TNP 3 & 4 for returning apprentices

Wait wait wait...

We ONLY use 3&4 for a continuing learner who has changed employer. These are not continuing learners because they have been withdrawn. Don't know what the service desk is on about...

Regardless of how you do the calc they'll only have what was left after their initial enrolment so, unless they were significantly ahead of where they "should" have been then you'll end up hitting the cap anyway.

Thanks Steve, that was my understanding too, my mind is blown!

See reply from servicedesk below:

When a learner is returning to an apprenticeship course where funding has previously been claimed on, this should be recorded in the ILR as a TNP 03 & 04 (residual costs) such as in the case of a change of employer, or change of employer during a BIL, or a withdrawal and restart as outlined in our webinars and guides on DfE Webinars on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@DfESectorComms.

Steve Hewitt - See this post. I thought the same as you. It seems wild to me to require TNP 3 and 4 for a restart after a full withdrawal. There could be a year or two in between, but if it's the same provider and standard, it's apparently TNP 3 and 4 regardless. We've successfully used TNP 1 and 2 for this, but apparently it's wrong.

What are your thoughts on which OTJ rules to use for a restart after a full withdrawal? After a break, it would be the rules from the original start date. After a full withdrawal and restart, I'd argue we should use the rule that apply on the new start date. In reality, I'd probably make sure the new OTJ hours met the minimum using both sets of rules, just in case.

For a restart where the original period was with us, we wouldn't normally use RPL to work out the new price, we'd just record the original price (not the band max) minus funding already received. If there wasn't a previous change of employer or price, you can just calculate funds already received, you don't need to check the Apps Monthly Payment reports. Amount received so far is original price x 0.8, divided by planned months, multiplied by months completed.

However, if you're using the new rules to establish OTJ based on RPL, then you also have to follow the guidance on how to reduce the price accordingly (paragraph 33.2). Seeing as you only have to reduce the price by "at least 50% of the prior leaning percentage", it would be very unlikely that the RPL would result in less funding that what was left. As Steve has said, you can't record a price that's more than what's left in the band anyway, so you do need to calculate what's left, not just base the price on RPL.

oh, well, that could have been communicated a bit more...

I'm still confused though, is using 3&4 post-withdrawal both for new employers AND the same employer???

(read to the end of the other thread now [mind blown emoji])

Yes, there shouldn't be any guidance which is only in videos, and not in writing. That should be in the PSM.

Thank you both!! Apologies for opening a can of worms!!!

Sorry to add further to the mix but can i get your thoughts on the below:

• Do they all have the original TNP1 and 2 and are given a TNP 3 and 4?
• Do we use the restart indicator and put their original start dates on the restarted record?
• To calculate their new OTJ, do we take the planned OTJ for the cohort they’re joining and then deduct their actual OTJ on WD?

Thank you both :-)

I wouldn't include TNP1 and TNP2, as those prices are not related to this period.

Yes, use the restart indicator, that would be the case even for a change of provider.

Original Start Date is only for a restart after a break.

OTJ is less clear. I think I'd use their original OTJ, take off what you can evidence they've already done, and use that. As I said above though, which OTJ rules are you supposed to use for a restart after a full withdrawal? 

Many thanks Ruth, every days a school day!!!!!! :-)