Amanda Ryalls is the Director of Operations, Skills for Justice. She has extensive experience in the field of education and skills from working successively with the Regional Development Agency for Yorkshire and Humber, the Learning and Skills Council for South Yorkshire and, immediately prior to her present appointment, the Sector Skills Development Agency. This piece follows another by her Chief Executive printed in our 49th Edition, April 2008

Skills for Justice is a sector skills council covering all employers, employees and volunteers working in the UK Justice System. It aims to supply the support necessary to enable the Justice sector to identify its current and future learning needs, to engage effectively with learning providers in order to meet these needs with high quality development programmes, and to link the acquisition of learning to reputable and valid qualifications.

What precisely are you delivering in particular to the custody sector?
AR To do that I will explain a little of how we operate. It’s important that we are directed by the needs of the sector; and that we work closely with those who can help to deliver appropriate and sector specific learning solutions; the stakeholders. We have to understand exactly what it is that the sector exists to do and what its specific challenges are, so that we can identify how and where skills and workforce development solutions can be best developed and implemented to deliver success. We have an occupational committee for custodial care, comprising representation from across the sector. We listen to what the committee is saying about its challenges. We consult with the committee, in line with our research, on the skills issues that we see on their horizon and for which we feel they may welcome our help and support to address. We also make them aware of funding opportunities and other support available for skills development across the whole of the UK, that might help address their needs. Where nothing exists to suit their specific needs then we work with them to develop and agree solutions. One of the biggest workforce development issues facing HMPS at the moment is that almost 50% of the workforce (ie non-operational staff) do not have their learning and development needs identified and addressed on a regular, formal and systematic basis in line with the strategic objectives. With resourcing, we can help HMPS to conduct research to explore the skills needs and gaps of non-operational staff and support the Prison Service to develop a variety of interventions and materials that will enable staff to achieve their potential. We have already developed National Occupational Standards for a high percentage of the occupations across our footprint. As a Sector Skills Council, it is our job to develop and maintain those standards and from them develop qualifications. We are responsible for advising government across the UK of the skills and qualifications that should receive some level of public subsidy and / or promotion in the interest of delivering the skills that the sector needs. We also work directly with some leaning providers, both in company and externally in pursuit of Skillsmark; the quality assurance standard that we have developed specifically for the sector. ** In England, we see Train to Gain, an employer led workforce development approach, providing a whole host of opportunities that were previously unavailable to the Prison Service. For the Officer Support Grades (OSG) staff, there is the opportunity to work towards level 2 qualifications. Funding available will enable OSG to achieve NVQ level 2 Custodial Care and provide support in addressing any functional literacy, numeracy and English language skills needs up to level 2. (Skills for Life). This should help staff for whom English is not their first language and all those required to write reports. Train to Gain also provides opportunities and some funding for non-operational staff, without level 3 qualifications, in areas such as business administration, customer services and/or IT. **

Is that just local FE colleges?
AR No, across the board. I suppose we have more leverage over things that are within further education in England because they rely more heavily on organisations like the Learning and Skills Council for funding their provision in a way that higher education institutions don’t. Higher Education Institutions have many other and well established means of generating income. The Leitch review of skills published in December 2006, endorsed the value of addressing skills development by sector and by shifting the emphasis to an employer, rather than supplier driven approach to learning.

Who is in the driving seat regarding skills provision at the moment then?
AR Let’s take a general example that we might all relate to: a young person leaving compulsory or further education , might be attracted to working in the film industry. They look around for an appropriate course of learning and find some kind of media studies course. They assume that this will equip them with the skills required to secure their desired employment. It does not, because the course has been unable to keep up with the significant changes that have affected the industry. The student may well enjoy the learning but will really struggle to secure work in the industry on the basis of the course. They will probably settle for an alternative career and then undertake appropriate learning and development as required. If in fact, they are lucky enough to break into the industry, they or their employer may end up having to make hefty investment before they start to become productive enough to generate income. The point here is that employers have become too far removed from the learning that is being promoted and delivered to prospective employees, expectations are not being managed properly leading to disappointment and money, which is in scarce supply, is being invested in developing skills that are no longer valuable.

So are we making the point that we have to make sure that the courses and qualifications resulting are relevant?
AR Yes and economically viable. Looking one way, an individual will place value on a qualification because it will appear on their CV and make them, hopefully, more valuable in the market place, whereas an employer places value on skills needed to do the particular job. Time and money are precious elements to both individuals and employers.

What can you do to address that dilemma?
AR We are developing a qualification curriculum framework in England which will allow a person to study and gain credit for specific units of learning rather than the full qualification..While an individual might wish to gain the full qualification, the employer might only wish to fund and release the employee to gain a selection of relevant units for a particular job.We are trying to make sure that at any time an individual invests in learning it will result in valuable and useful skills for the industry as it stands today.The task is to take a look at the whole thing and make sure there is nothing extraneous. I find that a terrifying prospect from the point of view of reviewing the content of a course and then agonising over the status of grey areas, that is to be included or not, and on the other hand training a host of specialists that can’t turn their hand to something slightly different.

Is that not putting a huge burden on the content reviewer as well as constraining the flexibility of workers?
AR It’s a matter of degree, a broad content might be attractive to learners but it does them no favours in the long run because it doesn’t sufficiently concentrate on the skills they need to earn a living. A lot of colleges quite happily exist by offering attractive courses without much concern about practicality. If public money is being spent then the courses on offer have got to be relevant to employers’ needs.

Has the appointment of a new chief executive caused a change of emphasis?
AR Since the appointment of our chief executive last October we have been focussing on what the Leitch Review means for us. (See Mr Alan Woods, 49th Edition April 2008 page 19). The government adopted most of the review’s findings and crafted a more robust remit for the Sector Skills Councils. It gave them approval over national occupational standards and qualifications that attract public funding and much more; in short we have been given a more substantial role.

Can you define what a compact agreement is?
AR The compact is an agreement between the government and the sector, best to use an example; the initiative ‘Train to Gain’ (initially unavailable to the public sector) detailed the main way further education colleges and providers in England could draw down public funding for what they delivered. So, rather than the learner taking the lead Train to Gain was going out talking to the employers and negotiating the deal, it was a drive to put the employer in the forefront. The Justice Sector has managed to access £72 million of funding over the next three years which has been ring fenced to deliver certain levels of skills and qualifications.The compact or deal is that Train to Gain will fund provision to deliver credit for skills (largely) up to level 2 to the same value of the employers investment which is used to fund anything else required, usually the higher level skills, ineligible in train to gain.

How do you view that?
AR The compact is a great deal and the trick we have to pull off is to make sure that we get maximum value from it for the sector.We also need to make sure that the provision available to meet increased demand is fit for purpose and accessible. We have developed content and quality standards against which we have already approved a number of learning providers. This is starting to be used as a kite mark recognised by the sector. to aid selection. We have also to make sure the whole thing works. Often the problem with these great initiatives is that the glue that sticks the elements together is missing, causing an otherwise brilliant programme to fall apart.

How can the funds be ring-fenced, how can you make sure of that?
AR It is contained in a Joint Investment Framework agreement between the Learning and Skills Council nationally and the respective employer.

What do you expect will be the result of this work?
AR It really comes down to the readiness of the sector to take advantage of the opportunities presented. The prisons could make huge use of it right now; the funding is available for three years and in that time a lot could be achieved. In the days when I worked at the LSC in adult basic skills, observing the improvement made to the quality of life of somebody achieving level 2, or functionality with English, was incredible. At the end of the endeavour there is always that piece of paper that makes a person more valuable out there in the market place. Also I think part of our job is to persuade employers of the value of releasing their people for relevant further education and training. That is another consideration we might take-up on another occasion.

Thank you, Amanda, for taking time from your busy schedule to speak with the Review.