For-profits face sterner tests for SLC cash

The increased focus on quality assurance in alternative providers is to be welcomed, and will ensure that rogue providers are not supported. However, it is noticeable that there are a number of elements within the guidance which are clearly aimed at inhibiting entry to the student market to any new provider (whether for-profit or not), even if the quality of the provision is excellent. This is not a step in levelling the field. Existing providers with demonstrable quality failures will (of course!) not suffer any constriction in their access to funds whilst new entrants with excellent quality provision will be inhibited from entry. Not obviously driven by a "students at the heart of the system" mantra. I wonder how that happened. Another vol-au-vent minister?