Replies
No one has replied to this post.
The simple answer at the moment Neil is that we just don't know. V1 of the rules are so undefined and DfE staff so unable to answer our questions since they've come out that everyone is in the dark. We were promised a V2 with more/better detail but the chances of that coming out this side of the election seem slim at best...
Only exception is your second one there, who would be fine, just like a low wage learner is now. The newly self-employed have always been a weird glitch in the low wage category, possibility of viewing last three months bank statements to see lack of/low income and make an in-house decision, but there's no proper guidance.
As Steve said, we don't know. Some of us have had completely contradictory advice when we've asked directly. I was told all unemployed would fall under this, including your first and third examples. Other providers have been told they're going to put the "unemployed" definition back in (which they actively took out of 24/25 for v1), and anyone not earning will need to meet that.
Your first example is exactly the category we most have a problem with. The new rules looked to me like they would be fundable for next year, as it specifically says:
You may fully fund learners who are unemployed, employed, or self-employed, up to and including level 2 and the level 3 offers, if they earn below £25,000 annual gross salary.
But people are hearing this is going to be changed back for v2 🙁
Neil Reeves
Low Earning remissions - what is in scope?
Created
Hi,
Could someone please advise if the following situations could be considered to meet the low earnings threshold for Adult Skill Funding:
Also, more generally, can people qualifying by virtue of just not earning £25,000, including those not earning at all and not receiving benefits? What evidence would be suggested for these?
Thanks
Neil