1

Skills Strategy Skills Funding Agency (SFA) ESOL Cuts

Impact Assessment: Greater Nottingham, April 2011

Executive Summary

1 The Skills Strategy & other cuts results in almost 60% cuts for the majority of ESOL learners (English for Speakers of Other Languages). This report highlights data for 3,316 Greater Nottingham begin ESOL clients 1/8/09 to 31/7/10, & 798 learners surveyed Feb 2011. At the ESOL Parliamentary briefing on Tuesday 29 March, the need for joint work & wide consultation was recognised.

2 It is NOT easy to access ESOL. Migrants face long waiting lists, strict eligibility rules, & fees if they are not on benefits.

3 From 2011/12, only adults on “active” benefits & 16 to 18 year olds will get free classes. All others, including those on low wages & “inactive benefits”, are to “co-fund” 50% of costs; fees will rise by 67% to £3.00 an hour / £900 a year; & the ESOL Hardship Fund will end.

4 Many groups are disproportionately disadvantaged by new fees &/or higher fees including: 1 Black & Ethnic Minority (BME) people including those who need ESOL for Citizenship or ILR

(Indefinite Leave to Remain) 2 Women 3 Spouses of British Citizens or settled persons 4 People with childcare or dependent care needs 5 People seeking Asylum 6 EU nationals 7 People on very low incomes, including low-waged people & those who get income benefits 8 16 to 18 year olds who may lose EMA 9 Large numbers of people who have not had access to ESOL who represent the “hidden demand”.

5 ESOL cuts present wide-reaching & adverse conflict within wider policy contexts: 1 Business, Innovation & Skills: eg, unspent ESOL allocations; damage to the ESOL infrastructure &

Further Education nationally; waste of migrant potential. 2 Department of Work & Pensions: eg, ineffective use of the new Work Programme to deliver ESOL –

which will also disrupt the progress of those already studying with Skills Funding Agency providers; the dichotomy with JCP EURES UK objectives to fill skill gaps through EU/EEA migration.

3 Home Office & UKBA: eg, the potential damage to UKBA’s successful strategy to promote language competence & Citizenship; the contradiction of prioritising language to create a “national identity” with reduced access to ESOL.

4 Communities & Local Government: eg, the lack of awareness of ESOL as the tool to create a “free, fair & responsible Big Society”; the naïve notion that ESOL can be passed to the Voluntary sector whose resources are diminished.

5 Other strategy: eg, translation or interpreting costs will increase across local & national public sector services.

6 ESOL is fundamental to all spheres of life. Cuts risk huge damage at individual, community & policy levels. They represent discriminatory practice against BME groups & Women. They threaten the economy, new or established central or local government strategy, & the public purse. Equalities legislation obliges an Equality Impact Assessment & modification to remove or mitigate these effects.

Action for ESOL contact: Fiona Vale, 0115 978 0942 / fiona@begin.org.uk / Full report available at www.begin.org.uk

2

Skills Strategy Skills Funding Agency (SFA) ESOL Cuts

Impact Assessment: Greater Nottingham, April 2011

1 INTRODUCTION & METHODOLOGY

Experts calculate that the new Further Education (FE) skills strategy 1 results in funding cuts of almost 60% for the majority of ESOL (English for Speakers of Other Languages) learners2. Any ESOL policy change will impact government work across departments – including Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS), the Department of Work & Pensions (DWP), Communities & Local Government (CLG), the Department for Education (DfE), & the Home Office (HO). At the ESOL Parliamentary briefing on Tuesday 29 March, the need for joint work & wide consultation was recognised. Every effort needs to be made to avoid a costly undermining of other strategies, including: - up-skilling the adult population at a time when low birth rates herald a future decline in the adult workforce, increasing employment & economic growth, promoting integration, Citizenship & the Big Society, delivering accessible & effective public services, raising the achievement of children at school, reducing interpreting & translation costs, & reducing crime.

This report highlights data for 3,316 Greater Nottingham begin 3 ESOL clients 1/8/09 to 31/7/10 & Learner Survey results for 798 ESOL learners conducted Feb 2011 as part of a local Equality Impact Assessment of proposed changes. Appendices include: Appendix 1: begin client profile 2009/10 cf 2011/12 Appendix 2: begin data: Impact on Equality Groups or SFA eligible groups cf Others Appendix 3: Survey data: 798 ESOL Learners, February 2011 Appendix 4: Sample Learner/organisation testimonials ESOL learners in Nottingham represent 108 countries for whom 77 languages are recorded. The ‘top ten’ countries recorded include: Poland (20%); Pakistan (11%), Iraq (6%), Iran (5%), Eritrea (4%), Afghanistan (4%), India (3%), China (3%), Hungary (3%), Sudan (3%). 83% of begin clients live in the City of Nottingham. 14% live in County boroughs – largely Gedling, Broxtowe & Rushcliffe. ESOL participation as a proportion of Skills for Life provision has dropped in England by 5% - from 26% (240,500) in 2005/06 - to 21% (183,700) in 2009/10. However, in Nottinghamshire it has remained at 16% 4.

ESOL learners are keen to integrate, contrary to David Cameron’s assertions about migrants “not really wanting or even willing to integrate” on 14 April 2011. In Nottingham ESOL learners, teachers & others have campaigned tirelessly to raise the Government’s awareness of the importance of ESOL to integration:

1,085 have signed the national petition

590 have signed & posted letters to ministers

798 took part in the ESOL Survey

82 have written personal testimony or letters to ministers.

300-400 attended a rally in Nottingham Market Square on 24 March 2011. This Government should be proud to support some of the most hard-working, respectful people who are committed to integrating into our society & contributing to its success.

2 MYTH-BUSTING: THE CURRENT POSITION

It is NOT easy to access ESOL. Migrants are keen to learn but face significant barriers & statutory restrictions:

Long waiting times, with 800-1,250 unplaced annually; childcare facilities now limited to one college crèche in the city; demanding work hours; family, or other commitments; rationing of ESOL where need

1 “New Horizons: Investing in Skills for Sustainable Growth, Nov 2010”; “Skills for Sustainable Growth Strategy Document: Full Report, Nov 2010” (BIS, Nov 2010). 2 Nick Linford, “Funding Policy & the impact on ESOL”, Parliamentary briefing 29 March 2011 3 Basic Educational Guidance in Nottinghamshire manages a central Literacy & Numeracy Referral & ESOL Placement Service for 4,300 adults pa. ESOL clients undergo comprehensive screening to effectively match provision to their needs. 4 BIS:: Table S6.1: FE & Skills - Learners Skills for Life Participation by Level & by GO Region (2005/06 to 2009/10) – Learner Volumes

3

is highest (eg, the adult offer in Nottingham is currently 2 to 9 hours a week). Language barriers also exclude people from ESOL & other services given the complexity of funding regulations & UKBA requirements for ILR, Citizenship, or spouse applications, etc.

Strict SFA eligibility rules apply: 3 years UK or EU residency or settled status; 1 year marriage to a person with settled status & 1 year residency; Refugee status; Asylum seeker status with 6 months + UK residency, Asylum Seeker Section 4 status.

SFA-ineligible clients are excluded from ESOL. We would not wish numbers to be exaggerated as a result of any confusion about eligibility. Those on Student Visas & dependants, who reportedly make up two thirds of all migrants 5, are not entitled to ESOL classes.

ESOL is only free for eligible 16-18 year olds & those in receipt of an income-based benefit or their unwaged dependants (Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) or Employment Support Allowance (ESA); Income Support (or NASS/ASS Section 95 or Section 4 Support for asylum seekers); Council Tax/Housing Benefit ; Working Tax Credit (WTC) (with a gross income of less than £15,276); Pension Credits.

The ESOL Hardship Fund (a discretionary SFA learner support fund) of £4.5million is only accessed by 2 vulnerable groups: eligible spouses who do not have a personal income, or low-waged people who do not receive WTC.

23% of current ESOL learners surveyed pay around 34% of the costs of ESOL.

54% of begin ESOL clients have lived in the UK 3yrs to 10 years+: migrants do not learn the language & go home. 73% (1180 of 1622) indicate at enquiry that they intend to stay in the UK indefinitely.

3 ESOL FUNDING CUTS 2009 ONWARDS & THE PROPOSED SKILLS STRATEGY 2011

A 60% cut in ESOL funding for the majority of learners results from new FE & ESOL policy 2009-2012:

1 40% reduced programme weighting for Literacy, Numeracy & ESOL 2009-12; 2 National rate reductions across FE: 3% 10/11 & 4.3% in 2011/12; 3 Full funding limited to those on “active” benefits: JSA & ESA-work related activity group (ESA WRAG)

benefits. 16-18 year old provision will also continue, but the ending of Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) threatens to exclude young people;

4 Learners on “inactive” income-based benefits or their unwaged dependants who currently get FREE classes will “co-fund” 50% of costs, £3.00 an hour in Nottingham, equivalent to £900 for 300 GLH per year (recommended Guided Learning Hours to progress one level);

5 Learners who currently pay £540 to £600 for 300 GLH will face an increase of 50% to 67% to £900 pa; 6 The ESOL Hardship Fund of £4.5m for spouses without incomes & low-waged workers will end; 7 Given cuts across FE, providers are not – as far as is understood - planning to “prioritise vulnerable

learners “as is specifically suggested in the 2010 Skills strategy; 8 Funding for ESOL in the workplace will end; there are no measures to ensure employers contribute.

4 DIFFERENTIAL, ADVERSE & NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SFA-ELIGIBLE & EQUALITY GROUPS

1 73% of begin adult ESOL clients from Black & Ethnic Minorities (BMEs) will be at risk of exclusion from ESOL. 83% of ESOL learners surveyed do not get JSA or ESA. 84% of Learners surveyed stated they could not afford new or higher fees.

ESOL cuts are part of broad-ranging FE cuts. However, all English-speaking people with below Level 2 English qualifications will continue to access FREE Literacy provision under the same SFA eligibility criteria. 86% of begin ESOL clients have no British qualifications 92% have below Level 2 Literacy. BIS’s own data verifies that 87% of East Midlands ESOL Learners 2009/10 were at Entry Level 6. This unjustified discrepancy creates a discriminatory cost barrier to non-native speaker BME participation in Further Education (FE) in addition to that caused by low Literacy.

40% of learners want the UKBA approved qualifications for Citizenship or ILR. Some already experience long delays in finding a UKBA-approved course & provider due to waiting lists. Many now also face the barrier of significant additional cost, including those with ‘no recourse to public funds’.

5 Teresa May, 23 November 2010 6 BIS:: Table S6.1: FE & Skills - Learners Skills for Life Participation by Level & by GO Region (2005/06 to 2009/10) – Learner Volumes

4

2 81% Female compared to 62% Male ESOL begin clients are affected by new & higher fee rates &/or the

removal of the £4.5 million ESOL Hardship Fund. Women represent 68% of Nottingham ESOL Learners surveyed & 66% of adult ESOL participants in England according to BIS’s own figures7. The majority are on “inactive” benefits or low wages, or are dependant on others’ benefits or low wages. The 19% gender differential evidences a discriminatory impact on women which could not have been the intention of this policy. The effect will be to reinforce the social & economic segregation of women.

3 92% of 296 Spouses of British Citizens or settled persons are affected - 21% more than other groups of SFA eligible clients . Eligible spouses represent 16% of begin ESOL clients.

4 84% of 245 begin ESOL clients with children under nursery age are affected . Most make their own

childcare arrangements or wait a few years to do ESOL after their children start nursery or school. 39% of learners surveyed are carers of young or older children & 9% have other dependants. There is a well-documented link between poor English skills amongst parents & underachievement or increased poverty of their children. Safeguarding risks for children or vulnerable dependant adults are also increased.

5 91% of people seeking Asylum - 20% more than other SFA-eligible learners - will be affected. They

currently represent 259 / 8% of adult begin ESOL clients (& we understand an increase in dispersal of asylum seekers is planned for the East Midlands). 86% have lived in the UK from 1 to 10 years+. (The New Asylum Model of April 2007 aimed to resolve all cases within 6 months, but at the end of May 2009, this target was met for only 44.3% of cases8). They are denied the right to work, receive £35 to £39 N/ASS support a week, will be out-priced by new fees, & - given the violence or oppression from which they flee – are one of the most vulnerable groups in need of ESOL. The effective withdrawal of ESOL for them clearly contradicts the UK’s obligations under the 1951 Geneva Convention.

6 80% of 1,413 EU Nationals are affected – 12% more than other SFA-eligible categories. EU nationals

represent 43% of eligible begin clients & 36% of ESOL learners surveyed. 55% of EU begin clients work; 40% have lived here from 3 years to over 10 years; 61% indicate they will stay in the UK indefinitely.

7 64% of learners surveyed declared a household income of less than the WTC threshold: £15,276. An

estimated 13% of these are thought to be very low waged working people or spouses financially dependant on others who will lose the support of the ESOL Hardship Fund to learn English.

36% of Learners surveyed work. begin data indicates the vast majority of employed people are not in jobs commensurate with the skills, experience & qualifications they bring to the UK. This correlates with local 9 & national studies that also cite fluency in English as increasing earning potential by up to 20%. Work does not promote language acquisition if the majority of employees are non-native language speakers, or where roles are isolated, eg, cleaning, or based in noisy factory floors. Without English, these workers may be trapped in a cycle of insecure/temporary/agency jobs/exploitation &/or costly long-term benefit dependency.

Case Study K, a volunteer at begin, has studied for 2/3 years to achieve Level 1 ESOL qualifications. She is a qualified Accountant with 10 years experience of working in small to multi-national companies. On Mondays, K starts her cleaning job at 5am, takes the children to school at 9am, volunteers from 9.30am to 12.30pm at begin, attends an ESOL lesson at another site at 1pm to 3pm, then picks up her children at 3.30pm. She is also preparing annual accounts for 2 local charities. The rest of week follows a similar pattern – with a mix of cleaning & voluntary work, study & childcare. She will be unable to afford classes under new ESOL funding rules next year & will not achieve her Level 2 ESOL qualifications.

8 3.5% of begin ESOL clients aged 16 to 18 years will continue to be prioritised for free ESOL. However, if

EMA ends, they are at risk of joining the ranks of the NEET group (Not in Education, Employment, or Training), & will require the highest levels of intervention to re-engage them.

7 BIS:: Table S6.1: FE & Skills - Learners Skills for Life Participation by Level & by GO Region (2005/06 to 2009/10) – Learner Volumes 8 Independent Chief Inspector's report "Asylum: Getting the Balance Right, A thematic Inspection: July - November 2009" 9 “A Study of A8 & A2 Migrants in Nottingham”, University of Salford, 2009

5

9 A growth is predicted in the ‘hidden’ need of people disengaged by new fees & the closure of ESOL

classes. In addition to around 3,000 people progressing through ESOL levels annually in Nottingham, & waiting lists rising to between 800 & 1,250 at the end of each year, there is an unmet ‘hidden’ demand of the ‘hard-to-reach’, eg, in the 2009 Nottingham A8 & A2 Migrants study10, 49% of respondents indicated that “no one” had offered them any help or support. Of these, 37% stated they would like to study but were not enrolled, reasons being lack of time, work & cost. These statistics can only increase under the new “Sustainable Growth” strategy. Of the remainder, 44% had accessed ESOL or were registered as waiting; 14% stated they did not need ESOL; only 6% were “not interested”.

5 CONFLICTING & ADVERSE EFFECTS OF BIS “Sustainable Growth” STRATEGY WITHIN WIDER

POLICY CONTEXTS

1 Conflict within BIS & Board of Trade strategies:

The overall reduction in FE allocations are calculated at 1% to 3%. However, experts argue that the cumulative effect of cuts 2009 to 2013 & funding at 50% means providers have to deliver twice as much to retain their allocation. The prediction is that FE allocations will go unspent & some providers will go out of business. The effect will be to “make education & training inaccessible to those who need it most”, at a cost that will be ‘felt across society’.11

Anecdotal evidence indicates a significant reduction in ESOL – or withdrawal of provision in a few cases. A thriving & professional ESOL ‘infrastructure’ has been developed over the last 10 years - the core curriculum, Level 5 teacher training, embedding of Citizenship, Employability & vocational subjects, Ofsted standard quality mechanisms, in-house development of teaching that responds to priorities, eg, census completion, etc . This may be wasted with thousands of teachers entering unemployment &/or moving to unrelated occupations. The capacity of the sector may be damaged irreparably.

Given the sentiments of BIS Ministers – (“Fairness means supporting those in need” (Vince Cable); “Education is the greatest civilising force....”; “The system … must harness both the economic & social potential of lifelong learning.” (John Hayes), we must conclude that the very real risk of damage to FE & ESOL is an accidental & unintended consequence of their strategy.

In its “Progression Funding “ up-date published 29/3/11, BIS had the opportunity to redress the balance for ESOL learners. The allocation provides exemption from the inactive benefits policy for those with an entitlement to a Level 2 qualification “to make the step up from basic skills”. However, Literacy, Numeracy & ESOL is specifically excluded “as funding policy has already been established”.

Providers may use Literacy & Numeracy funding & qualifications to deliver ESOL given the high numbers of learners without Level 2 qualifications & working at Entry level. Our understanding from the Parliamentary briefing of 29/3/11 is that this is not BIS’s desired outcome.

Migrant workers contribute more to the economy and in taxes than they receive from it. Of the 686,000 registrations for National Insurance Numbers (NINOs) for overseas adults in 2008/09, only 3.7% were claiming an out-of-work benefit within six months of registration.12 The positive contributions of migrants to UK business, economics, politics and society have been well documented.13

Many concerns have been raised about the damaging effect of non-EU immigration caps on economic growth, & skills shortages - including those of Vince Cable in his role as Secretary of State

10 “A Study of A8 & A2 Migrants in Nottingham”, University of Salford, 2009 11 Nick Linford, “Funding Policy & the impact on ESOL”, 29/3/11 & “Great idea: let’s put education out of reach of those who need it most”,

Guardian, 29 3 11 12 DWP (2010) National Insurance Number Allocations for 2009/2010 http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd1/niall/index.php?page=nino_allocation 13 Employability Forum “Making a Difference: Refugee successes in the world of work”, 2008. Reed, H & Latorre, M (2009) “The Economic

Impacts of Migration on the UK Labour Market”, IPPR www.ippr.org.uk/publicationsandreports/publication.asp?id=649

6

for BIS & President of the Board of Trade, the Confederation of British Industry, Boris Johnson, Lord Mayor of London, & the British Medical Association14. German & Austrian governments preparing to open borders to EU Accession nationals have planned vocational & language ‘conversion’ training to maximise potential of people who will address skill shortages. UK strategy has been different. Clearly, the government does not recognise the potential or existing skill base of EU or non-EU migrants settling in the UK. A relatively minor investment in ESOL subsidised at current levels could be the most cost-effective way to address these concerns.

4 Adverse Effects on DWP strategy: the Work Programme, Welfare Reform, Jobcentre Plus services

Learner survey data indicates only 17% claim JSA or ESA & so will be eligible for free classes in the future. There are very low skill levels amongst these groups with up 76% of Nottingham begin clients screened at pre-Entry to Entry 2 Reading & Writing skills. After 3 to 12 months unemployment, those eligible for free ESOL will also, depending on age & assessed needs, be eligible for the new Work Programme (WP) which we understand will be a mix of training, IAG & personal support including Literacy, Numeracy & ESOL over a 30 hour-week for up to 2 years. There are concerns nationally about the ability of such low-level learners to access & achieve in the WP, the danger of inconsistency & interrupted progression for those pulled between SFA & DWP (primary or sub-contracted) providers depending on their benefit & employment status. In addition, there are concerns in respect of the quality mechanisms for DWP provision. Until there is evidence that DWP strategy is delivering appropriate & sustainable ESOL provision it would seem prudent to retain the parallel FE-funded ESOL alternative to the WP while the infrastructure still exists. Otherwise the ‘revolving door’ for JCP customers will be costly.

The uncertainty of the pattern of unemployment & numbers of JSA claimants eligible for the WP is yet another threat to the effective planning & retention of SFA ESOL allocations in colleges, if not other curriculum allocations.

The DWP is also managing massive benefits reforms, including IB re-assessment & movement to JSA or ESA, the movement of lone parents whose youngest child is 7 years from IS to JSA, & the introduction of Universal credit 2013 to 2017 which will replace inactive benefits including WTC, IS, HB, Child Tax Credit, income-based JSA & ESA. Until these reforms are finalised, changes to ESOL funding determined by benefit status is premature.

Some 22 UK EURES (EURopean Employment Services) advisers are employed by JCP to promote the free movement of workers within the EU/EEA & Switzerland. JCP EURES quote DWP & Home Office report findings, including:

Without inflows of labour many regions will face shortages of skilled labour

A8 migrants are going where the work is and helping to fill gaps in our labour market

There has been very little evidence of A8 migrants claiming benefits Skills shortages range from Bankers to Carers to Butchers & Boners. Our understanding is that EURES advocate for early & effective language support to maximise the economic benefits of their work.

3 HO & UKBA immigration & Citizenship strategies

HO & UKBA controls & declining EU migration are reported to be reducing migration levels, eg, more rigorous application of asylum systems. BIS’s own data suggests this may have contributed to a 5% reduction nationally in ESOL participation from 240,500 in 2005/06 to 183,700 in 2009/10. 15 For those allowed to enter, settle & apply for Citizenship or ILR, UKBA delivers an accepted & successful strategy to ensure they achieve knowledge of life in the UK & improved language competence. The requirement from 2005 for an Entry level ESOL Listening & Speaking qualification (as an alternative to the online Life in the UK test) could explain the rise in Nottingham from 71% to 83% of participation in Entry Level ESOL between 2005 & 200916. UKBA has since built a significant infrastructure around ESOL to enforce these requirements, eg, provider-registration as approved centres.

14

Charles Kelly, 26/1/11, www.immigrationmatters.co.uk 15

BIS: Table S6.1: FE & Skills - Learners Skills for Life Participation by Level & by GO Region (2005/06 to 2009/10) – Learner Volumes 16

ibid

7

In his Munich Security Conference speech, David Cameron argued the UK needed a “clear sense of shared national identity” to prevent people turning to all kinds of extremism. He prioritised use of a common language “…making sure that immigrants speak the language of their new home & ensuring that people are educated in the elements of a common culture & curriculum.”17 ‘Action for ESOL’ believes that the formal embedding of Citizenship renders ESOL the most significant & sustainable tool to create a “shared national identity” & to combat social & economic exclusion, myth, prejudice & service pressures caused by language barriers.

It is assumed that the tension between new ESOL fee regulations & promoting a shared sense of citizenship is unintentional. Otherwise, they could be viewed as human rights issues.

5 Communities & Local Government

“We are helping to create a free, fair and responsible Big Society by putting power in the hands of citizens, neighbourhoods and councils... to solve their own problems and create neighbourhoods that are strong, attractive and thriving… and use it to create better neighbourhoods and local services.”18 In relation to cohesive multi-cultural communities & “education in the elements of a common culture”, ESOL is the most cost-effective way of achieving this. The government should seize the chance to fully subsidize those on low incomes who wait months for ESOL & struggle with daily commitments to achieve fluency & an understanding of British culture.

This responsibility cannot be passed to the Voluntary Sector, which in Nottingham delivers an estimated 5 to 10% of ESOL provision. It is characterised by mixed level groups, a mix of accredited & non-accredited provision, & to our knowledge, often lacks UKBA approved status for Citizenship or ILR. For the same reasons, this responsibility cannot be passed to volunteers, informal conversation groups, Personal & Community Development, Family Learning or other informal community activity. There are 6 levels within the ESOL core curriculum & 3 stages of ‘emerging’, ‘consolidating’ & ‘established’ skills levels within each for listening, speaking, reading & writing. Language learning & acquisition is a highly complex process requiring the skill & expertise of well-trained teachers.

6 Other strategy & departments: HO Policing & Crime, Department for Education & Skills, Department of Health, Local Government budget cuts

The impact of ESOL cuts will be far reaching – from the cost of translating police or census information to ensuring non-native speakers understand recycling regulations, school enrolment procedures, or local authority tenancy agreements. Taken together with local government cuts, eg, Nottingham City Council “Supporting People” & voluntary sector grant reductions, ESOL cuts will inevitably place an unforeseen & huge burden on other services with reducing capacity.

6 ASSESSMENT/RESPONSES TO ESOL CHANGES & PROPOSALS

There is a clear risk of adverse & disproportionate disadvantage to significant groups resulting from the proposed ESOL policy. The result will be that the social & economic costs will outweigh the costs of ESOL in the longer term. In addition, the cuts will waste tax-payers money due to the failure of new or established strategy across all central & local government departments. Equalities legislation obliges a full government-led Equality Impact Assessment, review & modification to remove or mitigate these effects. Currently, ESOL providers face the impossible task of planning more provision for less money, & levying unaffordable fees from those most in need. ESOL course closure & tutor redundancy is expected on a national scale. Stakeholders raised this concern with ministers following the launch of the new BIS strategy in November 2010. This issue is now of the greatest urgency.

Action for ESOL contact: Fiona Vale, 0115 978 0942 / fiona@begin.org.uk / Full report available at: www.begin.org.uk

17

PM’s speech at Munich Security Conference, 5 February 2011 18

http://www.communities.gov.uk/corporate/

LEA

RN

ER P

RO

FILE

S -

CU

RR

ENT

FEE

RU

LES

LEA

RN

ER P

RO

FILE

- N

EW F

EE R

ULE

S

TOTA

L C

LIEN

T G

RO

UP

Ge

nd

erN

o.

% T

ota

l

clie

nts

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

FEM

ALE

18

47

55

.7%

10

38

52

.1%

80

96

1.2

%3

49

38

.6%

14

98

62

.1%

MA

LE1

46

14

4.1

%9

51

47

.7%

51

03

8.6

%5

53

61

.1%

90

83

7.7

%N

OT

KN

OW

N8

0.2

%5

0.3

%3

0.2

%3

0.3

%5

0.2

%To

tal

33

16

19

94

13

22

90

52

41

1

Age

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

60

+ ye

ars

35

1.1

%2

11

.1%

14

1.1

%3

0.3

%3

21

.3%

50

to

59

yea

rs1

47

4.4

%1

06

5.3

%4

13

.1%

66

7.3

%8

13

.4%

40

to

49

yea

rs4

33

13

.1%

29

91

5.0

%1

34

10

.1%

15

61

7.2

%2

77

11

.5%

30

to

39

yea

rs1

13

73

4.3

%7

17

36

.0%

42

03

1.8

%2

92

32

.3%

84

53

5.0

%2

5 t

o 2

9 y

ears

78

22

3.6

%4

25

21

.3%

35

72

7.0

%1

51

16

.7%

63

12

6.2

%1

9 t

o 2

4 y

ears

60

61

8.3

%2

93

14

.7%

31

32

3.7

%1

12

12

.4%

49

42

0.5

%1

6 t

o 1

8 y

ears

11

73

.5%

11

75

.9%

00

.0%

11

71

2.9

%0

0.0

%N

OT

KN

OW

N5

91

.8%

16

0.8

%4

33

.3%

80

.9%

51

2.1

%To

tal

33

16

19

94

13

22

90

52

41

1

Res

ide

ncy

/Elig

ibili

ty f

or

SFA

fu

nd

ed

ESO

LN

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%EU

NA

TIO

NA

L/EE

A M

IGR

AN

T W

OR

KER

14

13

42

.6%

61

73

0.9

%7

96

60

.2%

28

53

1.5

%1

12

84

6.8

%U

K R

ESID

ENT

3 Y

RS/

SETT

LED

75

52

2.8

%4

82

24

.2%

27

32

0.7

%2

14

23

.6%

54

12

2.4

%R

EFU

GEE

/ILR

/REU

NIF

ICA

TIO

N /

HP

/DL/

ELE/

ELR

51

91

5.7

%4

44

22

.3%

75

5.7

%2

84

31

.4%

23

59

.7%

MA

RR

IED

/RES

IDEN

T 1

YEA

R2

96

8.9

%1

20

6.0

%1

76

13

.3%

25

2.8

%2

71

11

.2%

ASY

LUM

SEE

KER

RES

IDEN

T 6

MO

NTH

S1

88

5.7

%1

86

9.3

%2

0.2

%2

02

.2%

16

87

.0%

REF

USE

D A

SYLU

M W

ITH

SEC

TIO

N 4

71

2.1

%7

13

.6%

00

.0%

30

.3%

68

2.8

%1

6 T

O 1

8 Y

EAR

S (n

ot

cou

nte

d in

cat

ego

ries

ab

ove

)7

42

.2%

74

3.7

%0

0.0

%7

48

.2%

00

.0%

Tota

l3

31

61

99

41

32

29

05

24

11

AC

TIV

E &

INA

CTI

VE

* B

ENEF

ITS

-

FREE

: 1

99

4 (

60

%)

NO

BEN

EFIT

S -

FEE-

PA

YER

S:

13

22

(4

0%

)

AC

TIV

E B

ENEF

ITS

&

16

TO

18

YR

S -

FREE

:

90

5 (

27

%)

INA

CTI

VE

BEN

EFIT

S /

NO

BEN

EFIT

S -

FEE-

PA

YER

S: 2

,41

1 (

73

%)

* IN

AC

TIV

E B

ENEF

ITS

CLA

IMED

BY

10

89

CLI

ENTS

20

09

/10

:

W

ork

ing

Tax

Cre

dit

-

52

2 /

48

%

In

com

e o

r N

/ASS

Su

pp

ort

-

48

3 /

44

%

H

ou

sin

g B

enef

it

- 1

95

/ 1

8%

Co

un

cil T

ax B

en

efi

t

-

19

2 /

18

%

U

nw

aged

dep

end

ent

of

abo

ve

-

95

/ 9

%

P

ensi

on

Cre

dit

s

-

14

/ 1

%

Ap

pe

nd

ix 1

: b

eg

in c

lie

nt

pro

file

20

09

/10

cf

20

11

/12

LEA

RN

ER P

RO

FILE

S -

CU

RR

ENT

FEE

RU

LES

LEA

RN

ER P

RO

FILE

- N

EW F

EE R

ULE

S

TOTA

L C

LIEN

T G

RO

UP

Tim

e in

UK

at

31

/7/2

01

01

0/1

1%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

10

yea

rs p

lus

27

18

.2%

20

71

0.4

%6

44

.8%

86

9.5

%1

85

7.7

%5

to

9 y

ears

82

62

4.9

%6

03

30

.2%

22

31

6.9

%3

06

33

.8%

52

02

1.6

%3

to

4 y

ears

67

92

0.5

%3

94

19

.8%

28

52

1.6

%1

47

16

.2%

53

22

2.1

%2

yea

rs +

37

31

1.2

%1

99

10

.0%

17

41

3.2

%7

38

.1%

30

01

2.4

%1

yea

r +

52

71

5.9

%2

85

14

.3%

24

21

8.3

%1

22

13

.5%

40

51

6.8

%6

to

11

Mo

nth

s2

32

7.0

%1

00

5.0

%1

32

10

.0%

56

6.2

%1

76

7.3

%U

nd

er 6

mo

nth

s1

36

4.1

%6

03

.0%

76

5.7

%4

34

.8%

93

3.9

%N

OT

KN

OW

N2

72

8.2

%1

46

7.3

%1

26

9.5

%7

28

.0%

20

08

.3%

Tota

l3

31

61

99

41

32

29

05

24

11

Emp

loym

ent

sta

tus

No

.%

No

. %

No

. %

No

.%

No

.%

UN

EMP

LOYE

D/U

NW

AG

ED/N

ON

EM

PLO

YED

18

86

56

.9%

14

49

72

.7%

43

73

3.1

%7

97

88

.1%

10

89

45

.2%

EMP

LOYE

D

89

42

7.0

%2

77

13

.9%

61

74

6.7

%2

52

.8%

86

93

6.0

%P

AR

T TI

ME

UN

DER

16

HO

UR

S2

91

8.8

%1

28

6.4

%1

63

12

.3%

28

3.1

%2

63

10

.9%

STU

DEN

T/TR

AIN

ING

SC

HEM

E/FT

ED

UC

ATI

ON

76

2.3

%5

12

.6%

25

1.9

%3

53

.9%

41

1.7

%R

ETIR

ED1

80

.5%

11

0.6

%7

0.5

%1

0.1

%1

70

.7%

NO

T K

NO

WN

15

14

.6%

78

3.9

%7

35

.5%

19

2.1

%1

32

5.5

%To

tal

33

16

19

94

13

22

90

52

41

1

Leve

l of

List

enin

g &

Sp

eak

ing

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

No

.%

NO

NE

/ V

ERY

LITT

LE /

REA

L B

EG /

PR

E E

59

21

7.9

%3

85

19

.3%

20

71

5.7

%1

91

21

.1%

40

11

6.6

%LI

TTLE

/ B

EG /

E1

71

52

1.6

%4

52

22

.7%

26

31

9.9

%2

00

22

.1%

51

52

1.4

%SO

ME

/ EL

EM /

E2

83

22

5.1

%5

08

25

.5%

32

42

4.5

%2

13

23

.5%

61

92

5.7

%G

OO

D /

PR

E IN

T /

E36

80

20

.5%

39

31

9.7

%2

87

21

.7%

19

82

1.9

%4

82

20

.0%

VER

Y G

OO

D /

INT

/ L1

26

88

.1%

15

47

.7%

11

48

.6%

69

7.6

%1

99

8.3

%A

LMO

ST F

LUEN

T /

AD

V /

L2

12

23

.7%

60

3.0

%6

24

.7%

20

2.2

%1

02

4.2

%N

OT

KN

OW

N1

07

3.2

%4

22

.1%

65

4.9

%1

41

.5%

93

3.9

%To

tal

33

16

19

94

13

22

90

52

41

1

Leve

l of

Rea

din

g &

Wri

tin

gN

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%

NO

NE

/ V

ERY

LITT

LE /

REA

L B

EG /

PR

E E

83

72

5.2

%5

51

27

.6%

28

62

1.6

%2

82

31

.2%

55

52

3.0

%LI

TTLE

/ B

EG /

E1

74

32

2.4

%4

75

23

.8%

26

82

0.3

%2

26

25

.0%

51

72

1.4

%SO

ME

/ EL

EM /

E2

73

32

2.1

%4

46

22

.4%

28

72

1.7

%1

85

20

.4%

54

82

2.7

%G

OO

D /

PR

E IN

T /

E35

52

16

.6%

28

21

4.1

%2

70

20

.4%

11

71

2.9

%4

35

18

.0%

VER

Y G

OO

D /

INT

/ L1

18

85

.7%

10

65

.3%

82

6.2

%4

24

.6%

14

66

.1%

ALM

OST

FLU

ENT

/ A

DV

/ L

26

01

.8%

31

1.6

%2

92

.2%

10

1.1

%5

02

.1%

NO

T K

NO

WN

20

36

.1%

10

35

.2%

10

07

.6%

43

4.8

%1

60

6.6

%To

tal

33

16

19

94

13

22

90

52

41

1

AC

TIV

E &

INA

CTI

VE

* B

ENEF

ITS

-

FREE

: 1

99

4 (

60

%)

NO

BEN

EFIT

S -

FEE-

PA

YER

S:

13

22

(4

0%

)

AC

TIV

E B

ENEF

ITS

&

16

TO

18

YR

S -

FREE

:

90

5 (

27

%)

INA

CTI

VE

BEN

EFIT

S /

NO

BEN

EFIT

S -

FEE-

PA

YER

S: 2

,41

1 (

73

%)

LEA

RN

ER P

RO

FILE

S -

CU

RR

ENT

FEE

RU

LES

LEA

RN

ER P

RO

FILE

- N

EW F

EE R

ULE

S

TOTA

L C

LIEN

T G

RO

UP

Hig

he

st le

vel o

f B

riti

sh q

ual

ifac

tio

nN

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%N

o.

%

NO

QU

ALI

FIC

ATI

ON

S2

84

98

5.9

%1

73

28

6.9

%1

11

78

4.5

%7

91

87

.4%

20

58

85

.4%

BEL

OW

NV

Q1

OR

EQ

UIV

ALE

NT

12

43

.7%

83

4.2

%4

13

.1%

32

3.5

%9

23

.8%

NV

Q1

OR

EQ

UIV

ALE

NT

48

1.4

%2

91

.5%

19

1.4

%1

31

.4%

35

1.5

%N

VQ

2 O

R E

QU

IVA

LEN

T2

80

.8%

19

1.0

%9

0.7

%1

11

.2%

17

0.7

%N

VQ

3 O

R E

QU

IVA

LEN

T1

30

.4%

40

.2%

90

.7%

10

.1%

12

0.5

%N

VQ

4 O

R E

QU

IVA

LEN

T1

0.0

%0

0.0

%1

0.1

%0

0.0

%1

0.0

%N

VQ

5 O

R E

QU

IVA

LEN

T2

0.1

%0

0.0

%2

0.2

%0

0.0

%2

0.1

%D

EGR

EE7

0.2

%0

0.0

%7

0.5

%0

0.0

%7

0.3

%O

THER

25

0.8

%1

30

.7%

12

0.9

%3

0.3

%2

20

.9%

NO

T K

NO

WN

21

96

.6%

11

45

.7%

10

57

.9%

54

6.0

%1

65

6.8

%To

tal

33

16

19

94

13

22

90

52

41

1

Oth

er

pro

file

fac

tors

, in

clu

din

g

asp

irat

ion

s, v

oca

tio

nal

aim

s, e

tcO

f th

ose

an

swer

ing:

-O

f th

ose

an

swe

rin

g: -

Tota

l clie

nts

Mar

ried

to

Bri

tish

Res

ide

nt

51

31

5.5

%2

85

55

.6%

22

84

4.4

%7

31

4.2

%4

40

85

.8%

Lear

n E

ngl

ish

to

get

wo

rk /

bet

ter

wo

rk2

25

66

8.0

%1

31

95

8.5

%9

37

41

.5%

64

42

8.5

%1

61

27

1.5

%

Wan

t q

ual

ific

atio

n in

En

glis

h1

93

25

8.3

%1

14

95

9.5

%7

83

40

.5%

50

02

5.9

%1

43

27

4.1

%

Loo

kin

g fo

r w

ork

12

60

38

.0%

83

56

6.3

%4

25

33

.7%

59

44

7.1

%6

66

52

.9%

Ad

vice

ab

ou

t ca

ree

rs c

ho

ices

12

99

39

.2%

73

65

6.7

%5

63

43

.3%

35

02

6.9

%9

49

73

.1%

Wan

t lif

e in

th

e U

K t

est

77

42

3.3

%4

32

55

.8%

34

24

4.2

%1

42

18

.3%

63

28

1.7

%

Ch

ildca

re N

eed

ed

24

57

.4%

19

37

8.8

%5

22

1.2

%3

91

5.9

%2

06

84

.1%

Has

tra

vel/

tran

spo

rt is

sue

s4

99

15

.0%

29

65

9.3

%2

03

40

.7%

12

12

4.2

%3

78

75

.8%

AC

TIV

E &

INA

CTI

VE

* B

ENEF

ITS

-

FREE

: 1

99

4 (

60

%)

NO

BEN

EFIT

S -

FEE-

PA

YER

S:

13

22

(4

0%

)

AC

TIV

E B

ENEF

ITS

&

16

TO

18

YR

S -

FREE

:

90

5 (

27

%)

INA

CTI

VE

BEN

EFIT

S /

NO

BEN

EFIT

S -

FEE-

PA

YER

S: 2

,41

1 (

73

%)

Gender No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Female 1847 55.7% 81.1% 18.9%

Male (& Unknown) 1469 44.1% 62.1% 37.9%

Variance 19.0%

Age No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

19-50 years 2958 89.2% 76.0% 24.0%

Other Ages (& Unknown) 358 10.8% 45.8% 54.2%

Variance 30.2%

Residency Status / Eligibility for SFA funded

ESOL

No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

EU NATIONAL/EEA MIGRANT WORKER 1413 42.6% 79.8% 20.2%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 1903 57.4% 67.4% 32.6%

Variance 12.4%

UK RESIDENT 3 YRS/SETTLED 755 22.8% 71.7% 28.3%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 2561 77.2% 73.0% 27.0%

Variance -1.3%

REFUGEE/ILR/REUNIFICATION /HP/DL/ELE/ELR 519 15.7% 45.3% 54.7%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 2797 84.3% 77.8% 22.2%

Variance -32.5%

MARRIED/RESIDENT 1 YEAR 296 8.9% 91.6% 8.4%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 3020 91.1% 70.9% 29.1%

Variance 20.7%

ASYLUM SEEKER/WITH SECTION 4 SUPPORT 259 7.8% 91.1% 8.9%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 3057 92.2% 71.1% 28.9%

Variance 20.0%

Total Clients Married to British Resident

Of those answering

513 15.5% 85.8% 14.2%

Length of time in the UK at 31/7/2010 No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

3 years + 755 53.6% 69.7% 30.3%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 2561 46.4% 76.2% 23.8%

Variance -6.5%

2 years + 2149 64.8% 71.5% 28.5%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 1167 35.2% 74.9% 25.1%

Variance -3.4%

begin data: Impact on Equality Groups

or Skills Funding Agency (SFA) eligible groups cf Others

APPENDIX 2

Employment Status No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Employed & Part Time Employed 1185 35.7% 95.5% 4.5%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 2131 64.3% 60.0% 40.0%

Variance 35.5%

Unemployment Status No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Unemployed/non-waged 1886 56.9% 57.7% 42.3%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 1430 43.1% 92.4% 7.6%

Variance -34.7%

Level (Listening and Speaking) No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Pre Entry - Entry 2 2139 64.5% 71.8% 28.2%

Other Levels: Entry 3 - Level 2 (& Unknown) 1177 35.5% 74.4% 25.6%

Variance -2.6%

Level (Reading and Writing) No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Pre Entry - Entry 2 2313 69.8% 70.0% 30.0%

Other Levels: Entry 3 - Level 2 (& Unknown) 1003 30.2% 78.9% 21.1%

Variance -8.9%

Pre Entry - Level 1 (ie, below Level 2) 3053 92.1% 72.1% 27.9%

Level 2 (& Unknown) 263 7.9% 79.8% 20.2%

Variance -7.7%

British Qualifications No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

No Qualifications 2849 85.9% 72.2% 27.8%

All Other Categories (& Unknown) 467 14.1% 75.6% 24.4%

Variance -3.4%

Study/Employment aspirations declared

Of those answering

No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Learn English to get work / better work 2256 68.0% 71.4% 28.5%

Want qualification in English 1932 58.3% 74.1% 25.9%

Want life in the UK test 774 23.3% 81.7% 18.3%

Looking for work 1260 38.0% 52.9% 47.1%

Advice about work or careers 1299 39.2% 73.1% 26.9%

Other Needs declared

Of those answering

No. of Total

Clients

% of Total

Clients

% of Group

Affected

% of Group

Unaffected

Childcare Needed 245 7.4% 84.1% 15.9%

Has travel/transport issues 499 15.0% 75.8% 24.2%

1) Gender No. % 3) Do you look after? - No. %Female 546 68.4% Children 296 37.1%

Male 216 27.1% Children & others 12 1.5%

No answer 36 4.5% Other - grandmother, wife, husband 71 8.9%Total 798 No answer 306 38.3%

No-one 113 14.2%

Total 798

2) Residency Status in the UK? No. %

EU National 287 36.0% 4) Do you have British Citizenship? No. %

3 Years UK resident/settled 250 31.3% No 520 65.2%

Refugee 103 12.9% Yes 156 19.5%

1 Year spouse/UK Resident 59 7.4% No answer 122 15.3%

Asylum Seeker 38 4.8% Total 798

16-18 Years 18 2.3%

No answer 43 5.4%

Total 798

Children 296

(37%)

Children & Others 12 (2%)

No answer

306 (38%)

No-one 113

(14%)

Other familiy 71

(9%)

NO: 520 (65%)

YES: 156 (20%)

No answer

122 (15%)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Female Male Unanswered

Of those 520 learners who answered 'No', 320 (62%) said they were doing ESOL so they could apply for Citizenship.

Appendix 3 Survey data: 798 ESOL Learners, February 2011

EU National

287 (36%)

3 Yrs UK /settled

250 (31%)

Refugee 103 (13%)

1 Yr spouse 59 (8%)

Asylum Seeker 38 (5%)

16-18 Yrs 18 (2%)

No answer 43 (5%)

5) Has ESOL Helped you? Total % of

answers

6) Do you Work? Total %

More training/courses 192 15.1% no 484 60.7%

At work 190 15.0% yes 284 35.6%

Better job 188 14.8% Unanswered 30 3.8%

Getting a Job 187 14.7% Total 798

University course 79 6.2%

Voluntary work 74 5.8%

Other 199 15.7%

No answer 159 12.5% 7) Do you Claim Benefits?Total 1268

Income / Benefit declaration Total %

Working Tax Credit 133 16.7%

Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) 125 15.7%

Dependant of someone on benefits 66 8.3%

Income Support 58 7.3%

Housing Benefit 39 4.9%

N/ASS S Support for Asylum Seekers 13 1.6%

Employment Support Allowance (ESA) 9 1.1%

Pension Credit (Guarantee Credit) 3 0.4%

Council Tax Benefit 2 0.3%

Dependant on someone who works 108 13.5%

No answer 222 27.8%

Total 798

Active Benefits 134.0 16.8%

Inactive Benefits or No Benefits 664.0 83.2%

8) Low income/less than £15,276 a year?

513 (64%) declared a low income or income of less

than the family threshold for Working Tax Credit.

If No, does someone get benefit for you?If No, do you get money from someone who works?

199 "Other" comments focussed largely

on the benefits to community integration, access to goods & services:-

93 Comments about everday life, life skills &

communication in the community, with friends:

eg, "Everyday communication", "Everyday life", "Communicate with friends", "Confidence", "Talking with other people", "Helped me with normal life in UK", "Meet new people", "Open my eyes", "Understand people", "Making life easy. Essential to live in UK", "Helped me sort many problems & feel less stressed".

35 Comments about accessing services & goods:

eg, "Confidence to speak to the doctor & solicitor", "shopping, doctors, school", "in shop, in bank", "talk with doctor, at shop, in library", "it helped me for speaking with my children's teachers & my GP".

22 Comments about helping children (&, in one case,

other family members):

eg, "Helping my children", "Children have friends", "Helping children with homework", "help my son with school", "Caring for husband", "read with my children"

21 Comments about Living in the UK

eg, "to help me live in the UK", "to understand how to live in England"

19 Comments about Training/Work/Voluntray work

eg, "Looking for work", "3D Graphic Designer", "British Foundation Shop", "Literacy support for L2 teachers assistant course", "to prepare for a job", "Diploma pupil interpreter service"

4 Comments about getting a passport / Citizenship

eg, "Get Citizenship"

Active Benefits declared

134 (17%)

ONLY 134 (17%) on "active" benefits (JSA or ESA) will be eligible for free classes under new ESOL funding rules. 314 (39%) on "inactive" benefits or dependants of people on inactive benefits will pay for the first time. An estimated 13% will lose ESOL Harship Fund support. SEE Q 9) *

Inactive Benefits, No Benefits, or No answer 664 (83%)

9) Do you Pay for ESOL classes? Total %

No 549 68.8%

Yes 184 23.1%

No answer 65 8.1%

Total 798

CANNOT pay next year 617 77.3%

Can pay next year 116 14.5%

No answer 65 8.1%

If you cannot pay / more, how will this affect you?

* 56% of those who said "no" get income-based benefits.

Another 13% are likely to get the Hardship Fund. (SEE Q 7)

10) Can you pay new or higher fees next year?

29% of learners commented on how loss of ESOL will

affect current work, or chances of getting work, permanent, full-time, or better work: "At work", "When I will stop learn English I probably will lose my job & will not have money for life", "Will not be able to find work", "If I cannot speak English I cannot get a job which is so important for my life", "Can't get a better job ", "I work part-time. I won't be able to find a full time job", "No education, no jobs , no prospects for better life for me & my daughter".

10% of learners expressed their feelings:-

"Frustration", "I will be hopeless & helpless", "I feel angry", "Lose my confidence", "Get depressed", "I will feel very sad & disappointed", "Get isolated", "I will miss my classes very much", "I will stay at home feeling sad & lonely", "I will only forget it more which will cause me to suffer due to problems in communication", "My family who pay for me will be unhappy", "Never - never getting a better job & boring, hopeless", "Very bad. I will be hopeless. No future".

7% of learners comments on how loss of ESOL will affect

their ability to help their children, communicate with schools, etc "Can't help my child with homework / at school", "It will change my ability to speak to child's school/doctor", "Will not understand my child who was born here", "I need to understand native speakers to support my children".

7% of learners commented on the effect that losing

ESOL will have on every day life & integrating in UK society:

"Can't read or write important forms", "living in my community, reading hospital letters, shopping",

"I can't speak easily to doctors, teachers, job centre, tax office", "I will need translator at doctors", "I cannot communicate with my neighbour", "I have a problem to understand health & safety at work", "I will have problem with understanding people at work & my neighbours", "You can't adjust to new society", "Very difficult to integrate"

462 people commented on multiple disadvantage

created by new & higher fees:-

8% of learners considered amounts they might be able to

afford , & how they will try to continue learning:

eg, "Can pay £20 a month", "I want to study but can't afford much", "I pay now £560 & for me very expensive", "I will need to cut expenses from my family", "If find a job I will reduce classes - just Reading & Writing", "Just one from family can afford to come so we will have to choose", "Little bit is ok", "Will not continue unless I find an additional job".

39% of learners commented on the loss of ESOL, access

to further education & progress towards their aspirations:

"Then I stop education", "I will not achieve my goal which is learn English fluently", "I will not be able to continue next level", "Learning English will take more time & I will forget my skills", "No access to other education & courses because I need ESOL qualification", "I won't be able to finish Level 2 & go to University ", "Learn very slowly", "It stop my dream", "I might not be able to learn English & I'll be unable to fullfill my ambition", "I will lose my aspiration".

617

116 65

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

CANNOT pay next year Can pay next year No answer

Of 733 who answered 617 (84%) said they could not afford to pay new or increased fees.