Replies
No one has replied to this post.
I get what they're saying in that it doesn't matter from a purely financial perspective - it's all going to come out the same in the end. However, if it was me I'd make sure the dates complied with the definition in the ILR spec, namely that the learning start date should be
The date on which learning for the learning aim began (accurate to within a week).
It is sufficient for the date held in this field to be accurate to within a week, providing that any approximation does not result in a learner being wrongly included or excluded in the funding calculations.
In my experience, auditors are very particular about this and have always said it must be within a week, as Ben says. I'm really surprised your auditors have said different. It might not impact on funding once they get beyond 42 days, but if they do less than 42 days, that date has be correct to the day.
Bud is frustrating in that it automatically defaults to exactly 'x' months after the apprenticeship start date (based on what is configured in the programme build) with no mechanism to confirm or alter this date through the front-end.
We remove the FS aims from the ILR export when adding the learner to the ILR in Bud, and then re-activate the aim(s) and manually adjust the start and end dates accordingly once we have the first day of learning confirmed for English/maths. This ensures we don't inadvertently start drawing Functional Skills funding for a learner.
Tracey Grant
Functional Skills start date
Created
Our apprentices start their FS in month 2. The start date in our leaner platform Bud defaults to a date one month on from the actual start date.
When we had our first ESFA audit couple of yrs ago we were told that as long as they started their FS in the same month as the funding starts from this was fine....even if the date does not match. However i am now concerned that we should be amending the ILR start date to match exactly heir first FS learning activity...thoughts please
Many thanks
Tracey