The majority of this piece, and indeed OfS’ consultation, is focused on the way that higher education providers can work together to help anyone who can benefit from university level study do so.

But first we need to talk about maps. Specifically this map.

And we might want to pay attention not only to the way that it is not the same as any of these maps, but also to the way that none of these maps can easily be used (via joining areas together) to construct the map above.

I promise you we will get on to access and participation.

If you are reading this as an academic geographer please – I implore you – write a readable mass-market book about the history and scope of official geographies in the UK. I’d be happy to take recommendations if I have failed to spot one, or work with you in helping to write one (seriously, my email address is on my author profile).

The reason I am so wedded to this idea is that people in positions of power have a tendency to invent their own geographies based on nothing but their (undoubted) good intentions and administrative convenience. It is horrifyingly rare to see someone take an already understood set of subdivisions and tweak their own preferences to access the clear benefits of having people know which area they are in. Or to enable clear linkages with local bodies. Or just because of sheer tidiness.

If you are wondering about the ones above:

• ILTS2 is the system that sits below the administrative regions we are familiar with in most national statistics (North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands and so on). The level below maps to the counties and unitary authorities we are all familiar with, and groups them together in meaningful and sensible ways.
• LSIPs were designed deliberately by the last government not to map to any other well understood boundaries, so align nearly (but not quite) to both ILTS2 and local council areas in various unhelpful ways – ensuring that existing structures that deal with adult skills couldn’t be used instead.
• TTWAs are hopelessly small and don’t map to anything else, and are only really useful in analysing where people who work in a particular place tend to live. I mention them here because OfS displayed an improbable fondness for them a few years back.
• Combined authorities are the basis of the forthcoming new, single-tier, devolved plan for local government – it will also encompass new Strategic Authorities. The plans are not yet complete (for example there is still an ongoing debate around how to split Gloucestershire and the Cotswold up) so there is not yet full coverage of England. I include them mainly to demonstrate how silly it is to come up with new geographic areas at this precise point in English history.

So let’s think about the actual consultation.

It makes sense to see universities and other providers work together to drive up higher education aspirations, educational attainment, and eventual participation. It makes sense to have this happen in local areas, enabling providers to work together to make best use of resources and offer meaningful alternatives to people who may never even have even considered higher education. It makes sense to build on the excellent work of the partnerships and collaborations developed via the Uni Connect programme.

And, as the consultation itself states:

Devolution means that combined authorities are likely to be important partners in local skills and equality matters. We want to position new regional partnerships to engage in important local cross sector activity such as Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs)

The devolved authorities will have substantial powers around education and skills – the focus has been on non-HE routes but it makes absolute sense to consider these in the round with HE provision. This offers the potential for articulation, for learner-focused industry-aligned pathways bespoke to the area, and for better cross sector collaboration. There are so many potential wins here it is untrue.

It feels like this goal could be met by preempting the pending decisions on the new single-tier authorities that will cover the whole of England – which is what this consultation suggests. But the goal should be met by gradually migrating the existing partnerships into the new areas as they emerge, sustaining existing groupings in the meantime (and perhaps adding in the providers that are currently not involved). This would avoid having to do two reorganisations in one parliament, and allow for alignment both with new and existing authorities as they wax and wane.

If we get the proffered independent regional co-ordinators it would make sense for them to work with one authority – and with one regional contact within the Office for Students (seriously, has it taken eight years for us to realise how well this worked at HEFCE).

Until then, I’m happy to recommend Map Men.