Federations or Loose affiliations

There are many varieties of informal groups but the most effective of these models, seeking to influence provision, are those with written agreements such as memoranda of understanding, protocols, or minimum standards e.g. for services to be purchased.

Co-marketing agreements seek to build on partners' strengths and make better provision more easily accessible to learners, through working collaboratively rather then competitively.

These groups are often facilitated by outside organisations such as the local authority or the local LSC.

• Loose affiliations can accommodate a wide range of different types of providers;
• Provides a good starting point for collaboration, often around a particular driver;
• Very flexible therefore can respond to change quickly;
• Enables joint marketing to employers or learners;
• Can share practice expertise;
• More formal sharing of costs;
• Provides a focus for driving change through agreed priorities;
• Facilitates development of common standards and a more coherent approach to planning and delivery;
• Facilitates trust and understanding between partners.

• Too large a group can reduce the level of effective decision-making;
• Levels of commitment by partners can vary widely;
• Focus of collaboration may remain peripheral to delivery.

• Need to widen/increase participation;
• Need for better cross-area planning and co-ordination;
• Need to raise profile of FE;
• Need to focus on specific issues common to several providers.

One provider leads the federation

This model formalises the role of a single provider in facilitating the group and often in providing the legal entity for contracting on behalf of the group. They may also provide specific expertise such as marketing, providing quality assurance systems, working with employers, or liaising with the LSC and other funding bodies.

• A dynamic provider can drive progress more quickly;
• They can accommodate a wide range of partners including smaller organisations giving them a louder voice;
• Facilitates joint tenders for larger contracts;
• Can provide a single point of contact for customers.

• The objectives of the group may be seen to be too closely aligned with and in the interests of those of the lead provider;
• There could be less commitment from other members of the group.

• Need to innovate/ drive change quickly;
• Improved planning and learning offer;
• Need to improve progression routes;
• Need for leadership to bring together a range of different types of provider;
• Need to facilitate the engagement of learners and employers more in design and delivery of provision.

A group of providers with a structure representing all members

The group has a clearly defined representative structure so that there is transparent decision-making. This often involves a high level Board or committee, with the Chair moving between partners, and more operational sub-groups or task groups.

Neither the high level nor more operational groups have any legal status so contracting is usually managed with individual members acting on behalf of the group. The members would usually contribute to a central secretariat.

• A central secretariat/resource means the partnership can work more quickly to achieve benefits such as greater coherence, agreed priorities, identification of gaps in provision;
• A stronger profile for the group offering greater breadth and/or depth of provision for employers and learners;
• Maintain links with learners whilst providing a forum to consider emerging strategic issues affecting several partners;
• Expand and enhance provision for all learners in an area covered by the members of the group;
• Attract more business and larger contracts and has better leverage with major funding bodies;
• Use opportunities for joint staff training and development;
• Develop a more strategic approach to building capacity to address specific challenges such as operating in a demand-led system;
• Use its understanding of partners' strengths and weaknesses to make significant changes to delivery;
• Share good practice and provide mutual support.

• There may still be one or more dominant providers in the group;
• A large or diverse group will usually need time to build trust and understanding between members before significant changes to provision can be made.

• Need to innovate through different perspectives;
• Need to drive change through consensus;
• Improved planning and learning offer;
• Using strengths of different types of provider;
• Managing staff development across a broader range of partners.

A group of providers establish a statutory Joint Committee

A statutory Joint Committee receives delegated powers from each of the constituent partners' Governing Bodies and does not have to refer recommendations for decisions back to each partner's Governing Body.

This model is most likely to involve schools and colleges but other partners can be associate members. The Joint Committee can also have powers to enter in a contract.

• Quicker decision making as there is no need to go back to the Boards of the constituent organisations for ratification of a decision;
• Clarity of focus on agreed objectives;
• Transparency of decision-making;
• It is not as formal as models such as trusts or companies and thus has greater flexibility in terms of agreeing and reviewing its objectives and membership.

• More time is required to manage the formal arrangements;
• Formal regulations have to be adhered to.

• Need for quicker but transparent decision-making;
• Need for some flexibility;
• Need for a new body independent of Governing Bodies of partners;
• Need to collaborate formally with schools.

A group of providers establish a company

A group of providers establish a company in order to meet a specific need or to deliver specific services. For example, a specific trading company could be set up to focus on local employers, establish a different brand from the college, or to focus on a specific industry sector.

The company could be established under Companies House rules but as an incorporated organisation, a charitable company also has to reflect the regulatory framework of the Charity Commission. Each company will reflect the arrangements preferred by the contributing partners.

• Distinct market focus and brand;
• Single point of contact for employers/learners through which to access different training solutions;
• Separation from other delivery operations e.g. in a college;
• A legal entity that can agree contractual arrangements on behalf of all partners;
• An opportunity to focus on specific groups of learners and/or employers and develop employer service standards;
• A focus on industry specific qualifications and standards;
• A louder single voice when working with employers and sector skills councils.

• Securing commitment and resource can take time;
• The roles of Board members of the company must be clearly defined compared to the role of Governors of the colleges;
• Getting the right degree of separation whilst maintaining accountability and support from the member bodies.

• Need to make distinction from existing brand(s);
• Need to create opportunity for greater focus;
• Need to raise profile of FE;
• Need to pool resources.

A group of providers share services (excluding delivery of education or training)

This federation occurs around common services, excluding delivery of education or training. These could, for example include: customer services centres; corporate services; common infrastructure; data sharing; information management; information assurance; identity management; technology standards; procurement; legal services; marketing and sales; and internal audit.

The services could be provided by one partner on behalf of the others. Or the services could be delivered by another organisation such as a local authority to standards agreed by the partners.

• Increased negotiating strength to deliver cost savings and value for money;
• Enables partners to allocate more funds elsewhere such as directly into improving provision;
• Agreed service standards which in turn can help improve services across the group, raising the profile and attracting more resource for front-line activity.

• Control over the service standard is removed from each provider (unless it is providing the service on behalf of the group).

• Need to make savings;
• Need to develop common standards e.g. for procurement, customer services;
• Need to demonstrate more efficient processes;
• Need to improve/standardise collective systems to support data sharing.

A group of providers develop shared premises

Groups access capital funding to develop premises which are jointly managed. For example, the funding could be used to develop Centres of Vocational Excellence, or sixth form centres or learning centres for those with learning difficulties or disabilities.

There will be two main stages for this model:

• Designing and building the centre which must include effective project management;
• Developing joint management of the premises which could be achieved through other models described above or a trust.

• Integrated centres developed for the users with a strong sense of ownership by partners;
• Development based on a more strategic perspective leading to reduced competition and duplication;
• Raised morale and motivation by staff and learners;
• improved learner choice and wider range of provision by opening up provision and facilities to different groups of learners;
• collaborative working and up-skilling of staff across providers;
• Employers can recruit people trained using equipment of industry standard;
• Significant increases in student participation, retention and achievement;
• Opportunity to tackle several problems at the same time in a coherent way.

• Must have effective project management in place for the design and build stages;
• Must plan effective joint management;
• The scale and complexity of the build project could make it difficult to progress at times.

• Need to re-locate provision;
• Need to extend or enhance facilities;
• Need to develop specialised provision;
• Need to improve access for groups of learners;
• Opportunity to help other providers in the interests of local learners or employers.

Employers lead a specialist network (inc National Skills Academies)

Employers will have increasing influence in the design and delivery of provision through specialist networks and National Skills Academies.

Each industry sector can adopt a different model depending on the skills needs for that sector. For example they might need high level skills available nationally, or better regional coverage.

• Employers are in the lead in designing curricula, developing facilities etc.;
• The employers can define what excellence is and can work with the strongest providers;
• Innovation is encouraged and will influence other provision across the network, and within those providers involved.

• High performing providers may be involved in more than one specialist network;
• Providers will need to balance addressing the needs of the industry sector employers with those of local employers.

• Need to change the way provision is delivered for learners and employers;
• Need to improve or extend facilities;
• Opportunity to work across geographical boundaries.

Trust

The term "trust" is often used to cover both unincorporated organisations and associations, and incorporated organisations such as charitable companies. The main difference is that:

• unincorporated organisations do not have a separate legal personality so trustees may be liable for the repayment of debts they have incurred on behalf of the charity;
• a trust is governed by a trust deed. A trust cannot own land or sign documents in its own name;
• incorporated organisations (companies limited by guarantee) are governed by a memorandum and articles and have a legal personality of their own. The liability for trustees will be limited to a nominal amount.

Trusts may also be described as "not for profit charities" or a foundation.

As well as establishing a trust as a charitable company, from early 2008 a trust may be established as a charitable incorporated organisation (CIO).

Charities which want a corporate structure currently have to register both as charities and as companies, which means they have to meet the dual regulatory burdens of both the Charity Commission and Companies House.

• Clarity of vision, purpose and roles of partner members - recognising strengths of partners;
• Faster decision-making once trust is established;
• Reflecting ethos of partners which can extend to organisations beyond core group;
• Sustainability beyond founding members and longer planning horizons.

• Can take time to work through all partner issues;
• Need to consider specific legal vehicles which could support a trust including a company or the new Charitable Incorporated Organisation;
• Trustees need to understand their roles and responsibilities.

• Need for formalised structure to support continued or further collaboration;
• Need for long term planning to support investment;
• Desire to involve a wider range of partners and build consensus.

Trust School

Trust Schools are maintained foundation schools supported by a charitable foundation or "Trust" and were established under the 2006 Education and Inspections Act. Trust members may include Further Education Colleges, Higher Education Institutions, businesses, charities and community groups.

A Trust will cement and strengthen relationships with partners including those between schools and FE colleges.

• Increased potential to meet the specific needs of the local community;
• Sharing of teaching and management expertise;
• Enhanced partnerships and planning for 14-19 curriculum;
• Clear agreed structure provides the foundation for longer term forward planning;
• Provides new options for tackling persistent or previously intractable problems around disaffection, low achievement etc.;
• Raised awareness of new opportunities for targeting skills shortage areas;
• Increased participation through cohesive marketing and progression routes;
• Increased quality and range of provision including through a broader or more in depth curriculum offer.

• Maintaining commitment and focus when there are different types of provider involved.

• Need to engage specific local partners in an area;
• Need for significant new approach to address long term issues;
• Need to strengthen leadership;
• Opportunity to formalise existing strong partnership.

Bi-lateral arrangement:
Provider working with an employer

The employer offers premises for developing a learning centre at a location to suit the employees. The provider may support the initial development by providing equipment as well as expertise in developing the training, for example, in helping adults with basic skills needs.

The employer or the provider may also have strong links with other key partners such as union representatives, and Union Learning Representatives in particular, who can help contextualise training material, raise awareness of opportunities and support learners. The employer allows selected staff time off for training, within limits set to reflect operational

• Larger numbers of staff formally qualified in specific skills areas e.g. in IT;
• Increased motivation for on-going learning;
• Reduced staff turnover for the employer;
• Increased interest from other employers;
• Unions and Union Learning Representatives;
• Increased profile for the provider;
• Improved opportunities for staff development within the provider.

• The provider will need to adapt the delivery of training to accommodate specific employer needs e.g. offered outside normal hours;
• May need to review employment contracts for the provider's staff;
• Becoming too dependent on a single employer could become an issue in certain circumstances.

• Need to develop tailored provision for very specific employer needs;
• Opportunity to make use of local employer resources to raise skills.

Bi-lateral arrangement: One provider supporting another

This is based on a buddying or mentoring system but is likely to involve staff in supporting capacity building and identifying and addressing priorities in the weaker provider.

If the providers are not close geographically, the arrangements may be short term or offer a way of focusing an outside view on particular issues at a particular time such as when a poor inspection report is delivered.

If the providers are geographically close there is scope for longer term working together.

• Targeted help and support to address specific issues;
• Practical links between staff at all levels within the providers;
• Sharing of contacts and methods of working, and identification of strengths in both organisations helps build trust.

• There could be some very sensitive issues around governance and leadership but management of the model is likely to be more effective where the role and purpose of the support is clear;
• If engagement is restricted to discussions between the principals the impact on the supported provider and benefits to staff in the high performing provider are likely to be minimal.

• Need to address specific issues/poor performance;
• Need to broaden range of options and seek other views.

Bi-lateral arrangement:
College sponsoring an Academy

Colleges can become sponsors for school Academies in order to have greater influence over provision for young people before they reach 16.

Academy Trusts are charitable companies and are responsible for the running of Academies. Unlike Trust schools, the Academy Trust includes the Governing Body as part of the company.

• Bringing a greater focus for 14-19 provision;
• Increased potential to access capital funding and develop a visibly different centre for learning;
• Clarity of communication and responsiveness to employers;
• Improved quality of provision, participation and attainment;
• Ability to meet local needs for delivering a mix of specialised diplomas and A-levels and other provision to tackle persistent disaffection and low achievement;
• Working collaboratively with other providers e.g. early years, to ensure the system of education from 3-19 provides the best possible outcome for learners.

• May be perceived as a new competitor to existing providers;
• May take significant amounts of time of senior managers.

• Need to raise aspirations and standards;
• Need to attract additional funding;
• Need to bring in commercial expertise;
• Need for change of approach;
• Need to strengthen leadership.

Re-organisation of FE Corporation (Merger)

There are two types of merger both of which require a formal approval process managed by the LSC, including an options exercise and consultation.

In general:

• Under type A, a new corporation is established and the existing corporations are dissolved with their property, rights and assets being transferred to the new corporation;
• Under type B, one or more corporations are dissolved and their property, rights and liabilities are transferred to an existing corporation.

• Improved resources, recognition, leadership, management and funding;
• New organisation with clear remit to improve provision for benefit of learners;
• Captures benefits of scale e.g. through ability to improve back-office systems;
• Reduces complexity of local landscape. Increases the focus on meeting learner needs;
• Very effective when bringing together complementary providers;
• Maximises uses of land and buildings

• Challenges of combining different cultures and systems;
• Resistance from staff to changes and loss of identity of one or both organisations;
• Disruption to students and staff;
• Reduces choice for learners;
• Resistance from local stakeholders, parents and employers;
• Time required by senior managers;
• Long timescales involved before benefits of changes are realised.

• Need to reduce duplication in an area;
• Need to address problems at one or more providers;
• Need to increase use and range of resources;
• Need for financial viability;
• Need to transfer good practice and build on strengths;
• Need to strengthen leadership.