GROWTH AND INNOVATION FUND - unionlearn Bid… · Web viewThe dates given for DfE decisions are...

Bidding Guidance Draft final V1190916

Union Learning Fund

Bidding Guidance

Round 18

2016

1. Introduction

1.1 The Union Learning Fund (ULF) Prospectus This guidance is designed to assist you in completing the application form for Round 18 of

the ULF and should be read in conjunction with the ULF Prospectus.

1.2 ULF Round 18 Unionlearn is required to submit a business case to DfE, which will need ministerial sign

off to draw down funding for 2017-18 financial year.

The business case will include a summary of bids that unions have put forward for support through the Union Learning Fund as well as the work that unionlearn itself will do in supporting and developing the union contribution to skills and learning.

Union Learning Fund proposals will need to clearly show how they will help to deliver on the key priority areas agreed with DfE and/or set out the activity which makes each bid uniquely placed to provide learning and skills support.

Unionlearn will need to demonstrate to DfE and Ministers that the breadth and uniqueness of the work of ULF bids underpins the delivery of learning and skills in the workplace and beyond and is pivotal to future economic growth and that unions are a mainstream industrial partner in the UK’s skills landscape.

The bids submitted by unions for support will be reviewed by the ULF Assessment Panel who will recommend whether they are approved for a period of one year and form part of the unionlearn business case for 2017/8.

Bidding Guidance Final 190916

2. PROCESS OVERVIEW

This document provides an overview of the process and a guide to those writing the full application to the ULF Assessment Panel. The dates given for DfE decisions are provisional and subject to funding decision timescales within the Department.

Unions asked to submit full application by

14th October 2016

ULF Assessment Panel convenes

7/8/9th November 2016

Panel decision taken to Minister/DFE and budget for unionlearn agreed.

December 2016

DULF bids notified

Mid/Late December 2016


3. WRITING YOUR BID - WHAT WILL ASSESSORS LOOK FOR AND HOW WILL THEY ASSESS BIDS?

a) At the assessment panel the bids will be scored using the priorities described in the Prospectus:

Priority 1 Improving equality and engaging those most disadvantaged in the workplace.

Priority 2 Growing high quality Apprenticeships and TraineeshipsPriority 3 Supporting English and maths LearnersPriority 4 Developing the learning infrastructure, improving workforce development

and skills progressionPriority 5 Demonstrating sustainability, value for money and mainstreaming union

learning activity

b) In order to ensure that unions can propose bids that are both broad (covering all or most of the priority areas) and more specific, projects do not have to address all these priorities but must address at least 2 of Priorities 1-4.

c) To ensure that all bids address value for money and sustainability all bids will be scored against Priority 5.

d) The scoring will be out of 100 and the elements assessors will score against are:1. Strategic Fit of the Project (40/100) 2. Impact and Added Value (25/100)3. Previous performance, Sustainability and Value for Money (35/100)

e) The assessment process will ask a number of key questions about your bid: What is the aim of the bid? What is its unique selling point? Is there a clear

and well-articulated rationale for the activity proposed? Who will it benefit? Is there evidence for the need/demand for the activity

proposed? Why is the union best placed to deliver the bid? Is the proposed activity

added value (eg. is not substituting for other provision)? Is there a clear delivery strategy with clearly defined inputs, outputs and

outcomes? How will learners be tracked and impact assessed? Is there evidence that the costs and benefits have been described and

represent value for money? Is the extent and nature of union/employer contribution satisfactory?

f) The unionlearn team will provide assessors with a short summary document for each bid that will outline:

o Union background (size, distribution geographically etc.)o Previous ULF bids and details of audit and performance reports.o Any particular issues that the panel may need to be aware of when considering

the bid (eg. Industrial relations/employer attitudes in sector, pay and conditions issues or experience with providers).

4


4. STRATEGIC FIT

Bids will be scored for their Strategic Fit (40/100). This will assess whether the bid is addressing the agreed priority areas and whether evidence is presented for both the reason the bid is required and the action it proposes to take.

In writing your bid you should ensure that you address both these issues.

4.1 Fit with Priorities Does the bid address two or more of priorities 1-4 adequately and fully? (If so which

ones and how) The application should identify:o Who the bid will focus on.o What it will do with them. o How it will reach them.o What the outcomes and outputs will be.

In showing how the bid meets strategic needs it should identify the specific issues for the priorities selected and demonstrate why the bid is required. For example:

o For Priority 1: Which disadvantaged groups will be supported? How has this group been identified? What is the evidence of need? What will they achieve through the bid? How will success be measured?

o Priority 2: How will the project work with employers to increase the number of high quality apprenticeship/traineeships? What type of traineeship or apprenticeship will the bid focus on? How will the bid engage with employers to maximise use of the levy? What will the bid do to ensure the quality of apprenticeship/traineeship? How will the project support the development of new apprenticeship standards?

o Priority 3: How does the project plan help to identify and support learners who need to improve their maths and English? How will the project engage employers and providers to improve the development of maths and English?

o For Priority 4: How will the project work with employers and stakeholders to promote lifetime learning and co-investment? What workforce need will be tackled? How will progression, productivity or job security be improved? Which Employer/LEP/Sector/Combine Authority strategies will be supported? How will learning access or learning outcomes be improved?

4.2 Evidence of Need Evidence for the need and for the approach adopted should be provided. This might be

demographic, sector or union data in the case of need and may be union track record or evidence from other bids in the case of approach. Where a bid is offering a new or innovative approach the evidence requirement may be less important than the argument made for the potential success of the bid.

Bids needs to show they are setting themselves stretching but achievable targets in order that ULF achieves the best value for money.

The bid will need to show its outcomes and outputs (in total and profiled by quarter) and how these will be recorded, measured and reported. All projects will have to demonstrate that they have systems in place that are able to track their learners. To

5


demonstrate that there is a project plan a quarterly profile for outcomes will be required. Successful projects will be subject to performance monitoring and a performance related payment system which will be based on the achievement of these outcomes. (Appendix 1)

5. IMPACT AND ADDED VALUE (25/100)

5.1 Projects should aim to show how the union role adds value, what activity/learner engagement would not occur without union intervention and why ULF investment is required.

5.2 Your bid should demonstrate that the project is necessary and that the union is well placed to deliver this bid. For example:

o That the bid is filling a gap or addressing a market failure (eg where employers are not supporting development or where particular groups find it hard to access appropriate learning or will not attend traditional learning opportunities).

o That there is something innovative about the bid in terms of approach? (eg that it will it reach people that others cannot or that it will engage or improve access to learners in a different way).

o That it will it achieve better outcomes or support learners and provide opportunities that do not already exist or in a way that is different to existing opportunities.

5.3 How will the union will measure or assess the impact of its proposed activity. (eg Does the union have a track record or can it provide case studies/surveys or have evidence from other bids that supports this approach?) Where a bid is offering a new or innovative approach the evidence requirement may be less important than the arguments made for the potential success of the bid approach (eg why it might access learners better than others or why learners might be better engaged).

6. PREVIOUS PERFORMANCE, SUSTAINABILITY AND VALUE FOR MONEY

6.1 In this section you will need to show how your bid provides value for money, how its activity will be sustained in the future (if that is appropriate), that the union has the capacity and track record to deliver the project and to demonstrate how the union intends to embed the activity within the union and the mainstream.

The type of evidence required in this section will be:o union track record of delivery in previous projects with ULF or other funding

streams. o details of bid financial inputs and outputso additional sources of support (other than ULF) to the bid o explanations for bid costs (including staffing requirements)o calculations of bid costs per outcome, details of management o Governance arrangements (including equality and diversity arrangements)

Where a bid is offering a new or innovative approach the evidence requirement may be less important than the arguments made for the potential benefits of the activity or approach (e.g. why it might improve productivity, reduce costs to the employer, state or individual or enable an individual to achieve improvement that enhances their progression, employability and life chances).

6


When reviewing your bid you should ask yourself:o Have the spending costs been justified? o Has the bid been costed to provide value for money? o Is the bid governance and staffing adequate to deliver its objectives? o What will the union /employer/individual leverage be? o What will it measure to show impact? o How will it mainstream or sustain the work after ULF?

6.2 In the application form’s financial section you will be asked for details of expenditure and leverage. There is also an open ended section where you can place details of your financial arguments and calculations for the benefit of the Panel. You are advised to make these as clear and concise as possible to assist in the assessment of the bid. The key things that will be used by the ULF Assessment Panel to assess value for money are:

o Cost per learnero Cost per outcome/outputo Leverage ratio (how many pounds are levered in for every pound invested

through ULF. See Appendix 2 for guides to Leverage and Sustainability)o Overheads ratio (cost of administration/office cost etc. as a proportion of the

bid)

The panel will also see a DfE VfM Score (this calculation weights outcomes and the DfE priority outcomes (Maths, English, qualifications at 2 and L3, Apprenticeships and Traineeships) will score more highly.

In Appendix 3 there are some simple calculators that will help you look at these values for your bid.

Your bid will need to clearly state the numbers of learners and other outcomes and outputs you propose to achieve on a quarterly basis so that these figures can be calculated.

6.3 If your bid is offering a new or innovative approach or initiating work in a new area this should be explained in the bid. The Panel will allow for circumstances and will judge the cost effectiveness in the context of the sector and local circumstances as well as the stage of the activity proposed (eg. setting up cost). The evidence requirement may be less important than the arguments made for the potential benefits of the activity or approach (e.g. why it might improve productivity, reduce costs to the employer, state or individual or enable an individual to achieve improvement that enhances their progression, employability and life chances).

The spread sheet in Appendix 3 may help you with your calculations and the detail of your calculations can be put as a word file in the application form.

6.4 Equality and diversity are important issues for unions and your bid should demonstrate that it has embedded equality and diversity in its activity. This should be in terms of its approach (i.e. ensuring equal access to learning opportunities) and operation (i.e. ensuring staff are trained appropriately). Your bid should show how the bid is ensuring

7


equality and diversity:o How will bid staff be trained?o How will you ensure any specific issues of inequality or disadvantage are

tackled? o How will this be recorded and monitored?o What policies exist?o Is there union track record?

7. HOW WILL ALL THIS BE SCORED?

7.1 The Assessment Panel will score the bids as described above. The detailed scoring Matrix is outlined in Appendix 4. The Panel will discuss bids and agree a final score for each bid.

7.2 The Panel will determine whether an application should be:

o Recommended – score = >61o Recommended following negotiation and improvement – score = 46-60o Rejected – score = <45

7.3 The Panel will have discretion to recommend a bid that does not meet the exact scoring requirements but has shown some exceptional quality that they feel should be supported by the ULF.

7.4 DfE and the unionlearn Board will review the recommendations and make final decisions on whether bids are successful. DfE have the final decision on the funding of projects.

8


Appendix 1. Performance and Payment

1. PBR

Guide to PBR Framework

2. ULF Underperformance Procedure

Appendix 2. Leverage and Sustainability

a) Guide to Levered-in Funding for Union Learning Fund (ULF) Projects

9


Appendix 3. Calculators to Assist on Value for Money Calculations.

a) Cost per learner and Leverage Ratio’s

Using this spreadsheet you can put in your bid figures to calculate cost per learner, cost per outcome and leverage ratios.

b) Calculating Time for Learning Leverage

This spreadsheet (compliments of USDAW) enables you to put in wage rates and whether the learning is in the learners own time or employer released.

10


Appendix 4: ScoringTHE SCORING SYSTEM

Strategic Fit = 40 PointsEvidence of Impact and Value Added = 25 PointsPrevious Performance, Sustainability and Value for Money = 35 points

1. Strategic Fit [ 40 points]: Does the bid address two or more of the priorities identified in the prospectus adequately and fully? (if so which and how?) The

application should identify who the project will focus on, what it will do with them and how it will reach them. In showing how the project meets a strategic need it should identify:o Clear targets for its activity. For example: Workers without qualifications supported. Workers helped to progress/adapt to

change/cope with redundancy? Disadvantaged groups getting access to learning opportunities to progress.o Evidence for the need and for the approach adopted. This might be demographic, sector or union data in the case of need and may

be union track record or evidence from other projects in the case of approach. Where a project is offering a new or innovative approach or bringing in new or hard to reach learners the evidence requirement may be less important than the argument made for the potential success of the project.

The scoring guide for Fit with Priorities is:

Strategic Fit - 40 points:0-9 10-19 20-29 30-40

General Application does not clearly address two or more of the priorities.

No clear articulation of the proposed impact on skills or productivity/growth or tackling disadvantage

The scale of the impact is low

Two or more priority areas have been identified and the project is aimed at addressing these issue(s).

The project is likely to make some progress towards addressing the priorities although is limited in scale.

Ambition in terms of scale is adequate but it is not clear what success would look

Two or more priority areas have been clearly identified and evidenced. The project is clearly aimed at addressing the issue(s).

The project is either trying some new approaches, attempting to reach new learners/employers, working in a new environment or demonstrates the potential to make a step change

Two or more priority areas have been clearly identified and well evidenced.

The project is clearly aimed at addressing the priorities.

Project is either offering an innovative approach, reaching new learners/employers or is significant in scale and expected to make a significant impact on the skills problem(s) across a location

11


like towards addressing the problem(s).

The scale of impact is appropriate to the strategic fit of the project.

and/or sector, or multiple locations/sectors.

Priority 1 - Improving Equality and Engaging those most disadvantaged in the labour market.

Application does not clearly identify a disadvantaged group or groups in the labour market. There is no or little evidence of need.

There is no clear strategy for engaging the engaging the most disadvantaged group or to tackle areas of inequality.

Application has identified a disadvantaged group or groups in the labour market. There is some evidence provided of need.

The project is aimed at engaging a disadvantaged group and tackling areas of inequality.

There is a strategy provided for how the project plans to engage disadvantages workers and develop routes to learning.

Application has identified a disadvantaged group or groups in the labour market. Evidence of need has been provided.

The project is clearly aimed at addressing the disadvantaged group identified and tackling areas of inequality.

There is a clear strategy provided (such as utilising learner data) for how the project plans to engage disadvantaged workers and developing routes to learning.

The project is either trying some new approaches, attempting to reach a disadvantaged group or demonstrates the potential to make a step change towards addressing the problem(s).

The Application shows a strong evidence base and strategy for engaging the disadvantaged group(s) identified and tackling areas of inequality.

The project has a strong engagement strategy e.g. it is utilising learner data to prioritise and target hard-to-reach learners and develop routes to learning.

Project is either offering an innovative approach, attempting to reach new learners/employers, working in a new environment or is significant in scale and expected to make a significant impact on the skills problem(s) across a location and/or sector, or multiple locations/sectors.

Priority 2 - Growing high quality apprenticeships and

There is no clear strategy for engaging employer and unions to

There is strategy provided for engaging employer and unions to increase the

There is strategy provided for engaging employer and unions to increase the

The project has a strong strategy for engaging employer and unions to increase the number of high

12


traineeships: increase the number of high quality Apprenticeship and traineeship places.

There is no clear strategy set out for how it will ensure the quality of apprenticeships or traineeships.

There is a misalignment between the strategy described and the bid’s apprenticeship and traineeship outputs.

number of high quality Apprenticeship and traineeship places.

There is strategy provided for helping and supporting apprentices and trainees in the work place.

Project aims to engage with employers about the apprenticeship levy and apprenticeship standards.

There is a strategy set out for how it will ensure the quality of apprenticeships or traineeships.

The strategy described aligns with the bid’s apprenticeship and traineeship outputs.

number of high quality Apprenticeship and traineeship places.

The strategy described is aimed at levy paying employers or employers not yet involved in training apprenticeships.

There is a clearly described strategy described to engage with employers to develop new and tailored traineeship and apprenticeships and to develop new apprenticeship standards.

There is a clearly described strategy to ensure the quality of apprenticeships or traineeships.

quality Apprenticeship and traineeship places.

The project has a targeted and clearly described strategy for engaging levy paying employers or employers no yet involved in training apprenticeships.

The project has a targeted and clearly described strategy working with employers to develop new and tailored traineeship and apprenticeships and to develop new apprenticeship standards.

The bid aims to increase opportunities for young people and make them aware of the benefits of apprenticeships and traineeships.

Priority 3 - Supporting maths and English learners.

There is no clear strategy to identify and support learners who need to improve their maths and English.

The application does not have a clear strategy for how it will work with employers and providers to develop tailored approaches to the development of maths

There is strategy provided to identify and support learners who need to improve their maths and English.

The project aims to with employers and providers develop approach to the delivery and development of maths and English skills.

The strategy described aligns with the bid’s maths

There is clearly described strategy provided to identify and support learners who need to improve their maths and English.

There is a clear strategy to work with employers and providers to develop tailored approaches to the development of maths and English skills.

Project outputs align with the

The project has a strong strategy for supporting learners who need to improve their maths and English.

The project has a targeted and clearly described strategy for working with employers and providers to develop tailored approaches to the development of maths and English skills.

The project will track the progression and measure the impact from the acquisition of

13


and English skills.

There is a misalignment between the strategy described and the bid’s maths and English outputs.

and English outputs. strategy and learner’s progression is tracked.

maths and English skills.

Priority 4 - Developing the Learning Infrastructure, Improving Workforce Development and Skills Progression by:

There is no clear strategy to engage with employers and other stakeholders to promote and recognise lifetime learning and co-investment in skills

The application does not have a clear strategy for how the project will engage with employers and providers to increase access to learning opportunities.

There is a misalignment between the strategy described and the bid’s learner agreement outputs.

There is strategy provided to engage with employers and other stakeholders to promote and recognise lifetime learning and co-investment in skills

There is a strategy provided to engage with employers and providers to increase access to learning opportunities and ensure high quality provision.

Project aims to develop strategies and tailored approaches to support workers faced with redundancy.

The strategy described aligns with the bid’s outputs for learner agreement outputs, FE, CPD.

There is clearly described strategy provided to engage with employers and other stakeholders to promote and recognise lifetime learning and co-investment in skills

There is a clearly described strategy provided to engage with employers and providers to increase access to learning opportunities and ensure high quality provision.

The project aims to work with employers, LEPs etc. to target union activity in support of economic growth and future skills needs.

The project has a targets and clearly described strategy to engage with employers and other stakeholders to promote and recognise lifetime learning and co-investment in skills

The project has a targets and clearly described strategy to engage with employers and providers to increase access to learning opportunities and ensure high quality provision.

The project has a targets and clearly described strategy to work with employers, LEPs etc. to target union activity in support of economic growth and future skills needs.

14


2. Evidence of Impact/Added Value [ 25 points] :

Why is the union well placed to deliver this project? How does union engagement enable/create activity that would not otherwise take place? Union case studies/surveys or evidence from other projects that show potential impact.

Is there anything innovative about the project? Who will it reach that others cannot and how? Does it better engage or improve access to learners? Does it give learners access to learning/achieve better outcomes or support learners/provide opportunities that do not already exist or in a way that is different to existing opportunities? How are learners tracked and their progress monitored? What is the nature/scale of impact?

Where a project is offering a new or innovative approach the evidence requirement may be less important than the arguments made for the potential success of the project approach

The scoring guide for Evidence of Added Value is:

Evidence of Impact/Added Value - 25 points0-5 6-11 12-18 19-25

Application does not explain how the project will be delivered or how learners will be tracked.

There is little evidence of the need for the project and/or that union engagement will add value.

The project does not evidence that it will offer anything that is not already available or there is little evidence that the project is doing anything new

The scale of the impact is not mentioned or low.

There is little evidence of value creation either in terms of wage growth, productivity or employee advantage (eg: improved wellbeing/progression/growth in confidence)

There is some evidence that the union is well placed to deliver the project and learners are tracked

There is some evidence that the project is needed and that union involvement will either engage people that others find hard to reach or provide better access, support or learning opportunities

The scale of impact is adequate but it is not clear what success would look like

There is some evidence of value creation either in terms of wage growth, productivity or employee advantage (eg: improved wellbeing/progression/growth in confidence

There is clear evidence of a delivery strategy and tracking process

Evidence is provided that shows the project is needed and/or that union can play an important part in engaging people that are hard to reach or offering better opportunities, support or outcomes

The scale of impact is appropriate

There is good evidence of value creation either in terms of wage growth, productivity or employee advantage (eg: improved wellbeing/progression/growth in confidence)

The delivery strategy is clearly identified and well evidenced and learner tracking is embedded.

The project is clearly aimed at addressing a well evidenced need and the union is key to delivering it.

The project offers innovative, new, different or better access, support or learning opportunities/outcomes

The proposal has the potential to achieve transformation rather than marginal change

There is significant evidence of value creation.

15


3. Previous Performance, Sustainability and Value for Money [35 points]:

Where a union/project’s previous performance has not been good assessors will look for explanations for poor performance and evidence that lessons have been learned and that the proposed project is addressing the issues identified.

Where a project is offering a new or innovative approach the evidence requirement may be less important than the arguments made for the potential benefits of the project approach.

Assessors will receive current ULF project performance (if applicable) and union track record of delivery in previous projects. Calculations on leverage, explanations for project costs (including staffing requirements), calculations of project costs per outcome, details of management and governance arrangements.

Has the project been costed to provide value for money? Is the project governance and staffing adequate to deliver its objectives? What will it measure to show impact? How will it mainstream or sustain the work after ULF?

The scoring guide for Sustainability and Value for Money is:

Sustainability and Value for Money - 35 points

0-8 9-18 19-27 28-35 Previous project performance has

been poor and no lessons appear to have been learnt or mitigations or new approaches evident in this application.

Application does not explain how the project will impact on union strategy.

There is little evidence of union contribution to the project or leverage from employers, employees or others.

The project does not provide

Previous project performance has not been good but there is evidence that lessons have been learned and/or some mitigations or new approaches are evident in this application.

There is some evidence that the project will be integrated into union activity

There is evidence that the union is making a contribution to the project in cash or kind but the scale is limited and/or some leverage from employers, employees or others or

Previous Project performance has been satisfactory.

There is clear evidence of a strategy to embed learning within the union

Evidence is provided that shows the union is contributing project in cash or kind to the project and/or leverage from employers, employees or others or provides a good explanation of why this is problematic.

The project budget is clearly

Previous performance has been good.

The sustainability strategy is clearly identified and a plan for embedding learning is well evidenced.

The union is clearly contributing significantly to the project in cash or kind to the project and/or significant leverage from employers, employees or others or provides a good explanation of why this is

16


evidence for its budget or that its costs are justified. Project VFM scores are poor.

Partnership working and project governance arrangements is poor or not well described

an explanation of why this is problematic

There is a clear budget with some explanation/justification provided for project costs. Project VFM scores are adequate.

There is Partnership working and project governance arrangements are adequate

described and costs are justified. Project VFM scores are good or where the project is offering an innovative approach or tackling a completely new area of work or has demonstrated the potential to give future benefit.

Partnership working and project governance arrangements are satisfactory.

problematic

The project budget is clearly described, justifies the costs and demonstrates how the project achieves excellent VFM scores or has (where the project is offering an innovative approach or tackling a completely new area of work) clearly demonstrated the potential to give future benefit.

Partnership working and project governance arrangements are good.

17


Schedule 1

PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT OF UNION LEARNING FUND PROJECTS


GROWTH AND INNOVATION FUND - unionlearn Bid… · Web viewThe dates given for DfE decisions are...

Documents

Transcript of GROWTH AND INNOVATION FUND - unionlearn Bid… · Web viewThe dates given for DfE decisions are...