planning guidance.

3.18 The outcome of the planning process results in regional performance plans and internaloperational documents, produced in March and linked directly to the Business Plan. They willinclude information on how ELWa will be implementing the RSNPs and supported CCETrecommendations within the regions.

3.19 Once transition to the NPFS methodology has been achieved in all sectors, indicative, globalacademic year funding allocations, informed by performance data (including the previous year’sLLWR/PLASC returns and the Autumn PPR), will be issued to all providers no later than Aprileach year. The allocations may, where appropriate, include a small percentage of targeted/ring-fenced funds to address identified gaps in provision or supported priorities. Furthermore, CEUfunding units may also be capped or withdrawn at this point in respect of provision, identifiedduring the PPR process or as a result of Estyn inspection, that falls below the quality threshold.

3.20 The framework allows for ongoing dialogue, throughout the cycle, between the ELWa regionaloffices and learning providers. However, during the March to April period, prior to thesubmission of provider plans, more structured dialogue may be required in some circumstancesin order to facilitate the adoption of supported priorities and recommendations for change. Thishas, therefore, been built into the framework. It also provides a further opportunity to highlightand consider any unforeseen institutional changes or local demand which may not have beenevident when the NPF planning documents were produced. (e.g. local employer expansion orinward investment).

3.21 Learning providers will be required to submit three-year strategic, provision development anddelivery plans together with one-year CEU deployment proposals no later than the end of May.The plans should outline institutions’ response to appropriate objectives and priorities containedwithin the NPF documents, providing a clear link and rationale in support of any new provisionor areas of significant expansion or contraction. (The rationale would reflect NPF planningpriorities or evidence of local demand, enrolment patterns etc). This should enable ELWa officersto identify, in good time, emerging trends and potential areas of duplication.

3.22 Regional staff will approve provider provision development and CEU deployment proposals inearly June. Providers will be asked to amend their proposals if they are not in line with NPFstrategic objectives and identified priority areas, unless supported by local evidence.

3.23 Providers will need to submit, where appropriate, their operational plans by July, which shouldreflect regional analysis and feedback in the context of RSNP and ARLs.

3.24 Final allocations and conditions of funding for WBL and FEIs will be confirmed by July at the latest.The corresponding date for LEA sixth form and CL allocations will be March, but the July date isalso when the notional academic year allocations will be announced.

3.25 Finally, the academic funding year commences on 1 August, 16 months on from the start of theplanning cycle. Monitoring arrangements will be put in place to review performance and deliveryagainst submitted plans and strategic priorities identified during the planning process. Details ofthese arrangements will be made available separately.

3.26 In order to maintain flexibility and responsiveness to local demand, providers will be able todeploy their allocated CEUs between aspects of provision as they consider reasonable and



appropriate, other than those which ELWa has allocated for specific purpose. However, wherethis leads to a significant variation from the pattern of learning provision approved at 3.22,such variation and virement of funding will be subject to the written approval of the relevantRegional Office.

Monitoring

3.27 ELWa has yet to determine the nature and extent of the monitoring arrangements for eachsector. Currently, WBL contracts are subject to quarterly review with FEI funding and provisionbeing monitored on an annual basis. Each sector has its own conditions of funding. LEA and FEIconditions are referred to within this guide in Chapter 11. Contract specifications for WBL can befound at www.elwa.org.uk/wbl

Planning Priorities - Priority Setting Process and Decision Making

The following paragraphs outline how planning priorities are determined, what type ofdecisions are made, when and by whom.

Priority setting process

3.28 ELWa has adopted an evidence-based process for determining planning interventions and prioritysetting. The term ‘planning interventions’ is used to describe situations where ELWa will directone or more learning providers to use specific funds to deliver provision in specified subject orcurriculum areas (ring fencing). The process of setting priorities includes the following stages:

i. identify issues that need to be addressed, and develop a rationale based on research andintelligence. This must be informed by links to the outcomes of stakeholder consultations atnational, regional and local level including input from SSCs and CCETs, together with expertopinion, management information and available research;

ii. set out clearly the desired outcomes and objectives of the planning intervention;

iii. appraise the available options on the basis of costs and learning benefits;

iv. select the ‘best’ option for implementation; and

v. evaluate the likely impact of the planning intervention prior to it occurring, andsubsequent to delivery.

3.29 The planning framework delivers planning outputs at national, regional and local levels, asdescribed above. Needs and areas of demand are prioritised within RSNPs by way of a tailoredimpact assessment, with the CCET ARLs being evaluated using evaluation pro forma. The outcome of the evaluation will decide whether a particular recommendation is supported.



1 Many schools regard the start of the academic year as 1 September, as it coincides with employment for staff. For CEUand notional funding, however, it is not important as school based activity during the long holidays does not affect funding.It is, however, relevant in determining the age of a learner at the commencement of the academic year. This is explainedin Chapter 8.33.

3.30 Decision Making

The planning framework endeavours to blend high level strategic priorities with localrequirements and local solutions. Each component can be described under four headings:

i. what information is gathered;

ii. who or what informs the process;

iii. when does the element take place; and

iv. who decides on the outcomes.

3.31 The four prime component elements of the framework are the NLA, RSNP, ARLsand provider plans.

a) NLA

3.32 The NLA includes strategic steers and priorities, at the national level, that are generic and broadand will be linked to demand, participation, delivery, progression or achievement. Examplesinclude raising:

i. learning participation levels amongst the low skilled or inactive;

ii. demand for learning in the workplace;

iii. the quality of learning provision; and

iv. awareness of bilingual or e-learning.

3.33 In terms of addressing skills gaps and shortages, the NLA may focus on key priority sectors andskills issues for the Welsh economy at the SA level (e.g. need for increased basic skills training,management skills or construction skills training). The NLA would also include, whereappropriate, indicators as to level such as an increase in NVQ level 3 provision.

3.34 The NLA should also include current and projected future supply side data, in terms of SAs andqualification levels, in order to compare and contrast the current pattern of delivery with therequirements for the future.

3.35 The prime input to the NLA is through stakeholder consultation. Input will be needed fromeach SSCs and CCET, as well as many other stakeholders (a full list is appended at annex 3b).In addition, the NLA takes account of agreed ELWa strategies and related action plans, WAGstrategies, expert opinion, management information and available research.

3.36 The NLA is scheduled to be published at the end of April each year. This requires the contentand priorities to be approved in early April. The timing is designed to coincide with the annualWAG budgeting cycle, thus allowing the NLA to influence the overall level of funding to be madeavailable for post-16 learning, for the following financial and academic years. The role currentlyundertaken by ELWa will be continued in accordance with arrangements to be determined bythe WAG for 2006-07.

b) RSNP

3.37 In each of the four regions, the RSNPs include those generic and specific SA level priorities thatare to be taken forward within the region and at local level. They also focus on key economic



sectors important in the region, such as a focus on the Care Sector in one CCET area andConstruction in another. If there is evidence that the local provision map does not deliver inparticular identified areas of desired curriculum (market failure), the RSNP could includecurriculum steers.

3.38 RSNPs will be informed at the all-Wales level by the NLA, and by a review of stakeholderconsultation and by outcomes at regional level (including CCETs). The process of RSNPdevelopment will also include local research and qualitative input from regional officers.The RSNPs will be published at the end of July each year.

3.39 The role currently undertaken by ELWa’s Regional Committees in determining the RSNPs will,from 2006-07 continue in accordance with arrangements to be determined by WAG.

c) CCET ARLs

3.40 Each ARL will be an operational response, in respect of the particular CCET area, to the relevantneed or priority identified in the RSNP for that region. Each ARL should suggest how the localprovider network could deliver their respective element of the RSNP. Some ARLs may not havea funding implication, as they may be designed to promote more efficient ways of working andcollaborative approaches to achieve desired outcomes. Unless the overall quantum of fundingmade available for post-16 learning is sufficient to allow for growth, any ARLs that includerecommendations for additional activity should be accompanied by a proposal on how to balancethis demand with a corresponding contraction in other areas of provision. In practice, therefore,under the circumstances of a budgetary quantum that is only uplifted for inflation, growthrecommendations are really about shifts in activity, at the SA level, that may have fundingimplications for particular providers or groups of providers. Where a provider’s provisiontranscends CCET boundaries, it will be a role for regional officers to reconcile such matters.

3.41 CCET ARLs will be informed by the RSNP for the region in which the CCET is located and willhave evolved from an iterative process involving the CCET. CCET ARLs are required in October.Local knowledge of the provider network and its ability to deliver the RSNP will be essential tothe relevance of ARLs.

Consideration of CCET ARLs

3.42 Each November regional officers will rank each ARL to determine whether it should besupported or facilitated. This process is informed by evaluation criteria and regional officerinput, based on local knowledge and budget parameters. An essential part of this process isrecognition of the priority given to each need identified in the RSNP.

The ARL assessment pro forma assesses the recommendations in the following areas2

Equity

i. advantage/disadvantage to particular learner groups; and

ii. the contribution to equal opportunities and social inclusion.



2 Associated forms are under development and are subject to future update.

Efficiency

iii. financial viability;

iv. value for money;

v. reduction of nugatory competition and/or filling gaps in provision; and

vi. sustainable development.

Choice and responsiveness

vii. level of learner demand; and

viii.enhancement to local learner choice.

Effectiveness and quality

ix. fit with ELWa’s strategic goals;

x. compliance with legislation;

xi. enhancement of learner participation, attainment, progression and retention; and

xii. contribution to the quality of learning provision and compatibility with Estyninspection findings.

3.43 The results of the regional office’s evaluations will be submitted to the decision making body forthe RSNPs. This is currently the relevant ELWa Regional Committee. From 2006-07 this role willcontinue in accordance with arrangements to be determined by WAG.

d) Provider Plans

3.44 ELWa issues detailed planning guidance to providers each February. The guidance is based on,and provides direct links to:

i. the NLA published the previous year;

ii. the four RSNPs;

iii. the resulting CCET ARLs; and

iv. policy developments and related action plans.

In determining their plans, providers will also take into account:

iv. indicative funding allocations (including ring fenced or capped funding);

v. their capacity to alter their curriculum offer;

vi. quality issues;

vii. their own performance data;

viii.local demand intelligence including previous enrolments;

ix. participation and attainment trends; and

x. employer and learner enquiries.



3.45 Providers will determine the generic, programme and SA priorities to be included and addressedwithin their three year strategic and provision development plans. They will also prepare one-year proposals for CEU distribution, by SA where appropriate. This mirrors the current approachwith FE and the framework assumes WBL providers and LEAs will follow suit in due course.The CEU deployment proposals should reflect the curriculum decisions made by the institution’scurriculum planners in terms of course offer - type; mode of study and level. (i.e. increasedplumbing enrolments, part time, level 3) with resulting, anticipated changes to the volume oflearning at SA level. The actual volume of learning delivered within each SA would also beinfluenced by learner and/or employer choice at the point of enrolment.

3.46 Once the provider strategic and provision development plans and CEU deployment proposalshave been approved internally, they are submitted to the ELWa regional office for consideration.The precise provider approval mechanism will vary by type of provider but would ordinarilyinclude approval by the Governing Body, the relevant LEA Committee or the Board ofDirectors if the provider were a limited company. Submission to ELWa is required no laterthan May. The regional office will review the strategic plan and either approve the provisiondevelopment and CEU deployment proposals as submitted, or enter into a dialogue with theprovider where changes are required before approval can be given. Such a dialogue could beinitiated if the provider has not taken adequate account of the NLA, the relevant RSNP orCCET ARLs.

3.47 The above process is similar to the current FE model where volumes are determined and thenapproved at the SA level. Where the planning process clearly indicates and evidences the needfor such action, ELWa reserves the right in future funding cycles to request that providers supplydeployment information according to qualification levels.

3.48 WBL contracts currently set start, on programme and attainment targets for Skill Build(preparatory level training), Skill Build Plus (mainly NVQ level 1), Foundation ModernApprenticeships (mainly NVQ level 2 frameworks), Modern Apprenticeships (mainly NVQlevel 3 frameworks) and Modern Skills Diploma (level 4 NVQ frameworks). Whilst WBLcontracts include details of approved SAs for each provider to operate in, they do not yet includeany SA deployment targets. For WBL providers to fall in line with the proposal for one year CEUdeployment by SA they would also need to present a CEU pro-formae that breaks down eachWBL programme by SA. This is not anticipated until WBL is funded under the NPFS.

3.49 The WAG’s Department for Training and Education is undertaking a consultation exercise on therationalisation of planning requirements on LEAs. It is seeking to remove the requirements forLEAs to produce a wide range of plans, including education strategic plans, school organisationplans, behaviour support plans and early years and childcare development plans, and to replacethem with the requirement for a new single education plan to be produced by LEAs in 2006.The outcome of this exercise will inform the format and content of future LEA plans in relationto sixth form and CL provision.





FIGURE 1KEY MILESTONES IN THE NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK

Date Planning Funding Other

Jan toMar 2006

Planning FrameworkCircular issued.

National stakeholderconsultation.

(e.g. WDA, CBI, FSB,National Voluntary SectorOrganisations, 25 SSCs, JobCentre+, etc);

Review of managementinformation, demandintelligence, research andpublished statistics, WAGpriorities, related policyinitiatives e.g. pathfinders,WPLR, Bilingualism, 14-19 etc.

Stakeholders respond withcurrent and future issues forthe provision of educationand training in their area.

April 2006 Priority Approval:National Panel or equivalentconsiders options anddetermines strategic prioritiesto be reflected within theNational LearningAssessment.

National LearningAssessment of learningneeds, demand andsupply published.

May 2006 WAG budget planning round,informed by NLA, BusinessPlan, Policy Developments &financial commitments etc.

May toJune 2006

Regional stakeholderconsultation.

(e.g.WDA, 21 CCETs, 14-19Networks, 22 LocalAuthorities, YPPs, LocalVoluntary Councils,Community Groups,Regional EmployerOrganisations, LearningProviders etc);

Review of regional labourmarket intelligence, provisionand performance data.

Stakeholders respond withcurrent and future issues forthe provision of educationand training in their area.




Jul 2006 Priority Approval:Regional Panel or equivalentconsiders options anddetermines priorities.

Regional Statements ofNeeds and Priorities (RSNPs)published end July.

Aug to Sep2006

Internal Panel considers RSNPfunding implications.

Budget Holders prepare highlevel budget requests.

CCETs prepare theiroperational response tothe RSNPs.

Oct - Nov2006

Priority Approval:Regional or Officer Panel orequivalent review and approveCCET recommendations tobe submitted to budgetholders/policy makersfor support.

ELWa/Successor Body usesthe NLA, RSNPs, CCETARLs and other sources,to inform planning andfunding decisions.

Corporate Review ofbudget position.

Nov: Draft high-levelbudget submission.

CCET recommendationssubmitted October.

Quality Framework - PPRcompleted during Autumn.

Dec 2006 Final WAG budgetallocation confirmed.

Final high-level budgetsapproved for LP, WDS, SIS &SfL. for coming year, plusindicative budgets years 2 & 3.

Financial year budgetallocations for LEAs

(School 6th Forms andACL funding).

(The financial year runs from01/04 to 31/03).

Jan 2007 ELWa contributes toits successor body’sBusiness Plan.




Feb 2007 ELWa responds toCCETs regarding theirrecommendations to besupported or facilitated.

Provider Planning Guidanceissued with appropriatelinkages to RSNPs andCCET ARLs.

RSNPs & CCETrecommendations informindividual budget lines andfinal allocations within NFSfunding streams.

Providers prepare planningdocuments in line withguidance.

Mar to Apr2007

Regional Performance Planproduced.

Regional Officers engaged indialogue with providers tofacilitate the adoption ofsupported priorities andrecommendations for change.

Apr: Indicative academic yearglobal allocations for LEAs,ACL providers, FE and WBLcontaining ring-fenced orcapped units whereappropriate.

(The academic year runs from01/08/06 to 31/07/07).

Allocations informed by PPR.

Providers engaged in dialoguewith regional offices.

Providers prepare planningdocuments in line withguidance.

May 2007 Providers submit 3 yearstrategic and provisiondevelopment plans plus 1year CEU deploymentproposals.

June 2007 Regional Offices feedbackon strategic and provisiondevelopment plans andapprove CEU deploymentproposals.

Providers amend plans if notin line with NPF objectivesand priority areas.

July 2007 Final academic year allocationsconfirmed & conditions offunding - For FE, WBL, LEAs& CL.

Providers submit operationalplans (where appropriate).

Aug to Sep2007

Academic year begins.

Sep 2007onwards

Ongoing Monitoring toreview performance againstsubmitted plans and strategicpriorities.

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDEINTRODUCTION TO THE NPFS



Month

PLANNING MILESTONES(Subject to Merger & Sponsor Division Process)

F

Feb 06

Mar 06

Apr 06

May 06

Jun 06

Jul 06

Aug 06

Sep 06

Oct 06

Nov 06

Dec 06

Jan 07

Feb 07

Mar 07

Apr 07

May 07 – July 07

Aug 07 – July 08

National Learning Assessment of Need, Demand and Supply

Research DataManagementinformation &expert opinion

Stakeholder consultationnational level; SSCs; existing SSA’s;

WDA; Vol Sector; WLGA; Job Centre+; employer organisations; provider bodies;

Careers Wales etc

ELWa & WAG -Agreed strategies,

policy objectives andassociated action plans

RSNPs published

Consultation with regionalstakeholders incl CCETs; LEAs;Regional Economic Fora; WDA;

14-19 networks; YPPs Vol Sector& Careers Wales; employer groups

providers to identify areas ofPriority & unmet demand

Priority approval National Panel considers options and determines priorities: links to Single Intelligence Hub?

Priority approval : Regional Panel considers options and determines priorities

CCET Recommendations

Provider Strategic and Provision Development Plans received May. CEU de

Priority approval: Regional SMT review recommendations and select recommendations to be submitted to budget holders & or policy makers

for additional support / directed or indicative funding.

Business PlanRemit Letter

Provider Planning Guidance issued: FE; Wappropriate references to NLA; RSNP and

Indications of directed & indicative f

Internal: RegionalPerformance Plans

Regional Office responds to CCET ARLs

Red

w

Academic Year commences 1st Aug. Ongo

D

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDEINTRODUCTION TO THE NPFS


BUDGET SETTING MILESTONES(Subject to Merger & Sponsor Division Approval Process)

IGURE 2

WAG Budget Planning Round informed byNLA, programme & project commitments etc

Budget Holder/ Budget request round informed by NLA & RSNPs ; financial programme / project commitments & performance; policy objectives, ongoing developments &

anticipated activity (built in flexibility to respond to RSNPs & CCET ARLs as appropriate).

Corporate Review of Budget Position

Draft high-level budgets for coming year LP,WDS,SI & SfL andindicative budgets for following 2 years

(built in flexibility to respond to RSNPs &CCET ARLs)

Final high-level budget 07/08 and indicative budgets08/09 & 09/10 compiled. LEA indicative financial year

allocation 6th forms/ACL/SEN

2007/08 Academic year global allocations LEA/ACL/WBL/FE informed by planningprocess / directed allocationsand quality framework PPR

Review of AssemblyAllocations and financial

commitments

Business Plan /Established Policy Aims &

Objectives andassociated action plans

Successor Body approve LP quantum for FE;

6th forms; ACL;

eployment approved by Regional Office June. Operational Plans submitted July.

Budget Holder response toCCET ARLs from within

allocated budget lines

WBL; 6th forms and ACL withd ARLs and quality frameworkfunding policy changes.

egional Officeialogue withproviders

BilingualismStrategy

E LearningStrategy

WPLR ActionPlan / SEAP 2

Skills for theworkforce and

business

Pathfinders -Geographic

Pathfinders -Sectoral

14-19Framework

Pilots andspecialist

consultations

CreditFramework

SSAs

Internal Panel to review NLA & RSNP and any significant funding or policy implications

AT

AD

EC

NA

MR

OF

RE

P

oing Monitoring / Review of Provider Plans

PolicyDevelopments

& relatedaction plans

QualityFramework &

PPR

4 FUNDING LEARNING PRIORITIES

Learner Provision Funding

Introduction

4.1 This chapter forms a bridge between the planning framework activities and the fundingmechanism. It offers a practical guide to linking the planned response to demand and need to theapplication of the LP stream funding methodology (described in Section 2 of the Guide). This willbe used in the determinations of funding in 2006-07 for LEAs and 2006/07 for FEIs. Planningintelligence will inform WBL allocations, but the mechanism will not follow the CEU/LP routeuntil 2007/08 at the earliest.

Overall Approach

4.2 In determining the volume of learning to be funded, providers will need to demonstrate anunderstanding of the need to reconcile competing, and often contradictory, demands. At themacro level the national and regional level intelligence will offer advice on sector skill level trends– growth, stability or contraction – whilst CCET level information distills that information andenables local circumstances, such as specific commercial developments or significant economicfactors, to be given appropriate consideration.

4.3 A flowchart summarising the overall approach to linking planning with funding located at theend of this chapter. (Figure 3 - NPFS Learning Provision Planning Framework Links to Funding –overall framework).

4.4 Against this backcloth are other influences, including:

i. provider-level strategic plans, reflecting direct contact with the sources of demand;

ii. local authority education, young peoples’ and community plans;

iii. regional economic fora priorities;

iv. demographic profiles and trends impacting on post-16 ‘staying-on’ rates;

v. the most recent recruitment data on current programmes of learning;

vi. outcomes of quality inspections from Estyn and the Provider Performance Review; and

vii. the impact of such factors as:

a. WAG priorities, such as basic skills;b. any recent capital build which promotes the take-up of places;c. marketing outcomes, including those under the auspices of Sector Skills Agreements; and d. curricular developments, such as the Welsh Baccalaureate, or SSA information on the range

and scope of learning programmes.

4.5 All of these factors, and the above is not an exhaustive list of influences, have also to be balancedagainst the reality of “affordability”. The post-16 learning sector in Wales is not immune from theeffects of operating within the context of a finite budget. Whilst all of the intelligence related tothe above factors is relayed to WAG as part of its budget planning round, the grant finally agreedwhich determines the post-16 quantum will necessitate a process of prioritising. The size of thequantum will govern how much learning can be funded each year, and at what £rate.

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDEFUNDING LEARNING PRIORITIES


4.6 In practice, therefore, it is not practicable for any provider or LEA to assume that all provisionthat they wish to make available will be funded from the public purse. Nor can they assumethat all learners whom they wish to admit will be specifically funded. In order to avoidmisunderstandings or false assumptions in this respect it is essential that providers and LEAsmaintain a regular dialogue with ELWa in the context of the NPFS.

4.7 At the basic level, planning for the next year’s funded provision comes down to three categories:

i. subject areas which are experiencing or have a predicted reduction in the volume of learning;

ii. those subjects where current levels are expected to be maintained (although this does notpreclude compensating changes of sub-subjects within stable overall totals); and

iii. subjects where an increase in demand is already occurring and expected to continue, orwhere growth is anticipated.

4.8 In considering the approach to subsequent years’ funding, the evidence base will be fundamental.In this respect, robust and timely data from the Lifelong Learning Wales Records (LLWR) andPupil Level Annual Schools Census (PLASC) data are central and, without it, funding assumptionswill need to be made; and these always err on the side of conservatism.

4.9 Consequently, providers’ and LEAs’ managers should make full use of their managementinformation to provide the base data for the next planning/funding round. Together with thebroader market research and other background intelligence about trend analysis, provided bythe outputs of the macro level planning, the base data will provide the foundation for futurefunding allocations.

Provider-Level Practice

4.10 In ‘making the case’ for the next funding round, providers and LEAs will need to demonstratethat they have a régime in place that has taken account of the various elements outlined above.The provider-level approach to linking planning to funding is described in a second flowchartappended at the end of this chapter. (Figure 4 NPFS – Learning Provision Planning FrameworkLinks to Funding – Provider Level).

4.11 The LLWR and PLASC can tell providers and LEAs the volume of learning, by subject area, interms of CEU up-take. This can be compared with the profile of previous years and the volumesfunded in previous rounds. This will provide information about earlier planning assumptions,immediate and past take-up and contribute to longer term trends. Specifically, it will tell providersand ELWa whether the targets associated with the level of funded activity were realised or not.

4.12 In the event of the latest data indicating that funded targets per subject have not been met,providers will need to ascertain whether this is part of a trend, or a one-off ‘blip’. In this respectthe macro level intelligence may be able to offer an insight. If a certain programme of learninghad only recently been launched, it would be inappropriate not to allow time for recruitment tobuild up. On the other hand, if a change in the employment sector indicates a decline, it wouldbe inappropriate to continue to fund at an unrealistically high level of expected participation.

4.13 In addition to responding to a reduced level of learning activity by lowering the volume to befunded subsequently, the possibility also remains that even a buoyant subject area could befunded at lower volumes in future if the local, regional and national priority decision-making



bodies (to be determined by WAG once ELWa’s National Council and regional committeescease to perform that function) deem it to be a lower priority for support from the public purse.

4.14 In either event, unless there are mitigating circumstances, such as a current year 11 cohort beingsignificantly larger than the previous year group, subject area activity which is lower than thefunded target, can be assumed to be funded at a lower volume than hitherto. This is Box A inFigure 4.

4.15 In the event of a subject area’s activity meeting a funded target, and there being no evidence toreduce or increase the volume of activity, the assumption would be to maintain current levels.This would also be the case if an area of growth was in a subject area where the latest Estyn orPPR grade indicated it was below the quality threshold (currently this would apply to grades 4and 5), or there were no funds to support growth. This is Box B in Figure 4.

4.16 If, however, recent recruitment levels, or the various areas of intelligence listed above, indicatedthat a subject area would warrant and qualify for funded growth, consideration will need to begiven to whether it can be afforded and if so, to what extent. This is Box C in Figure 4.

4.17 In broad terms there are four principal ways of funding growth:

i. additional funding from ELWa to increase the allocation from the quantum;

ii. increase the funding for the specific subject by re-deploying resources from areas suffering areduction, thus maintaining the overall size of the quantum. This could equally apply to anindividual provider’s grant allocation which could remain constant whilst virement occurredbetween subjects. Both options i and ii would result in an increase in the following year’starget for the subject area;

iii. although not specifically funded by an increase, it would not be prohibited to expendresources from within the current level or grant allocation, by exceeding subject area targetsand operating at a reduced unit £rate of funding. For example, if a provider was funded for1,000 CEUs at £25 each (thus receiving £25,000) but provided 1,040 CEUs for the samemoney (through good house-keeping, economies, etc), the actual out-turn unit £rate wouldbe £24;

iv. the above principle could be applied to the whole post-16 sector with the official unit£rate being reduced to accommodate the additional CEUs. This would act as a form ofefficiency gain.

4.18 In the event of none of the above options occurring, there remains the possibility of running theprogrammes on a full-cost recovery basis, but only where fees are appropriate and realistic.Similarly, the potential of drawing down European funding should not be overlooked.

4.19 In reviewing their requests for growth, providers will need to have regard for their own capacityto accommodate and facilitate additional learning, and how their provision complements otherproviders in the context of the CCET’s overall pattern of learning provision.

4 .20 Section 2 of this Guide describes how providers and LEAs are funded under the NPFS, based onthe CEUs generated by learning programmes, and having regard to learner characteristics thataffect the cost of provision.



The Regional Rôle

4.21 The extent to which ELWa’s officers will become involved in the approach described above willdepend largely on the capacity of the provider to demonstrate their own management of theprocess. Once an individual provider or LEA has demonstrated a grasp of the process, and theirsystem is shown to be efficacious, it is envisaged that the primary rôle of ELWa officers will bethat of facilitator and liaison with other stakeholders. On the other hand, where shortcomings areevident, ELWa officers will seek to be more rigorous in their testing of the assumptions behindproviders’ responses to the various planning stimuli.

4.22 It is not envisaged that ELWa officers will engage directly with secondary schools and adultcommunity learning providers funded by LEAs. Rather, ELWa officers will liaise with their LEAcounterparts, as the strategic body responsible for their institutions. Whilst ELWa will becomposing LEA school sixth form allocations based on the volume of learning at each school,and sharing the basis of the calculation with LEAs, it will be a matter for LEAs to determineindividual schools’ budgetary allocations, as part of their statutory duties. ELWa will, however,apply conditions of funding to guide LEAs.

4.23 With regard to the implementation of the NPF, as described in Chapter 3, the regional offices willfulfil a central role. The following paragraphs reflect some of the activities to be undertaken withinthe regions in this respect.

4.24 Regional officers, for example, will identify qualitative market intelligence relating to regionally -based need, demand and supply information. They will also facilitate face-to-face consultation,where appropriate, with regionally - based partners and stakeholders during the preparation andanalysis stages of the NLA.

4.25 Relevant NLA priorities will be taken forward by officers within respective RSNPs. Officers willproduce the RSNPs on an annual basis, and then disseminate and promote NLA and RSNPpriorities at all available fora, including regional partnership meetings (Economic Forum, CCET,14-19 etc) and through dialogue with partners and providers about future provision developmentand delivery proposals.

4.26 To inform RSNP priority setting, ELWa’s regions will prepare a situational analysis informed bynational priorities, baseline data relating to the regional and local learning and labour market,discussions with key stakeholders, Political, Environmental, Social, Technological, Legislation andDemocracy (PESTLE) and Strength, Weakness Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analyses.They will also co-ordinate the consultation exercise with regional and local stakeholders in orderto review the relevance to the region of the priorities within the NLA; the continued relevanceof priorities identified within the previous RSNP and the identification of additional current andfuture priorities of regional and local importance to be included within the new RSNP.

4.27 The Regional Committees approve regional office recommendations and aid the identification ofkey priorities to be included within the RSNP. 2005/06 will be the last cycle involving ELWa’sRegional Committees.

4.28 ELWa officers will work closely with CCETs over the co-ordination of their tactical planning andthe production of their ARL document. They will also provide appropriate research andperformance information and other relevant documentation that may assist the work of theCCET and their decision making process.



4.29 In line with agreed selection/assessment criteria, outlined in 3.39, the regional office will prioritisethe CCET recommendations and determine, subject to Regional Committee approval, whichrecommendations can be taken forward within the region and which should be forwarded forconsideration to ELWa’s budget holders and/or policy development team for additional supportor potential variations in funded learning activities.

4.30 Regional officers will provide feedback to CCETs by letter, and at partner and stakeholdermeetings, on the outcome of the ARL assessment and budget setting process. They will also seekto facilitate the implementation of supported recommendations at the regional level. This includesstructured dialogue throughout the planning cycle, but especially during the March to Aprilperiod, with learning providers in order to facilitate the adoption of supported priorities andrecommendations for change.

4.31 Within the context of ELWa’s Quality Framework, regional teams will contribute to the review ofperformance of all regionally based providers during the autumn months. The outcome of theProvider Performance Review (PPR) process will inform the planning guidance and the fundingallocation process. Details of ELWa’s PPR and Investing in Quality initiative is described athttp://www.elwa.org.uk/quality

4.32 Following receipt of provider planning documents, regional officers will undertake a detailedanalysis of submitted documents in order to determine compliance with the requirements setout in the provider planning guidance circular letter. This analysis will inform the regional officeapproval, or otherwise, of provider CEU deployment proposals and subsequent feedbackto providers.





Figu

re 3

NP

FS –

Lea

rnin

g P

rovi

sion

Pla

nnin

g Fr

amew

ork

links

to

Fund

ing

Loca

l int

eres

ts e

.g.

empl

oyer

s an

d C

ham

bers

of

Com

mer

ce, i

nput

from

pr

ovid

ers’

mar

ket

rese

arch

Indi

vidu

al p

rovi

der

perf

orm

ance

re

targ

ets:

PL

ASC

LL

WR

WBL

sta

rts

etc.

Impa

ct o

f Qua

lity

/ PP

R gr

ade

3 or

abo

ve

ELW

a Fu

ndin

g T

eam

£u

nit r

ate

Affo

rdab

ility

Regi

onal

Offi

ceFu

ndin

gT

eam

Indi

vidu

al

Prov

ider

£

Allo

catio

ns

Loca

l and

pr

ovid

erle

vel

Regi

onal

/Sp

ecia

list

advi

sory

pan

el

c.2

00 x

pro

vide

rpl

ans

21 x

CC

ETs

/ 22

x L

earn

ing

Net

wor

ks

(inc.

14-1

9)

4 x

Regi

onal

Ec

onom

ic fo

ra +

Pa

rtne

rs e

.g. J

C P

lus,

Vo

lunt

ary

Sect

or,

Car

eers

22 x

LEA

edu

catio

n,

YPP

and

econ

omic

pla

ns4 x

RSN

Ps /

Spat

ial P

lan

Nat

iona

l Le

arni

ng

Nee

ds

Ass

essm

ent

(all-

Wal

es

advi

sory

pa

nel)

Sect

or S

kills

A

gree

men

ts

(SSA

s)

25 x

SSC

, plu

s C

BI, I

oD, 2

1 x

CC

ETs,

TU

C,

etc.

Mar

ket

Rese

arch

In

telli

genc

e,

Dem

ogra

phic

tr

ends

, WA

G

targ

ets

Mac

ro le

vel

LLW

R / P

LASC

dat

a

Budg

et /

quan

tum

Unm

et, o

r ev

iden

ced

fore

cast

dem

and

+/-

e.g.

loc

al d

emog

raph

ics,

ec

onom

ic d

evel

opm

ents

, SS

As

Spec

ific

initi

ativ

es

Figu

re 3

NP

FS –

Lea

rnin

g Pr

ovis

ion

Pla

nnin

g Fr

amew

ork

links

to

Fund

ing



Provider level

= Quantum

Figure 4

NPFS – Learning Provision Planning Framework links to Funding

No

No

No

No

No

No

YesYes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Latest year’s data

Has provider met /exceeded

target, per subject area?

Does National/ regional / local picture indicate

decline?

(A) Take lower of forecast funded or

outturn CEUs

Is there predicted growth via NLA, a SSA, or other growth stimulated through policy development, capital

project, or other evidence need/priority or unmet demand in RSNP, CCET or demographics.

(B) Maintain CEU current

levels

Can funding come from

declining areas? Is additional funding available?

A + B + C = Base CEUs +

Subject weightBilingualism

Sparsity16-19 Development

Deprivation, Attainment

Total = CEUs

CEUs x £unit rate= £allocation

(C) Increase funded volume and relevant targets: CEUs

Quantum

Total of all CEUs = £ rate per unit

Last year’s quanta+ inflation

+ /- Any growth/decline- efficiency gains

+/- any virements

Macro Level

Total of all £ allocations = Quantum

Is Estyn, PPR, H&S, Audit, etc above quality threshold?

Figure 4

NPFS – Learning Provision Planning Framework links to Funding

5 NPFS PLANNING FRAMEWORK: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

5.1 How can I as a new provider to Wales have a direct funding relationship with ELWa?

The existing network of WBL providers was established following a comprehensive and opentendering exercise in 2004. It is anticipated that there will be an opportunity for new providers toapply for a direct contract for 2007/08 when providers will be appointed on the basis ofqualifying criteria in force at that time. At present, if ELWa is approached by a new provider, theyare referred to the existing network of learning providers to see if there is an evidenced needand justification for them to enter into a third party funding arrangement.

5.2 Are any changes planned for the future?

ELWa is a partner on “The UK Register of Learning Providers” (UKRLP) Project.

The UKRLP forms part of the Managing Information Across Providers (MIAP) programme whichseeks to “benefit individual learners by supporting the drive to deliver quality and value for moneywhilst helping to remove wasteful and unnecessary bureaucracy from post-16 learning”. It alsoaims to produce a database of learning providers which will facilitate the sharing of providerinformation between government departments, funding agencies, employers and providers.

It is anticipated that the register will be fully functional by the end of July 2006. Registration criteriaand ELWa policy relating to the nature of its future relationships with registered providers haveyet to be determined.

5.3 What happens if a provider receives a grade 4 or 5 following an ESTYN inspection in an area ofits provision?

ELWa is seeking to ensure that the education and training that it funds is of excellent quality.Therefore, where a provider has been awarded a grade 4 or 5 in respect of a particularsubject area, no growth in provision will be funded in that area until a satisfactory re-inspectionhas taken place.

ELWa’s priority is to ensure that the provider improves the quality of provision to above thequality threshold (i.e. currently grade 3). The provider will be required to produce andimplement a quality improvement action plan in order to remedy the position by the time of there-inspection. The provider will be given clear targets and timescales for improvement and accessto quality improvement funding to assist with the implementation of the action plan. CircularNC/C/03/03SLD, Aiming For Excellence: Performance and Quality Improvement, issued inJanuary 2003, provides further information on ELWa’s strategy for improving performance andquality in post-16 learning (excluding HE).

5.4 What happens if on re-inspection by ESTYN following a grade 4 or 5 a provider still does notmake the grade?

ELWa’s position is that poor quality provision, which fails to improve, should not be funded. In the event that a re-inspection results in a second grade 4 or 5, ELWa will seek to withdrawfunding from the area in question.

Re-inspection will normally be undertaken 12-20 months after the original inspection. If there-inspection results in a grade 4 or 5, a meeting between ELWa and the provider will be

THE NATIONAL PLANNING AND FUNDING SYSTEM (NPFS): A GUIDENPFS PLANNING FRAMEWORK: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS


scheduled as soon as possible, normally within two weeks of the end of the inspection. This willbe used to agree the way forward including, wherever possible, the transfer of funding to analternative provider. ELWa will take account of the advice from Estyn on the nature of theshortcomings identified and whether the provision is likely to improve. Learners’ interests willalso be a key priority. ELWa will ensure that alternative provision is available to learners beforedeciding to discontinue a provider’s funding.

5.5 Will ELWa use the planning framework to introduce ring fenced funding allocations to providers?

The NPF supports an administrative light touch methodology that allows providers to retain theirstrengths in flexibility and responsiveness, allowing them for the most part to deploy their fundingbetween aspects of provision as they consider reasonable and appropriate.

It also seeks to alleviate some of the weaknesses of the current arrangements and todemonstrate a direct link between the priorities articulated within the relevant NPF planningdocuments, ELWa’s funding allocations and the provision development plans of funded post-16learning providers.

With this in mind, within the Learner Provision funding stream for example, provider fundingallocations may on occasion, subject to the determination of priorities for intervention, includea percentage of targeted and/or ring fenced funds for specific purpose in order to address gapsin provision and supported priorities for learning identified during the planning process. It isanticipated, however, that this will be an exceptional approach. The ring fencing of funds is notnew. Within the FE sector, for example, funds have previously been ring fenced for Welsh forAdults, Ufi and entrepreneurship activity.

5.6 How does the planning process take into account the views and needs of employers?

A network of 25 Sector Skills Councils has been established to inform the planning processand those involved on an on-going basis in the planning, funding and delivery of learning andeducation, about the skills requirements of key employment sectors within the Welsh economy.The intelligence provided by SSCs (and Sector Skills Agreements when available), will bereflected within the NLA and it will inform priority setting within the NLA and RSNPs. Otheremployer bodies, such as the CBI; FSB; Chambers of Commerce etc and individual employersof strategic importance are also consulted at key stages in the process.

Employer related research information and published data is also used to underpin the NPF andto aid decision making and priority setting. Examples include the Future Skills Wales Reports(2003 and 2005 surveys); The Workplace Learning Review Action Plan 2005 and regional andsector specific research i.e. the North West Wales Construction Learning Network Report 2005.

5.7 How can providers influence national, regional and CCET level planning, strategy andpriority setting?

Providers are an important contributor to the intelligence gathering and priority setting processthat underpins the planning framework. Their views are considered and actively sought, eitherdirectly or via their representative bodies such as fforwm, the National Training Federation andADEW etc, during the consultation and preparation stages for the NLA, RSNPs and CCET ARLs.Providers are encouraged to respond to these consultation exercises. FEIs, LEAs, School 6thForms and WBL providers are also represented on all CCETs. Their representatives can directlyinform and influence the production and content of CCET ARLs.



5.8 What happens to ELWa's National Planning Framework after the 1st April 2006?

In the short term, the NPF is not expected to change fundamentally, although there may besome internal governance and process changes to ensure compatibility with the WAG’s planningand budgeting processes. It is recognised however that the NPF will always be a work underdevelopment in order to accommodate any future opportunities for improvement. For example,in the future, consideration may be given to adopting spatial plan areas for planning purposes.

5.9 What role do 14-19 Area Networks play in the planning framework?

The 14-19 agenda is considered an important area of policy development and as such it isreflected within all NPF planning documents as a key priority area for ELWa and our learningproviders. 14-19 Area Network Groups are invited to contribute directly to the RSNPconsultation process and they inform ongoing corporate policy development throughout theplanning cycle. Via common representation on CCETs, they also contribute to the productionof related CCET ARLs. The 14-19 Area Networks have an active role to play in taking forwardany recommendations that relate to this agenda.



Documents

PLANNING PRINCIPLES, METHODOLOGY AND …funding-model.pbworks.com/f/ELWa_NPFS_Sect-e.pdf · iii. reflective of the current and future needs of individuals, employers, communities