Ms Mary Doyle:

I am accompanied by my colleagues Mr. Brian Power and Mr. Hugh Geoghegan. I will be as brief as possible. We are glad to appear before the committee to discuss issues relating to the charging of fees by QQI. I will focus on the reasons for the establishment of QQI, the roles of QQI and the Department and other issues which are relevant to further education and training. As the committee will be aware, the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills wrote to the committee on 24 January 2014 providing information on this issue, and I will of necessity cover some of the same ground in my comments.

QQI was established in November 2012 under the Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Education and Training) Act 2012. That Act also provided for the dissolution of the Further Education and Training Awards Council, FETAC, the Higher Education and Training Awards Council, HETAC, and the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland, NQAI. QQI was given responsibility for the functions of those bodies across further and higher education and training, in addition to the external quality assurance function formerly carried out by the Irish Universities Quality Board, IUQB.

The purpose of the amalgamation of these bodies into QQI was to bring greater coherence to the sector, creating a single body which can deliver a more efficient and integrated service and uphold quality and standards in Ireland's qualifications and educational institutions. It is also important to bring a stronger focus to the creation of flexible pathways for learners. As such, it is an important structural element of our education system, focusing on quality assurance.

Since its establishment, QQI has been undertaking a comprehensive policy development programme involving structured consultation with relevant stakeholders, and I am aware that reference has been made to that consultation process in earlier interventions. QQI has prioritised the development of its policies on initial access to validation, programme validation and fees. In accordance with section 80 of the 2012 Act, QQI determined its fees and submitted them for the consent of the Minister for Education and Skills and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. The consent of those Ministers was conveyed to QQI in October 2013.

FETAC, QQI's predecessor body in the further education and training sector, had approximately 1,000 registered providers to which it provided services and to which QQI continues to provide services. It is considered unsustainable for QQI to continue to engage with such a large and growing number of providers in the further education and training sector without charging fees in respect of those services. This is particularly the case given the reduced resources available to all public sector bodies.

In this regard, I inform the committee of the reduction in resources available to QQI and its predecessor bodies in recent years. In 2008, the NQAI, HETAC and FETAC together received total Exchequer funding of some €14.4 million, of which approximately €13 million related to current expenditure. In 2013, QQI received Exchequer funding of €6.4 million, representing a reduction of more than 50% in five years. At the same time, QQI's staffing complement has decreased from more than 120 members of staff to 80.

There is a significant amount of work involved in assessing applications from providers seeking access to QQI's awards, so that QQI can be assured that they meet its rigorous quality standards. The purpose of those standards is to ensure that providers have the capacity to provide high-quality programmes of education and training to their learners. The fees, therefore, underpin QQI's ability to ensure and monitor compliance with its standards. Furthermore, the fees help to ensure that only those providers that are serious about complying with those standards apply to QQI.

It should be noted that QQI's role is not to provide access to awards to all providers who wish to have such access. The 2012 Act requires that quality assurance underpin the relationship between QQI and the providers with which it engages. Therefore, QQI is statutorily charged with providing access to a range of quality-assured awards only to those providers that can demonstrate their ongoing capacity to assure and enhance the quality of the programmes of education they provide.

It is open to organisations, including those in the community and voluntary sector, that find the revised arrangements put in place by QQI onerous to give consideration to working together. This would allow them to share resources and expertise and thereby build the capacity to engage meaningfully with QQI. Bodies wishing to have access to QQI awards could also seek to engage directly with providers which have themselves had programmes validated by QQI, including, for example, the new education and training boards which have been established through the amalgamation of the VECs.

In addition, there is a wide range of other awarding bodies operating in Ireland, with awards which are recognised through the National Framework of Qualifications, which providers may seek to engage with in order to gain certification for their programmes of education and training.

I can assure the committee that the role played by the community and voluntary sector in providing training and educational opportunities to marginalised communities is both important and valued. However, we must recognise that learners, particularly those who may be disadvantaged due to unemployment or who come from marginalised communities, deserve to be assured of the quality of the programmes they undertake and the awards they receive. Given the establishment of QQI and the reforms taking place in the further education and training sector in general, it will be necessary for providers in this sector, including those in the community and voluntary sector, to work with QQI to ensure they continue to provide a high-quality offering to their learners.

Clearly, there is scope for further clarifications and discussion on this issue. The Department would welcome these discussions taking place at an early date, particularly in the context of the emerging policy and provision landscape being developed in the further education and training sector.