TAFE Directors Australia Australian College of Education Forum Vocational Skills for Youth

1. TAFE Directors AustraliaAustralian College of Education Forum Vocational Skills for Youth Funding for VET In Schools Peter Noonan

2. Purpose • Background and context for VETiS Funding • Key Issues for Consideration • Principles for a funding model • Elements of a funding model

3. Background and Issues • VETiS growth stimulated by $20 million allocation through ANTA. • Debate in relation to funding issues. • Is VETiS part of core Year 11-12 program provision? • Extent to which schools have flexible resources to shift to new programs

4. Issues • Does VETiS cost more? • How should it be funded? • Commonwealth\States • VET or schools budgets • Students and families • How can funding support different models: • Schools as RTOs • Auspicing\partnerships with RTOs • Clusters\regional partnerships

5. Issues • Relative resourcing levels between schools and TAFE for similar programs. • Capacity of schools to free up resources from other programs • How to support partnerships between schools and TAFE without double dipping. • Quality of outcomes and levels of provision • Highest levels of provision in low cost areas • Facilities and equipment • Teacher expertise

6. Cost Drivers • Allen Consulting Group (2003) • Set-up of VET in School Costs — the costs incurred at school level to commence delivering a VET in School course; • School VET Administration Costs — the on-going administrative costs incurred at school level to run VET in Schools; • School VET Course Delivery and Assessment Costs — the costs associated with teaching and assessment of VET in Schools; and • Non-School Organisation Costs — the costs incurred by education systems (Government, Independent and Catholic), curriculum and assessment authorities and state training boards. • TAFE and VET relative funding models: • Recognise relative costs of delivery between program areas • Ratios typically 0.8 – 1.4

7. Issues • Other cost issues include: • Workplacement; • Transport costs; • Rural and regional costs; • ‘Thin markets’; • Students with disabilities • Indigenous students particularly in remote localities

8. Current situation • Wide variations between and within jurisdictions and between sectors. • This also reflects different school funding models for all programs • Additional funding provided for VET programs from national allocation and state funding • Relationship to overall school resourcing framework may not be clear; • Funding may not relate to relative costs of delivery • Funding may be capped • Resourcing levels significantly influenced by commitment of individual schools.

9. Current context • Despite weaknesses in funding models significant growth in VETiS • 182,000 students (37%) of all senior secondary students enrolled in VETiS programs in 2005. • Future arrangements for ATCs, Trades Training Centres in Schools, skills shortages and student demand require an ongoing and sustainable VETiS funding framework within jurisdictions and schools sectors

10. Principles for a Funding Model • VETiS provision should be funded as part of core commitment to essential areas of learning in senior secondary education. • Funding should reflect cost drivers eg admin costs and relative costs of delivery • Funding should also reflect other additional costs eg distance

11. Principles for a funding model Funding should be neutral in terms of delivery models • Funding should be enrolment\activity driven • Funding should be transparent and avoid ‘double dipping’

12. Elements of a Funding Model • Elements – base + unit price + nominal hours+ student load • Average funding per sch for all senior secondary programs or average cost of VET programs should be fully applied to all VETiS programs as a base from schools budget eg $8 (A). • Supplementary funding per unit should then be provided based on • Standard loading for admin costs (B) • Application of VET weighting for relevant area to average cost of delivery • e.g. 0.2 hospitality (C) 0.3 (D) engineering 0.4 (E) etc

13. Elements of Funding Model • B($1)+C($1.60) = $2.60 • Nominal hours per unit(F) eg 200 • Supplementary funding per unit $2.60*f(200)=$520(g) • Enrolments eg 10 (h) • Total supplementary funding $5,200 • Total funding per program A+(B+C*F*H)

14. Elements of a Funding Model • Additional loadings for other factors: • Regional and rural • Indigenous • Skills shortage areas • Thin markets • Recognise that capacity of schools to free up resources for base funding still an issue

15. Future Issues • Impact of broader VET reforms and initiatives – contestability? • COAG agenda • New Commonwealth places • Skills Australia • New Commonwealth\State agreements for schools and VET