Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 26
26
The ESFA confirmed that the administration processes for the two colleges were largely complete, although...
Conclusion
The ESFA confirmed that the administration processes for the two colleges were largely complete, although some statutory duties and administrative tasks remained to be done.46 It estimated that it would have spent more than £60 million on the two cases by the time they were completed. It said that a large proportion of this related to the costs of bringing the colleges’ estates up to a reasonable standard, before other providers took them on. It had also provided a significant amount of emergency funding to pay the colleges’ creditors.47 The ESFA estimated that the cost of the administrators 38 Q 97 39 C&AG’s Report, para 19 40 C&AG’s Report, paras 19, 3.21, Figure 9 41 Qq 99, 104 42 C&AG’s Report, para 20 43 Q 108 44 Q 110 45 C&AG’s Report, paras 3.31, 3.33 46 Qq 102–103 47 Q 92–93 14 Managing colleges’ financial sustainability was £6 million – 10% of the total cost – and was likely to rise further as the process was finalised.48 The Department asserted that, without the insolvency regime, it would have cost over £20 million more to resolve the problems at the two colleges.49
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
Between November 2014 and March 2019, the ESFA paid £253 million to 36 colleges which had serious cashflow problems. The purpose of this emergency funding was to help the colleges maintain their teaching and other services for learners. At the beginning of this period, government’s intention was that all the emergency funding would be repayable. However, at March 2020, the ESFA had categorised 39% of the total (£100 million) as non-repayable.42