Replies
No one has replied to this post.
That EITHER is doing a *lot* of work for a single word change...
In fact, the key thing here is to allow economically inactive people who aren't on benefits to be fully funded but it also does technically allow those on benefits not looking for work (along with, it's worth pointing out, Asylum Seekers (who, according to ESFA, cannot be "looking for work" as they're not allowed to work) to be fully funded as well.
However, when you get to the evidence section:
Adult skills fund: funding rules 2024 to 2025 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
we find this sentence:
Where the learner is unemployed, this must include a record of what you have agreed with them, including the relevance of the learning to their employment prospects and the labour market needs.
Now, if we're being super pedantic the evidence could be that we've discussed it and it has no relevance as that would still be a record but, y'know, I think we all know what it means really...
The other thing that came up when I was discussing the Asylum Seekers bit in particular with Policy was;
- You will also want to consider the learners you are prioritising funding on in line with your Accountability Agreement, and FE Provider Dashboard where progression and employment outcomes will be measured. Prioritising funding on learners who are unable to work, may affect your ability to achieve employment outcomes.
And I'd argue "doesn't want to" is the same as "unable to" in terms of the original question.
Samantha Hobbs
Definition of Unemployed
Created
We have noticed that in reference to the definition of unemployed, it no longer says that a person in receipt of benefits needs to be willing to get back to work or doing the course to improve their employment prospects.
We are not sure if this has changed and the person doesn't need to be looking for work, or are we expected to assume that they do have to be looking for work although it doesn't explicitly say that.
So, for example if a learner is in receipt of 'other state benefits' and their take-home pay (disregarding UC payments and other benefits) is less than £892 a month and is not looking for work, we understand that they are eligible for full funding.
Are we interpreting this correctly?