Review of further education governance in Scotland

Annexe D - Publication (1993) Describing The Process Of Incorporation

(HMI J Howgego)

THE INCORPORATIONof COLLEGES of FURTHER EDUCATION in SCOTLAND

This booklet provides an account of key events stemming from the Ministerial decision in March 1991 to remove Further Education ( FE) colleges in Scotland from Local Authority control and to give them incorporated status. The account finishes at the 1st April 1993, the date on which the legal status of the colleges actually changed. It includes the initial preparation of a White Paper in the first part of 1991, the publication of the consequent Parliamentary Bill, the passing of the Further and Higher Education (Scotland) Act in March 1992, and the quite remarkable range of preparatory activities which were undertaken by the colleges and other agencies - including The Scottish Office Education Department ( SOED) - during the remainder of 1992 and the first three months of 1993. The account does not provide any assessment of how well incorporation has progressed since April 1993. That will be the subject of separate reports.

1. The Further Education College system in Scotland

1.1 At the time of the Ministerial Statement announcing impending changes there were 45 FE Colleges in Scotland. Forty two of these were located on the Mainland and one each in Orkney, Shetland and the island of Lewis. They ranged in size from the small unit in Orkney catering for a few hundred students to the recently created single college based on Aberdeen with over 15,000 students on its books. Then, as now, the FE colleges offered a comprehensive range of education and training. Some were specialist institutions for the land-based industries, the building trades or nautical studies; the great majority provided a wide choice of learning programmes, mainly to meet vocational requirements.

1.2 Just as the programmes themselves were varied, so were the students who made use of the colleges. They ranged from school pupils who participated in link courses designed to give them some experience of vocational education, to mature students returning to education to fulfil either a career or personal need. A significant feature of FE in the late 80s and early 90s was the large increase in older students and a proportionate reduction in those in the 16-19 age group. All colleges strove to a greater or lesser extent to be community institutions, serving not only local industries and commercial interests, which were their traditional clients, but also other groups in the area who could benefit from what they had to offer. Some were officially designated community colleges and were expected to make a particular contribution to social as well as vocational educational needs.

1.3 In order to fulfil this demanding role the FE colleges had to work in close cooperation with many other agencies. To ensure that their vocational role was being well fulfilled they set up course committees of various kinds with representatives of local employers; College Councils included representatives of all those with an interest in the colleges courses; and they sought to keep close contact with other educational providers - the schools, the Community Education Services and Higher Education institutions - who were likely to be dealing with local students in other contexts. It should be noted that both the schools and the Community Education Services were, and remain, under the management of the Local Authorities. Until incorporation FE colleges shared the same control systems and services as these other sectors of education.

1.4 This, then, was the educational sector that was to be given a new autonomy. The colleges were to be accorded a degree of freedom over their own affairs which went far beyond anything which had been possible under previous legislation, and they were to be required to accept the major responsibilities which went with this freedom. It was abundantly clear, well before the 1992 Act became law, that much energetic preparation would be needed if the intentions of the legislation were to be met. So it proved in the event.

2. The Ministerial Statement

2.1 On March 21st 1991 the Secretary of State for Scotland announced in the House of Commons that, as from 1st April 1993, the funding of FE colleges in Scotland would pass from the local authorities to central government, and the management of the colleges would become the direct responsibility of the College Councils (later to be re-named Boards of Management). As corporate bodies, the colleges would be vested with the land, buildings and equipment which to date had been under the control and disposition of the authorities. Similar statements covering the colleges in England and Wales were made by the relevant Secretaries of State. The main intention of the proposals was to give colleges a greater degree of freedom to respond to the demands of the labour market: autonomous colleges would be in a better position to offer vocational education as and when it was required; they would work in close co-operation with the newly established Local Enterprise Companies; and they would be encouraged to operate in an entrepreneurial way, seeking business opportunities throughout their catchment areas and competing on the basis of quality as appropriate. The Ministerial statements of 21st March reflected a UK policy; the differences which emerged later between Scotland and the other parts of Britain were introduced to reflect the distinctive features of the Scottish scene. Care was taken throughout, however, to ensure that the major thrusts of the original policy were in no way diluted.

2.2 In The Scottish Office, and indeed throughout the educational world, there was immediate consideration of the implications of the statement. The colleges had already been afforded a degree of independence in previous legislation, including some financial freedom, but what was now proposed went much further. The College Councils, for example, would now be employers, with all the responsibilities which that status entailed; they would own and maintain the college property - not all of which, it must be said, was in prime condition - and they would, above all, have to balance the books year by year without recourse to a regional finance department. Curricular implications were also immediately evident: not all FE courses were strictly vocational; indeed many colleges had been encouraged to take on a powerful community role. How would this role be sustained in a new regime? And others had developed a particular expertise in the further education of students with special needs - an expensive provision which drew in very little by way of fee income. Could this work continue in a situation where colleges might find themselves very close to the budgetary line? At this stage in the debate there was no shortage of questions. The search for satisfactory answers was to take much hard work and ingenuity over the period up to April 1993.

2.3 A consideration in the minds of legislators and civil servants was the timetable for the whole operation. An unknown factor in this was the knowledge that a General Election was pending. It seemed likely at the time that this Election would take place within a year of the House of Commons statements, making it essential, if the new provisions were to receive the force of law, that all the preparatory work should be undertaken at considerable speed. Within that year it would be necessary to draft a White Paper, submit it for the required consultation, prepare and present a Bill to parliament, take the said Bill through its several stages and ensure that the emerging Act became law. In March 1991 this seemed a daunting prospect, and the price of failure would be a vast amount of wasted effort and a further period of uncertainty in the colleges which could only be harmful.

3. The White Paper

3.1 The first task, therefore, was to prepare a White Paper setting out the context for the reforms and spelling out in greater detail than in the Ministerial Statement the future intentions for the management of colleges. This work was taken on by Division 4 of SOED and began almost immediately after the publication of the Statement. At this stage the operation was internal to the Scottish Office but it involved nevertheless frequent contact with the Department of Education and Science ( DES), as it then was, and an active input by HM Inspectors of Schools ( FE Division), who were to play a key role at most stages of the legislation and its implementation. At this particular point they were called upon to ensure as far as possible that proposals in the White Paper represented a reasonable set of demands on the FE colleges, and that the implications for the curriculum of organisational proposals were fully taken into account. Given the pressures of time, those involved had to be available for virtually immediate response to queries during this drafting period. In the event the White Paper was drafted, approved by Ministers, printed and published almost exactly two months after the date of the Ministerial Statement.

3.2 It is not proposed to spell out here the detailed contents of the White Paper, which is readily available for reference. Suffice it to say that under its title 'Access and Opportunity' it set out a wide-ranging policy for vocational education and training in the 1990s. It dealt with the Government's overall aims in this field, the future role of the Careers Service, questions of participation and choice and the need for relevant skills and qualifications, as well as the proposed changes in FE colleges. Indeed, the intention to incorporate FE colleges was covered only in the seventh of eight chapters in the document, which was used to serve the wider purpose of setting out government policy for vocational education and training as well as announcing proposed structural change. The sub-title of the White Paper was: 'A Strategy for Education and Training'.

3.3 In the FE chapter, however, many of the details which would eventually be enshrined in legislation were already to be found. The statutory duty to secure the provision of further education was to pass from the education authorities to the Secretary of State; the funding of further education would be transferred from local to central government; colleges - with the exception of two very small units in Orkney and Shetland - would become incorporated bodies with the full range of responsibilities which this entailed; and a funding mechanism would be devised which would reward in some way effective and efficient colleges. (The way in which this would be done was not indicated at this stage). The White Paper also set out a list of areas of educational activity which would qualify for central funding - in effect a definition of further education. This list (see para 7.24 of the White Paper) was to undergo some refinement as the legislative process continued; it had implications which may not have been fully realised at this early stage.

3.4 It has been stressed earlier that the White Paper was intended to reflect a UK policy for vocational education and training. In the course of its preparation, however, it became clear that it could not match exactly its companion document South of the Border. There were issues relating to the size of the FE system, developments in the colleges themselves and the qualification arrangements in Scotland which required separate provisions. A fundamental difference in the proposals for Scotland was that both recurrent and capital funding for the incorporated colleges was to be by direct grant from The Scottish Office and not, as would be the case in England and Wales, through the intermediary of a Funding Council. The reasons for this were mainly the small size of the system, which could hardly justify the additional layer of bureaucracy, and the depth of experience which was available in The Scottish Office through its funding over many years of the non-university Higher Education sector. A related, and important, Scottish feature was that a defined range of work in FE colleges would be funded by the Secretary of State irrespective of whether it fell into the advanced or non-advanced category. The colleges, rather than the work itself, were being funded. In the DES document it was clear that any advanced work would be covered by grants from a Higher Education Funding Council, thus making FE colleges dependent on two Councils for their financial support. In certain smaller ways too the Scottish document had to differ: the references to the development of new types of vocational qualifications had to take account of the current work of the Scottish Vocational Education Council ( SCOTVEC), and important Scottish developments in quality assurance in further education had also to be reflected.

3.5 The White Paper was issued for consultation in the latter half of May 1991. By chance the date of publication coincided with a seminar on financial management involving virtually all the FE college principals in Scotland; it was perhaps not surprising that the organisers had some difficulty during that day in keeping the attention of their audience closely focussed on the topics which were supposed to be under consideration. The White Paper generated considerable interest, and the consultation period, which lasted until 12 July 1991, was a time of great speculation, some of it quite unprofitable, as to the hidden agenda which lay behind the proposals. There was a body of opinion which held that the removal of FE from the domain of the Local Authorities was no more than a way of reducing levels of Community Charge. (As the White Paper made it clear that the Revenue Support Grant to Authorities would be reduced by an amount which took full account of the change, this argument could not be sustained.) Others believed that the proposals were no more than an attempt to undermine further the power of local government by reducing its range of responsibilities. The reforms were seen by this group as the very opposite of what they were intended to be - a further step in the process towards true delegation of authority to the colleges themselves.

3.6 The formal responses to the consultation were, not surprisingly, mixed. In general the colleges themselves welcomed the prospect of having greater independence and new powers, though there were expressions of caution - no doubt in anticipation of the load of work and responsibility which would accrue to them. The likelihood of closer co-operation with autonomous colleges was warmly welcomed by employers and their organisations. The major certificating bodies, including SCOTVEC, recognised the new impetus which the White Paper would give to vocational qualifications. On the other side, perhaps predictably, the teaching and student unions expressed their opposition as did the Local Authorities and their organisations (The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and The Association of Directors of Education in Scotland). Even some of the supporters of the proposals commented on what they saw as an excessively tight time-scale for their implementation.

3.7 Among the more detailed comments that were made some were to prove quite insightful. There was concern about the developing field of Community Education, including Adult Basic Education, which took place in a variety of locations, including FE colleges. Who would have the continuing responsibility for this provision, and how would it be funded? There was also some disquiet about the decision that the allocation of bursaries for non-advanced further education would remain the responsibility of the Authorities. Might this give them an effective veto over which courses a college could offer? The notion of colleges being in competition with each other for a perhaps dwindling number of students also left some respondents somewhat uncomfortable. Was this a valid area for competitive activity? Would it lead to the axing of whole areas of college provision to the disadvantage of students and lecturers alike? Needless to say there was also concern about the nature of the funding system which would eventually be applied, and perhaps especially as to how the quality bonus, as it was sometimes described, would be calculated. All these comments proved extremely valuable as the work on the legislation and its implementation proceeded. They gave a useful early warning of those areas which would need close attention, further consultation and sensitive decision.

3.8 The official conclusion based on the consultation was that there was no need for major changes in the policy areas covered by the White Paper. Ministerial statements were made to reassure those concerned about the future of Community Education and about a particular concern regarding transfer of staff. The way was now clear for the preparation of a parliamentary Bill.

4. The Preparation of the Bill

4.1 The Further and Higher Education (Scotland) Act 1992, as it was eventually called, covered important areas of Higher Education ( HE) as well as the incorporation of FE colleges; indeed as the Bill as a whole went through its various stages the HE sections attracted more attention than those dealing with FE. This account considers only the FE provisions, while recognising that there were to be later implications for FE colleges deriving from the changes in the HE sector.

4.2 The time-scale to which officials and their advisers were working made it inevitable that some early drafting of the Bill had to be undertaken even before the consultation on the White Paper was complete. Indeed a sketch of the Bill as a whole was in existence by mid-July 1991, so that it was a somewhat less demanding task than it would otherwise have been to make the necessary adjustments based on the consultation. This was not an attempt to pre-empt the outcomes of consultation; rather it was made necessary by the timetable for the presentation of the Bill to Parliament.

4.3 Officials felt reasonably confident in any case that they were in a position to take matters forward because of the high level of informal consultation which accompanied every stage of this exercise. For several years before the Statements of March 1991, and in support of earlier legislation, there had been regular contacts between Departmental officials on the one side and college principals and Local Authority representatives on the other. These had included management training exercises in which HM Inspectors had played a key role, as well as formal meetings to discuss the progress and implications of earlier legislation. As a result the Department was well attuned to the likely reactions to the new proposals. It was also well placed to seek views on a continuing and informal basis as the exercise proceeded. At the time when the Bill itself was being given its final shape arrangements were made to hold frequent meetings with representatives of the Association of College Principals ( APC) as well as with the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland ( ADES). These were informal meetings, without agenda or minutes, but with a helpful level of open debate and positive suggestion. It is, perhaps, only in a country of the size of Scotland that informal consultation of this kind can be entered into. (One interesting outcome of the meetings with the college principals was that the title of the governing bodies for incorporated colleges was changed from College Councils to Boards of Management - the suggestion of an individual principal.)

4.4 The sections needing closest consideration as the drafting proceeded were the definition of FE itself, the composition and duties of the college Boards of Management and the range of provisions designed to ensure that the transition from Local Authority to central control proceeded as smoothly as possible. There was still concern that elements of Community Education might be prejudiced by the proposed changes and there were many redrafts of the relevant Section of the Bill before a formulation was reached which seemed to allow sufficient flexibility to avoid the undermining of valuable developments. At the same time Ministers made statements both North and South of the Border to reassure those concerned about the future of Community Education (in Scotland) and about the position of Adult Education in particular in England and Wales. As far as the Boards were concerned their duties were spelt out in considerable detail (see Section 12 of the Act) so as to make quite clear to prospective Board members what the full range of their responsibilities would be. Decisions were also reached about the composition of Boards: an important provision, for example, was that the college principal would be a full member of the Board. But there would be no automatic place for a Local Authority representative, nor would such a member be entitled to become a Board Chairman. The importance of stressing the future independence of colleges from the Authorities was in a way symbolised by this decision. (In the event the membership of the Boards of almost all colleges have included representatives of the Local Authorities). The transitional arrangements also needed very careful attention. Here there was concern that the transfer of goods and property should proceed with the minimum of difficulty or conflict and that the position of staff who would move from one employer to another was adequately safeguarded. The repercussions of this aspect of the reforms are still evident at the time of writing this account.

4.5 The drafting of a Bill which took full account of a variety of kinds of consultation, and which would, it was felt, command a large measure of public support, was completed in time to have its formal First Reading in the House of Commons early in November 1991

5. The Passage of the Bill

5.1 The debate on the second reading of the Bill took place on 26 November 1991. Not surprisingly, rather more time was devoted to Part II (the HE section) than to Part I. The Secretary of State for Scotland, in presenting the Bill to the House, stressed the Government's intention to break down barriers to access in both further and higher education, and to give FE colleges the freedom they needed to respond to local needs. He sought to alleviate the concerns which had already been expressed during consultation on the White Paper about the position of Adult Education by stressing the duty which Local Authorities would retain to provide Community Education, and by indicating that powers would remain with colleges to make provision in this area. He saw no reason to doubt that the necessary links and co-operation between incorporated colleges and the Authorities would be established. The Opposition saw the Bill as an assault on local democracy; they were not convinced by the Secretary of State's assurances on the question of Adult and Community Education, which they felt to be put at risk by the proposed legislation; and they regretted the lack of any provision in the Bill for an FE Funding Council to create a buffer between the College Boards and central government. The debate was lengthy, lasting over 5 hours; at its conclusion an Opposition amendment rejecting the Bill was defeated by a majority of 105 and it passed to the Committee stage.

5.2 There were 5 sittings of the Standing Committee set up to debate Part 1 ( the FE Section) of the Bill. Some of the same concerns as had been expressed earlier - in some cases more than once - re-emerged, but at the conclusion of the Committee stage most of the changes made were not of great significance. One exception was that a Section was introduced at Report Stage giving the Secretary of State powers, without further legislation, to set up a Funding Council for further education. A second area which exercised the Committee was the provision of further education for students with learning difficulties, and clauses were introduced which strengthened quite considerably the way in which the duty to make such provision was expressed. Some concession was also made to the position of Local Authorities by placing an obligation on College Boards to consult them about their development plans. No change was made, however, to the provisions about representation on the new Boards.

5.3 Once the formality of the Third Reading had been overtaken the Bill passed to the House of Lords where many of the previous arguments were raised again in this new setting. These included the issue of an FE Funding Council which some Peers wished to see introduced immediately upon incorporation. An interesting and possibly significant event at this stage was the receipt by the Scottish Minister of State for Education of a letter from the Chairman of the Association of College Principals in Scotland stating the Association's opposition to the notion of a Funding Council. This was timely, because it may have prevented lengthy debate in the Lords, or later in the Commons, at a time when any undue delay might have been fatal to the Bill. By now the Dissolution of Parliament in anticipation of the General Election was imminent and speculation was rife as to whether or not the Bill could possibly be approved in the time available.

5.4 In the event the Bill was returned to the Commons with the necessary seal of approval from the Upper House and received Royal Assent on March 16, the day Parliament was dissolved. It has been argued - perhaps tongue in cheek - that the history of Scottish Education in the 1990s would have been very different if 1992 had not been a leap year!

6. Planning for Implementation

6.1 It had been necessary, even before the final passage of the Bill through its various stages, to begin to plan for the implementation of the expected provisions of the Act. This was especially important as regards the change of status of the colleges for which a completely new system of management, both in the Department and in the institutions themselves, was expected to be required. The time-scale was much too tight to allow the Department to wait until the Act had Royal Assent before providing, in part at least, a blueprint for the necessary changes. In any action that was taken at this early stage care was taken to concentrate on matters which were reversible, should the Bill fail to be ratified, and on development work which would be useful whether or not the new legislation reached the Statute Book. It was seen to be valuable, for example, to push forward with work on Unit Costing in colleges which had relevance in the context of the 1989 legislation, as well as being crucially important as colleges began to prepare for possible future changes. Similarly, the development of Computerised Management Information Systems ( CMIS) for colleges was needed for effective management whether or not the Bill was approved.

6.2 Soon after the publication of the White Paper arrangements were made for the full-time secondment of a member of HM Inspectorate to Division 4, SOED to analyse the tasks which would have to be carried out and to begin to consider the options available to the Department for the funding of colleges - by far the major responsibility which would fall to the Department when the new legislation came into force. The first job carried out by this secondee was to set out, by September 1991, a comprehensive statement of all the tasks that could be envisaged - assuming the new legislation came into force - in the period up to April 1993. The list was formidable: it included, amongst many other things, the creation of a funding formula, the establishment of a system for capital funding, the design and introduction of a computerised management information system for all colleges, the appointment of new College Councils, the publication of guidelines for development planning in colleges, and an indication of the large amount of staff development which would be required to assist all those concerned to meet their obligations. It was also clear even at this stage that there would be a host of apparently minor matters that would have to be resolved if the transfer of control of the colleges was to proceed smoothly: arrangements for insurance would have to be clarified; the situation of colleges regarding VAT had to be resolved; procedures for dealing with the European Community would certainly change; and colleges would need to know where they stood regarding their charitable status. Most, but not all, of these issues were anticipated in the planning document of September 1991. The next task was to devise a strategy to deal with them and to produce, and publish as soon as it was appropriate to do so, a timetable for implementation.

6.3 The Department was very keen, as in the build up to the Parliamentary Bill, to involve all those who would be affected by the changes in the implementation process. In the course of preparing the implementation plan the idea emerged of establishing a number of Core Groups whose membership would be drawn from people with a direct interest in the FE sector. These Groups would be asked to make recommendations regarding key aspects of the proposed new arrangements. In the event four such Groups were set up; they were to deal with recurrent funding of colleges, capital funding, management information systems, and staff development. Their members, in every case, would include college principals and other college staff, local authority representatives, HM Inspectors and SOED administrators. The input of these Groups to the process of implementation was enormous. Their existence also ensured, as far as it was possible to do so, that the new FE would not be devised solely by politicians and civil servants; it would be based on ideas emerging from the field, and its initial shape would be powerfully influenced by those who were working in it. For completeness it must be recorded that the co-operation of the Local Authorities in this matter was not immediately forthcoming. ADES had opposed the proposed legislation from the start and the directors were, perhaps not surprisingly, reluctant at first to collaborate in a process which would reduce their own influence. As preparations continued, however, there was a growing acceptance of the inevitability of change and most Authorities allowed their officers to play a full part in the work of the Groups. The story of the implementation process is, in considerable measure, an account of the work and deliberations of these Core Groups.

6.4 Two other important steps were taken in this early planning phase. One was a decision, based on a review of the staff and expertise available in the Department, to employ external consultants to advise on certain key aspects of the proposed changes; the second was to engage as soon as possible in discussions with COSLA about the transfer of funds from local to central government which would be required to allow the new FE funding arrangements to be set up. In the event external consultants played an increasingly important role as implementation proceeded. A firm was employed well before the legislation had the force of law to develop a manual of guidance for unit costing in colleges. This decision was fully in line with the policy of not taking steps which depended entirely on the new Act for their relevance - the work on unit costing was urgently needed even in the context of the 1989 legislation; it had redoubled importance in the context of 1993. At a later stage consultants were heavily involved in the development of CMIS, and in reviewing the financial control systems of colleges as they approached the April 1993 deadline. In the context of capital funding a firm of surveyors undertook a selective review of the state of college buildings to assist in the estimate of future capital requirements. Regarding the discussions with COSLA on tranfer of funds it should be recorded simply that they had to be initiated well before April 1992, even at the risk of being abortive, so that work in the Authorities and in the colleges on plans and budgets for 1993-94 could proceed. In the event agreement on the basis for transfer was reached in time for the required decisions to be taken.

6.5 At this time the FE Inspectorate was also considering, in discussion with the administrative Division, how it could best contribute to the process of implementation. In order to play a full part in earlier college developments based on the 1989 Act HM Inspectors had already strengthened their College HMI system under which each inspector in the FE team had time allocated to maintain close contact with a small number of colleges (usually 4-5). This arrangement proved invaluable as implementation progressed, allowing HM Inspectors to provide first line advice to individual colleges and also to keep the Department informed about the state of preparedness of colleges and give early warning of any incipient problems. HM Inspectors had been engaged, prior to the emergence of the new Bill, in a large body of work on performance indicators in FE. The base document 'Measuring Up' had been published in 1989 and work was in full swing on the technical report 'On Target' which was intended to support colleges as they began to develop their own quality assurance systems. All this had a heightened relevance as ever greater autonomy for the colleges was envisaged. Members of the Inspectorate were also to be found, throughout the period of implementation, in the Core Groups, in discussions with ADES, at the many seminars and conferences which were organised and as workers behind the scenes on most aspects of the new arrangements.

6.6 It was perhaps even more essential, once the legislation was in place, to ensure that the colleges themselves were as fully prepared as possible for their new responsibilities. In March 1992 the Department invited colleges to prepare and submit within two months an Action Plan setting out their own intentions and preparations for the period leading up to incorporation. Funding had been secured by the Department which enabled them to offer a sum of £2.3m in total in support of these Action Plans. The drafting of plans was facilitated by the production and issue of an Incorporation Audit Pack to all colleges and many colleges took the opportunity to discuss drafts of their plan with their College HMI. of the available funds were put to Ministers. The grants to individual colleges were announced in a Press Release in June and colleges, in receiving notification of their allocation, were also sent a letter including a brief critique of their own Action Plan. This was backed up by further discussions, as necessary, with their College Inspector.

6.7 By September 1991, therefore, a broad implementation plan was in place. The members of the Core Groups were being approached and the necessary financial discussions were in hand, or being initiated. By mid-1992 the colleges themselves had their own plans as a basis for development and had access to funds designated specifically for that purpose. The whole process was overseen by a small FE Implementation Group, chaired by the Under Secretary, which received and acted on progress reports from the various quarters as matters went forward. This Group continued to meet regularly up to the time of the incorporation of colleges in April 1993. It was to this Group that a comprehensive time-table of tasks to be carried out was first submitted in the early autumn of 1991. This time-table was to be revised and reviewed many times over the following year and a half, but this was the document which provided reassurance and challenge to those most closely involved in the implementation process as the months went by.

7. Funding the Colleges

7.1 The Core Group on Recurrent Funding at its inception was by no means starting from scratch. A substantial body of work had been undertaken in support of the 1989 legislation which had been intended to enhance the levels of financial expertise in colleges; the Department itself had developed a methodology for funding Institutions of Higher Education; and some regions - notably Fife and Strathclyde - were introducing quite sophisticated funding formulae to replace the almost purely historic systems which had obtained hitherto. There was also the experience South of the Border to draw on. Colleges in England and Wales had for a number of years been required to bid for funds for work-related FE under a system which had not been adopted in Scotland. This, and the fact that the Education Reform Act in England pre-dated the related Scottish legislation by one year, meant that there was a body of experience of funding methods in the English FE colleges which did not exist in Scotland.

7.2 Studies of these various approaches were undertaken within the Department and by members of the Core Group in their search for a rational and practical approach to the funding of FE of colleges in Scotland. Starter papers setting out the main characteristics of the existing systems were laid before the Group at its early meetings, and an attempt was made to distil the most acceptable and successful characteristics of each to form the basis of a new system. Decisions had to be taken about the relative merits of approaches based mainly on Full Time Equivalent ( FTE) student numbers, student hours, a calculation of student/ module activity, or approved courses - as well as various combinations of these. At the same time it was clear that no reasonable system could disregard the differences between subjects as far as their relative costs were concerned. There would have to be, therefore, a pattern of weighting of subject or programme areas to take account of these differences. Nor was it likely that the weightings would be identical to those already established for Higher Education. In many cases the subjects could not even be equated to each other. The final, but perhaps most crucial, consideration was that Scottish FE colleges, unlike those South of the Border, offered most of their non-advanced programmes on a modular basis. No course-based funding system could be easily applied in this situation.

7.3 Even when these funding issues were resolved to the satisfaction of the Group there remained other considerations to be taken on board. In FE colleges, unlike the Institutions of Higher Education, there were many students with learning difficulties; indeed some colleges had been designated by their regions as special centres for the provision of programmes for such students. These programmes were expensive to run because of the equipment needed and the necessarily low student/lecturer ratio. This particular issue had, of course, received close attention during the passage of the parliamentary Bill. The funding of such programmes could not fit neatly into a pattern designed for the generality of college work. Another complication for the Group was that, unlike the Funding Council in England which would fund only FE activity, the intention in Scotland was that the Department would fund the work of the colleges as a whole, in so far as it met the definitions in the Act. The funding formula devised had, therefore, to take account of courses of higher education - a high proportion of the work in many colleges - and a wide range of adult education which might fall into a variety of categories. Finally there had to be decisions on how fee income would be taken into account. Colleges were to be encouraged to seek income-generating work, but not at the expense of distorting their overall provision. Given the complexity of these issues it is perhaps not surprising that they were not all resolved rapidly or with an easy consensus. It soon became clear that it was unlikely that a fully-fledged funding formula would be ready for general application in time for the first year of incorporation.

7.4 After full consideration of the available options the Core Group decided that the most satisfactory basic measurement for funding purposes would be one derived from a unit based on the modules (or module equivalents) taken by each individual student. It came to be known as SUM (Student Unit of Measurement) and drew on features from the established Fife system as well as from the Department's own approach to Higher Education funding. This proposed approach was incorporated in a consultative paper issued by the Department and published in June 1992. The paper was not at this stage complete; it set out the main features of the proposed system but did not deal, for example, with subject weightings which were covered in a later technical paper in the Autumn of 1992. A seminar was held soon after publication to explain the proposals and to allow those concerned to debate the issues. The response at the seminar and through the formal consultation was positive, though it must be said that there were fewer written comments on it than had been expected, given its importance. The time allowed for response was, of course, short (but then, this was the rule, not the exception, throughout this exercise). More positively, the proposals did derive from ideas generated largely by people who would be responsible for operating the system at a later stage and who understood very well the workings of FE colleges. One source of concern, at this stage and later, was the effect that the formula would have on those colleges which served areas of deprivation; they had little opportunity to generate fee income and were, in a sense, being subsidised by the regions to provide a service to their communities. Later applications of the formula would have to take special heed of these concerns.

7.5 The main task of the Core Group on Recurrent Funding was complete once this consultation had been undertaken, but the Group continued to meet - with less frequency - and served as a sounding board for the drafts of various financial documents to be issued by the Department to colleges. The Group also kept an eye on the approach to recurrent funding being taken by the Further Education Funding Council ( FEFC) in England, ensuring as far as possible that no valuable lessons were being missed. It was noted, for example, that the FEFC was proposing to include in its formula specific elements to cover guidance activities at the different stages: entry, on-programme, and exit. The Group also gave close consideration to the likely impact on colleges of the proposed formula. Taking account of their advice Ministers decided towards the end of 1992 that funding during the first year of incorporation would be based on historic data obtained from colleges themselves and from the regions. The decision - in some ways regrettable because it delayed by one year the full implementation of the changes - nonetheless prevented excessive disruption which would certainly have ensued from an immediate introduction of formula funding, and allowed a little more time to refine the formula and respond to the concerns expressed as it was being developed. Colleges were circulated early in 1993 with the resultant figures informing them of their grant for 1993-94. They were also given a shadow budget showing them how the funding would have worked out if the formula in its existing form had been applied.

7.6 The necessary preparatory work for the transfer of the responsibility for capital funding to the Department, though certainly no less important than the work on recurrent funding, was, on the face of it, somewhat less complicated. The procedure used in the Higher Education sector based on bids from colleges which would then be evaluated, leading to an eventual allocation, was readily applicable to the FE colleges. Similarly the key criteria used for allocations - need, value for money, and affordability - were equally valid for FE. The major remaining problem, however, was how, within these criteria, to establish a realistic assessment of building requirements in a sector which was known to be seriously deficient in this respect and then to meet them in an atmosphere of severe financial constraint. In order to obtain an initial estimate of total need all colleges were asked to estimate and justify their requirements for new building projects, maintenance and repair, and renovation; this exercise resulted in an apparent total requirement for capital funding which exceeded by a multiple factor the sum which was expected to be available in the first year of incorporation. Yet the Department's standing in the eyes of college staff would to a large extent depend on its willingness to tackle this perceived shortfall.

7.7 Clearly it was not reasonable to rely entirely on the colleges' self-assessment of their need in this matter and, advised by the Core Group on Capital Funding, the Department took a number of steps in an attempt to arrive at a rational solution to the problem. In the first instance a firm of building consultants was employed to survey a sample of colleges deemed to provide a representative cross-section of the sector as a whole. Their findings were then extrapolated to give an indication of the total needs of all the colleges. These results, together with input from the regions and HM Inspectors and bearing in mind the colleges' own estimates, were used to inform the 1993-94 Public Expenditure Survey. Even this information, however, was insufficient to make defensible allocations to individual colleges and it was decided to undertake, over a slightly longer period, visits to a much larger sample of colleges, using the services of the Scottish Office Buildings Directorate. About half of the colleges in Scotland were visited on this round, and care was taken to include those colleges which were known to have deficient buildings. These visits were made mainly in the second half of 1992. In some cases, the assessments made in the course of this review revealed even greater shortcomings than had been suggested by the colleges themselves. It was decided at this stage that the only priorities which could be met during 1993-94 would be those deriving from health and safety requirements and essential plant and fabric maintenance. The allocations which were eventually forthcoming for further education capital spending permitted little more than a remedying of the most extreme deficiencies in the colleges.

7.8 Throughout the various stages of these reviews the Core Group on Capital Funding was kept informed and was consulted as necessary. The Group also assisted in the arranging of staff development related to building matters (see also Section 11 below), and advised on new Building Procedure Notes, issued in December 1992 to inform colleges of the steps to be taken when proposing building projects, and on the methodology for preparing Schedules of Accommodation. Finally the Group sought to develop procedures for capital expenditure on equipment. Again it proved possible to make good use of the well-tried methods employed in the Higher Education sector. For FE, however, it was decided to borrow the SUM (Student Unit of Measurement) approach from the recurrent funding mechanism and to employ it to make calculations of need based on student numbers. For the first year of incorporation an allocation for equipment was made based on a fixed amount for each college, irrespective of size, and a further amount based on the SUM calculation. Colleges have, of course, freedom to spend this allocation on any items of capital equipment they judge necessary; they may also augment it, if they wish, from revenue or recurrent funding. They may not, however, divert funds allocated for building projects to other purposes.

7.9 In spite of the modest allocations for capital expenditure, and especially for equipment, the processes involved worked relatively smoothly and colleges were not too surprised at the small sums allocated. It was recognised that constraints on public expenditure in all sectors were extreme, and there was a degree of resignation that FE would be no exception. In one respect, however, the colleges felt particularly hard hit: this was when a decision was made, close to the time of incorporation, that colleges would have to make their own provision for major aspects of insurance cover. This involved them in a rapid re-working of budgets and financial plans to accommodate the quite significant sums involved.

7. 10 As with other aspects of the incorporation process the work of the Core Groups on Funding proved immensely valuable to the Department as it prepared to take over the task of allocating significant sums each year to the College Boards. The membership in both cases was crucial. It included college staff, not only at principal level, but also from those who had been dealing very directly with college finances. It also included individual regional officers who were able to offer advice based on the experience of funding colleges and managing building projects up to that time. This advice was freely given and ensured that mistakes were avoided as new systems for allocation were developed.

8. Management Information Systems

8.1 At the time of the Ministerial Statement in March 1991 the FE colleges in Scotland showed a striking variety in the degree of sophistication of their management systems. Some regions - including the largest, Strathclyde - had encouraged their colleges to install computerised systems for many aspects of management; other individual colleges had introduced quite comprehensive systems of their own. Many others were conscious that they should be taking action on this front but were rather unsure as to what that action should be. It would be fair to say that most colleges had some way to go in this respect, and in no college had a system for financial management been developed - it had not so far been necessary. Even more crucially there was no common system, or even compatible systems, across the colleges. The prospect of incorporated colleges which would be required to operate as independent business concerns and yet would have to be accountable to the Department and to the public for their activities made the development of such systems a very high priority indeed.

8.2 The college principals themselves were well aware of this need and, early in 1991, discussed the question of developing appropriate management systems in the context of their Association meetings. A conference with the title Changing the Culture was organised for May 1991 at which it was intended to explore the many management issues - including computerised management systems - which were becoming urgent. By coincidence, this conference fell at about the same time as the publication of the White Paper 'Access and Opportunity'; its content was thereby given even greater relevance. A key outcome of the conference was a request to the Scottish Further Education Unit ( SFEU) to investigate the kinds of systems which would be required in colleges to cover financial management. As a result a joint Working Party, chaired by the APC and with membership from SOED and SFEU was established to explore in detail the field of computerised management information systems. An early conclusion of this Group was that it was not sensible to look at finance in isolation; colleges would eventually need integrated systems covering all the major management functions: finance, personnel, property and curriculum. The Working Party went one stage further by inviting all Scottish colleges to commit themselves to the concept of a single user requirement for CMIS and received a positive response. In the final quarter of 1991 a part-time development officer, supported by the SOED, worked on the preparation of this user requirement which was eventually circulated to colleges for their approval before the end of the year.

8.3 The fourth quarter of 1991 was also the time when the Department's plans for the expected legislative changes were being laid. Fundamental to these plans was the notion of participative development and this was manifested in the setting up of the various Core Groups already mentioned. It was agreed at this stage that the membership of the APC's Working Party should be extended and that it should be incorporated in the Core Group arrangements. The Group retained its APC chairman but new members from the education authorities and from among college experts in CMIS were added. This was a prime example of on-going work, which was clearly relevant to forthcoming needs, being harnessed and supported in the interests of successful implementation of the Act.

8.4 The task facing the Core Group on CMIS and the Department was monumental - greater perhaps than members realised at the time. Not only had user requirements to be finalised but they had, in their turn, to be developed into operational requirements which could form the basis of contracts with suppliers; the existing position in colleges had to be explored in detail so that the most economical ways could be found of converting all colleges to compatible systems (in the inimitable jargon of computer experts: a migration strategy); all those who would be involved in the colleges had to be trained in the necessary skills; and the finance had to be found to meet the very large bills which might be expected.

8.5 It was immediately recognised that there would be a need to call on outside help if there was to be any hope of accomplishing the necessary tasks in time. Consultants were invited to tender for an initial phase of development with a remit which included the verification of the user requirement prepared for the Core Group, its refinement to form a statement of operational requirements, an evaluation of the existing position in colleges, the development of a migration strategy, the provision of a list of possible suppliers for the equipment that would be needed, and participation in the selection process for the eventual suppliers. It is indicative of the sense of urgency that was being felt in this project that the time from the closing date for the tenders to the final award of contract - including the short-listing and interviewing of selected firms - was a mere six days; and the work was expected to start immediately. In January 1992 this contract was awarded to a major firm of consultants and a full-time development officer was appointed as a project manager for the Department.

8.6 Parallel work was undertaken to ensure that finance would be available for the not inconsiderable investment in computer hard- and software that the system was going to need. Because the colleges would be under regional management until the date of incorporation, the agreement of the Regional Councils had to be sought to act as intermediaries for the initial purchases of capital equipment. In practice they were given capital consent to borrow a sum of £2m for this purpose, with the Department agreeing to cover any short-term interest payments.This agreement was forthcoming; any reservations the regions may have had about the legislation as a whole were set aside in face of the pressing needs of the colleges.

8.7 By February 1992 the draft user requirement had been taken to the stage where it could be issued to all colleges and discussed at a series of consultative workshops which involved the consultants as well as departmental representatives and members of the Core Group. It proved possible by March 1992 to issue a final version of this document by which time the whole FE system had been well alerted to the implications of introducing a country-wide CMIS. Consultants had visited all the colleges; the members of the Core Group had reported back to their own organisations; and HM Inspectors, through their frequent college contacts, had been underlining the message. The responsibility now passing to the colleges was further emphasised by the decision to accept the consultants' proposal to create a number of network teams across the country. Each team would consist of representatives from a group of colleges and would be responsible for the development of CMIS within their group. For each team a host college was nominated which was expected to take the lead in the local development. Funds were made available to establish an electronic mail system to ease communication among the network teams and from the teams to the Department. The teams were directly supported by the consultants and by HM Inspectors. Every college in the country was involved in these arrangements.

8.8 By mid-1992 the final operational requirements for the system had been prepared and it was now possible to invite tenders for the supply of equipment to the 43 colleges involved. Because the eventual purchases were regarded by Treasury as a Government purchase - even though they were being made on behalf of 43 colleges - the procedures used had to comply with specified procedures which included advertising European Community-wide and allowing sufficient time for possible contractors to reply. All this added to the anxiety of the Department and the Core Group about the time-scale for the project, but no short cuts were possible at this stage. The tenders were assessed and a short list was drawn up by the end of July 1992. Meetings were held with the short-listed firms and - not without a number of unforeseen difficulties - a decision was made to offer contracts to three suppliers to equip the colleges with the hardware they needed. The choice of three rather than a single supplier was based on the level and type of equipment already present in the various colleges and the estimated cost of moving to provision which would meet all requirements.

8.9 A further stage of the consultancy was agreed before the end of 1992 to ensure that all colleges would be in a position, by April 1993, to run financial management systems on the hardware which was being installed. At this stage the work of the Core Group was deemed to be complete and it was disbanded. Implementation was now put in the hands of the Department which set up a project structure which conformed to government requirements for major investments of this kind. As before, however, support was offered through the network teams with specific training in the use of equipment being provided by the suppliers. User assurance groups fed back comments to the Departments project team as final arrangements were made and acceptance testing was undertaken.

8.10 By April 1993 most targets had been met. The great majority of colleges had the necessary hardware and software in place, though in a number of cases it had not been piloted to the extent that would have been desirable; all those with responsibility for the systems had had opportunity to undertake related training; some systems were already running smoothly and caused little concern; in all cases, however, more training and support was still required and there was some way to go before the eventual goal of an integrated management system was to be reached. Some colleges, without being negative in their attitude, maintained parallel manual management systems to cover the possibility of initial hitches.

8.11 The development of CMIS was at one and the same time the most nerve-wracking and most exciting of the series of events leading up to incorporation. It placed enormous stresses on individuals and groups both inside and outwith the Department; it involved considerable sums of money; and it required for its success the commitment of a very large number of people. It might be argued that CMIS in all colleges would have been required with or without incorporation. This may well be true; it would be foolish to speculate, however, as to how long the process might have taken in other circumstances.

9. Development Planning

9.1 The production of development plans incorporating a college's intentions, targets and projects for future years was not common practice prior to the 1989 legislation. Colleges in England and Wales had greater experience in this matter as they had been obliged to produce detailed plans and bids for funds under the work-related FE arrangements referred to earlier. Scottish colleges had a more limited experience based on the extent to which they had been involved in MSC (later Training Agency) projects in the late 80s and early 90s. With the 1989 Act, however, there was a greater degree of delegation of responsibility from the Education Authorities to the colleges, and it was soon evident that more formal forward planning for all the work of the college was needed. Guidance in the production of development plans was well in hand before the publication of the 1991 White Paper, and an initial study on development planning had been commissioned and published by the Department as early as 1989. With the 1992 Act, the submission of regular development plans would become a statutory requirement. Even without this requirement the need to plan in a more formal way became very evident as the implications of incorporated status became ever clearer.

9.2 In anticipation of the passage of the Act the Department felt obliged to take action and, in March 1992, asked all colleges to submit a copy of their current development plan in whatever form it existed. The purpose was to update the information which was already available as a result of the 1989 study and to establish a firm baseline from which further work could be undertaken. The returns were analysed by an outside consultant and a further request to colleges in July for later development plans and financial projections announced that guidance on the production of development plans in the new incorporated environment would soon be forthcoming. The intention throughout was to build on existing work as far as possible rather than create a completely new format with all the additional work which this would incur.

9.3 In order to ensure that the Guidelines were acceptable to colleges the Department decided at this stage to appoint a short-life Working Group, under the chairmanship of a college principal, which was given the task of commenting on a set of draft guidelines and making any other recommendations about assistance which might be useful to colleges in this matter. As a further safeguard the draft guidelines were put out for consultation to all colleges in October 1992.

9.4 Informed by the returns from this consultation, and by the comments from the Working Group, the Department issued its final set of guidelines in January 1993. This document included a statement of the purposes of development plans as they were now envisaged, both for the colleges themselves and for the Department, suggestions for the content of plans, and a timetable for the submission of plans up to 1997. Colleges did have to make changes to their practice hitherto, and some indicated that they would have difficulty in complying with all the details of the Department's requirements at the beginning of the process - some of the returns depended on management systems which were not yet fully operative - but in general they were able to move relatively painlessly into the new style of planning. On the recommendation of the Working Group the Department also appointed an outside consultant with detailed knowledge of similar operations South of the Border to run a series of workshops, starting in March 1993, to offer further support to those responsible for preparing the plans.

10. The College Boards of Management

10.1 A key element in the proposed arrangements for the management of incorporated colleges was to be the College Council in its new form. FE Colleges had had Councils long before the 1992, or even the 1989, legislation was envisaged, but the management responsibilities of these earlier bodies were strictly limited and their effectiveness variable. Under the 1989 Act they took on more clearly defined duties, but they were still heavily dependent on the Education Authorities which retained control of major aspects of finance, were the owners of college property, and remained the employers of all staff in spite of the College Councils' increased role in staff management. With incorporation all this was to change: the new style College Councils would have full financial freedom and responsibility, would be the employers of staff - with all that this entailed - and would have to manage and maintain the college property and assets. It was in recognition of this greatly enhanced role that the Department accepted, during discussions with college principals, the suggestion that their title should become Boards of Management.

10.2 The composition of the Boards was laid down in the Act, as was the intention that the initial appointments would be made by the Secretary of State. Thereafter Boards would fill vacancies themselves, always staying within the statutory composition. In the first instance shadow Boards would be appointed - to operate from September 1992 - so that colleges would be in a position to make adequate preparations in the period leading up to April 1993. These shadow Boards were to have the same composition as the fully-fledged management bodies which they would become, and were given sufficient powers to enable them to undertake whatever actions were needed to prepare their colleges for incorporation, including the power to recruit staff for this purpose. They were also to have access to information as required from the Education Authorities. Needless to say, a considerable proportion of their time and energy in this build-up period was devoted to negotiations with the regions on such matters as the ownership of property and access to financial information in a form which was of value to them.

10.3 The initial appointment of the shadow Boards was not a straightforward matter. A way had to be found of preparing a list - for each college - of persons who might be approached by the Secretary of State with a view to Board membership. It was decided that the only possible mechanism to achieve this end was through the College Inspector system. College Inspectors held individual discussions with all college principals, the existing College Council chairmen and regional officials and drew up, on the basis of these discussions, a recommended list for each college. These lists were collated and checked by the Administrative Division and put to the Secretary of State for his approval. Each nominee received a personal letter inviting him or her to become a member of the relevant College Board. Overall, this approach to the making of appointments, though expensive of manpower, went smoothly. It demonstrated again the Department's willingness to involve those most directly concerned in the impending changes. All the shadow Boards were in place by the beginning of September and were ready to assume their full range of duties in good time for the incorporation date.

10.4 The interim period - between September 1992 and the end of March 1993 - was not, however, an easy time for the Boards. There was, first of all, a need to familiarise all the Board members with the full range of duties which fell to them. (See Section 11 below). Once this was achieved, and within the flexibility allowed by the Act, each Board had to reach its own modus operandi , deciding the extent to which matters would be delegated to college management and which ones would have to be brought back to the full Board; they had to establish their own sets of sub-committees, bearing in mind the major responsibilities in staff and property management which were now coming their way; they had to make the appointments which they felt necessary to ensure a smooth transition to their new status. These, and other tasks, all had to be completed at a time when the regions were still for most purposes the interim college managers and showed varying levels of readiness to provide Boards with all the information they needed. A particular bone of contention in some cases related to the future ownership of property. There were many instances throughout Scotland where particular buildings had been used for more than one purpose - perhaps partly for FE purposes and partly by a Social Work Department or a school. Claims to future ownership had to be prepared and negotiated. There were even cases where ownership of a particular property was a dubious privilege, and each party was seeking ways to ensure that the liability did not fall in their direction. It is greatly to the credit of the shadow Boards and to regional representatives that the great majority of these potential disputes were resolved before the date of incorporation; it seems likely that only a few will have to pass to the arbitration procedures allowed for in the Act.

10.5 Arguably the most onerous new task falling to the College Boards, and certainly the one most likely to arouse sensitivities was that of acting as employer for the college staff. Not only were Boards to become recruiters of staff and paymasters, they also had the responsibility of deciding on the thorny matter of conditions of service. Staff were assured in legislation that they would transfer to their new employers under the same conditions as before incorporation, but there was no guarantee that these conditions would obtain for all time; it would be for the Boards to introduce changes as they thought fit. There was much concern among staff about the possibility of a variety of sets of conditions in different colleges.

10.6 Even prior to the appointment of the shadow Boards the Chairmen of the College Councils were clearly aware of these concerns, and of the vulnerable position in which they might find themselves. A number of them got together in the summer of 1992 to explore the need to set up an organisation of some kind to represent them and to establish common policies in so far as this was necessary. Initially a group with the title 'Employers' Forum' was set up as an organisation which would take over the management side responsibilities of the Scottish Joint National Committee ( FE) which had hitherto been the body which pronounced on matters of pay and conditions of service for FE staff. Membership would be open to all colleges and each would be represented by the principal and the Board chairman. The Department supported the creation of this body and offered financial support for three years (a total of £240,000) after which time it was expected to be self-financing. A final decision to proceed with the organisation was taken at a conference in Elgin in September 1992 involving the newly appointed chairmen of the shadow Boards; an executive committee was elected, and the body was re-named the Employers' Association. In due course a full-time Chief Executive was appointed to run the Association's affairs. The Association was well established before the date of incorporation in April 1993.

11. Staff Development

11.1 Every aspect of incorporation made new demands on college staff and college Boards and it was evident from an early stage that a wide-ranging programme of staff development would be needed to underpin the work that had to be done. Even before the publication of the 1991 White Paper a substantial amount of staff development relevant to college management was already in train or had been undertaken: the SFEU had, for example, published manuals on Financial Management, Property Management, Staff Management and Development Planning in support of the 1989 legislation; attention had been paid to the needs of the College Councils, and a comprehensive pack of materials for their guidance was readily available; series of seminars on aspects of college management had also been arranged for college staff at various levels. But all this work needed revision and intensification as the implications of incorporation became clear. In order to identify these demands, and to ensure as far as possible that they were met , the Core Group on Staff Development, meeting for the first time in October 1991, was given the task of drawing up plans for staff development leading up to April 1993. In common with the other Core Groups it was able to draw on the knowledge and experience of college staff (including administrative staff), regional officials and, in this case, the agencies which would have a direct role in providing the necessary training: the SFEU and the Scottish School of Further Education ( SSFE).

11.2 The staff development programme which emerged proved to be varied in content and comprehensive in relation to the groups covered. It included regular seminars, a wealth of print material, an incorporation video, an information pack for College Boards, a regularly produced magazine and, as incorporation approached, the creation of a Field Force which was ready to offer assistance to individual colleges on key aspects of their task. The main agency for this centrally-sponsored programme was the SFEU which was allocated specific additional funds to enable it to deliver what was required. A more informal level of support was available through the College Inspector system, referred to in Section 6 above. HM Inspectors were able, in their regular visits to colleges, to discuss the concerns which staff expressed and to participate in local staff development activities; they were also able to feed back to the Department and the Core Group information about these concerns which would influence the central programme as it developed. The third arm of the staff development programme was the range of in-college activities which went on across the country. All colleges mounted their own support programme, often using centrally-based materials and targeting the work according to their own particular perceived needs. Without this effort the central provision would have been of very limited value.

11.3 The seminars which were run by the SFEU on behalf of the Department represented an intensification of the Unit's on-going programme. A series of management topics was identified covering the major new responsibilities - finance, personnel and property - and they were adapted to meet the needs of various groups of staff. Principals continued to have their own programme, and versions were developed to suit their deputes, those in middle management and administrative staff. In the case of administrative staff steps were taken to develop a new professional qualification for them which would facilitate career progression. This was done in recognition of the increasing dependence of the colleges on high grade administrators as they accepted ever greater responsibility for their own affairs.

11.4 The need to keep people as well informed as possible about what was going on was given high priority by the Core Group. The principal way in which the Group sought to meet this need was by publishing, at regular intervals, a magazine with the title 'Countdown' which included a range of articles and information relating to the progress towards incorporation. Multiple copies of this publication were made available free of charge to all colleges in an effort to ensure that all staff had access to authoritative information. Many colleges supplemented this magazine with leaflets of their own, either using existing college publications as a vehicle for the incorporation material or producing new documents devoted entirely to this topic. The SFEU's own regular publication 'Broadcast' also included, among its regular features, much information related to the new legislation. There was no shortage of documentation - indeed some felt there was too much - but there were still complaints that people were being kept in the dark, especially during the early stages of the exercise. Certainly in early 1992 many lecturers in colleges were unsure of the full implications of the proposed changes, as indeed were many others much closer to the action. Any concerns about lack of information after the Act had been passed were much less justifiable.

11.5 A need was recognised by the Core Group to ensure that the new shadow College Boards which came into existence in September 1992 should also have access to relevant information in a form which would be suitable for them. The response was threefold: special seminars for Board chairmen were organised, the information pack which had been designed for the 1989 legislation was fully up-dated, and an information video was commissioned. The last-mentioned was seen also as a possible vehicle for informing a wider audience about the main features of incorporation. Beyond this it was felt, quite legitimately, that the onus of ensuring that all members of College Boards were well informed and trained as necessary lay with the colleges themselves. All colleges took steps to meet this responsibility.

11.6 A particular effort was needed to cover the demands which would be made by the introduction of new management information systems. The planning of an appropriate programme in this area fell mainly to the Core Group on CMIS, as the expert Group, and involved several agencies. The consultants appointed to advise on CMIS provided a range of training, including regional seminars and in-college support; the suppliers themselves were contracted to provide training in the use of their equipment; and the college network teams (see Section 8 above) were themselves a rich source of staff development, allowing college staff to benefit from each other's experience with the support of consultants and HM Inspectors. In this area, however, the pressure of time was extreme. An adequate programme was mounted for the immediate needs of those most directly involved but a continued programme of training and development is likely to be needed for some time as the various parts of the computerised systems come on stream.

11.7 As the time of incorporation approached it became evident that the remaining development needs of individual colleges differed considerably from one location to another. It was no longer useful to offer general seminars (one representative from each college) - a more customised approach was required. In order to respond to these differing needs it was decided on the advice of the Core Group to create a Field Force - a small cadre of specialists in the various aspects of college management who were ready to visit colleges at their request and to spend sufficient time with them to ensure that any immediate difficulties were overcome. The services of this Field Force were in considerable demand towards the end of 1992 and in the early part of 1993. In effect the Field Force represented a cost free consultancy service as far as the colleges were concerned and made a valuable contribution in those colleges which they visited. Oddly enough some colleges had to be persuaded to make use of the service, feeling no doubt that to do so was some kind of admission of weakness; others which were clearly well ahead with their preparations took very full advantage of this extra bonus.

12 Conclusion

12.1 The two years between March 1991 and April 1993 were of great importance in the history of Scottish post-school education. During that period, alongside the developments in the higher education sector, preparations were made for a major change in further education. Not only were procedures to be different, there had to be what amounted to a culture shift among those who were responsible for running the colleges. They had to be ready to take on board tasks and responsibilities which they had hitherto been able to leave to their managers - the Education Authorities - and for which some would claim they were ill-prepared. True, there had been some move towards autonomy enshrined in the 1989 Education Act, but it was very limited compared with the demands of the 1992 legislation. This was not the first time that the FE sector had been required to submit to rapid change: in the early 1980s the curricular revolution of the 16-19 Action Plan had required a total rethink of approaches to teaching and learning within a period of little more than 18 months. On that occasion it was the teacher in the classroom who was in the firing line of change; this time it was first and foremost college management teams.

12.2 On both occasions, whatever success was achieved resulted above all from two factors: one was the readiness of a large number of people, both in the colleges and in educational administration, to commit themselves fully to the work in hand, and to give unstintingly of their time and energy in order to make the changes work. The second was the extent to which those most affected by change were given the opportunity to take an active part in the developments. In the case of Action Plan large numbers of college lecturers became Development Officers and were the powerhouse of curricular change. When they returned to their colleges they were genuine experts and ensured that those who had been less involved had an easily accessible point of reference when it was needed. In the case of incorporation the existence of, for example, the Core Groups, Network Teams and the Field Force had the same effect.

12.3 That is not to claim that everything went smoothly, or that there may not be problems still to be resolved. This narrative has indicated the points at which there was real concern about lack of progress or very genuine frustrations. And it is inevitable that the early years of incorporation will have their difficult moments. Overall, however, the omens are favourable. In spite of the demands of incorporation colleges have somehow found the time and energy to devote themselves to fostering the quality culture and, through their own Quality Forum, are setting demanding standards for all aspects of college life. Many colleges clearly relish the prospect of more freedom of operation and will respond well to the opportunities which they now have. College Boards contain a remarkable cross-section of members of the Scottish community, and will exert a positive influence on the sector. The elements are in place; only time will tell whether the intentions of Access and Opportunity are fully realised.

J. HOWGEGO September 1993

Acknowledgments

The co-operation and assistance of a number of individuals in the preparation of this document are gratefully acknowledged: Gerald Wilson (Secretary SOED) for initial advice on the form and scope of the account. Dick Jackson (Assistant Secretary SOED Div 4) for commissioning the work and advice on the final draft. John Henderson (Senior Principal SOED Div 4) for general advice on the project and providing essential documentation. Mitch Brown HMI for detailed information about funding procedures. Joyce Johnston HMI for help with the Development Planning and Staff Development sections. Ken Hope HMI for his input on the section on CMIS. Bob Young HMI for assistance with capital funding. Michael Leech, Tom Burness and Jim Neill, college principals, for their readiness to discuss the consumer's viewpoint, and all those within and outside the SOED with whom I had the privilege of working when it was all happening. J.H. September 1993