Replies
No one has replied to this post.
See the note from the ILR specifications.
This field must be completed if any proportion of the learning aim is delivered by a partner organisation. This partner organisation may be a provider, employer or employer-provider that is engaged to deliver education and training provision.
This field is not recorded for programme aims.
If the learning aim is subcontracted to more than one organisation, then the one who delivers the greatest proportion of the aim should be recorded.
If the training is sub-contracted more than once (subject to approval by the funding agency) then the UKPRN of the organisation which is actually delivering the training should be recorded.
HTH
I don't think the ILR will error if you use the same aim twice? It might pop up on a PDSAT (I'm not sure if the duplicate aim report includes FM36) but you've got a solid reason for doing it, so not a problem. Rather surprised that RoATP registration is linked to it if you're reporting it in your sub-contracting declaration though? That would seem the most obvious place for the Agency to get the information about who is active rather than the ILR itself...
Thanks Martin. I read this earlier too.
Steve - my thoughts are to potentially record the two non-regulated learning aims with the same code, and see if it errors.
I'm not even sure that it's necessary for all subcontractors to be recorded on the ILR...The quote from the funding rules suggests not and the guidance I initially had a few years ago from the ESFA was that the recording of the non-regulated aims were optional.
ESFA confirmed with me that if the subcontractor is just delivering part of the Standard itself (which is only represented by the the ZPROG), then you don't need to declare the subcontractor in the ILR. You're not allowed to record a subcontractor against the ZPROG, and it's not true to say they're delivering on the admin bodge that is the the Z00 code we have to return, because it doesn't represent any delivery! ESFA's comment was "Just note the apprenticeship evidence file, regarding the sub contracting". If your subcontractor is being threatened with removal from RoATP, then ESFA need to sort it out and change the rules both to allow subcontractors on the ZPROG, and to allow multiple subcontractors to be recorded against one aim. This is an absurd situation that only ESFA can resolve. It sounds like you've found the only "solution" available at the moment, but you shouldn't be in a position where you have to enter a bunch of fake data of your own devising to get around this problem.
Emma Orr
Subcontractors & Non-Regulated Learning Aims
Created
Just after a little advice please regarding using non-regulated learning aims on the ILR!
We need to record more than one sub-contractor for delivery of part of our Apprenticeships, however both will need a non-regulated learning aim.
Is it a problem to use the same non-regulated learning aim twice in the same ILR record to record the two different courses? This is the only way we can see to record both subcontractors.
Initially we were told that it's optional to record these courses in the ILR however it looks as if we do need to list the subcontractor details somewhere as our subcontractor is being threatened that they'll be removed from ROATP. I assume it's the ILR that provides the evidence they are being used for training...