Replies
No one has replied to this post.
Haven't done a proper in-depth look at mine yet, but there were definitely learners in Gateway (ie completion 1, outcome 8, actenddate not blank) from a quick scan. Having watched the webinar they did on it, they had NO CLUE what the codes for "in gateway" were and the description (no tech spec OBVIOUSLY) implies it's anyone PPED who is still completion 1 and that's all...
Webinar is here: https://www.gotostage.com/channel/apprenticeshipservicewebinars and the confusion is about 42 minutes in at the start of the Q&A if you want to check it out.
As always, the whole thing is a mess, with conflicting information being provided in different sources.
The guidance document is clearly indicating the inclusion of learners in gateway.
"If the Completion Status is 1 and the Learning Actual End Date is not populated and the difference between the Learning Planned End Date and the ILR Freeze Date (not 31/03/24 for R08 stated on the dashboard) is greater than or equal to 1 day.
If the Completion Status is 1 and the Learning Actual End Date is populated and the difference between the Learning Planned End Date and the Learning Actual End Date is greater than or equal to 1 day."
Yet the dashboard states otherwise.
The total counted for our R05 data doesn't match what we would expect, the background learner data includes gateway learners, and only lists learners who are over their end date by more than 30 days, not 1.
Requires improvement.
I was on the same webinar where there was confusion over the ILR codes to use to stop learners showing on the AAF dashboard when they are in gateway. Reviewing the information from the webinar and the guidance then we will be using Completion Status - Code 2 Completed learning activities and Outcome - Code 8 Learning activities are complete but the outcome is not yet known.
This hopefully should then correctly only show true learners past planned end date as part of the dashboard for AAF.
The technical funding guidance states the 20% payment is only release with the ILR being updated with the Achievement date field and the correct completion status and Outcome codes.
Our PPED includes learner post gateway as well. What Chris suggests above might work (i.e. coding gateway as 2 and 8) but the ILR specification states
-
For apprenticeship standards, the learning activities for the programme aim include both the training and end point assessment. Code 2 must only be used for the apprenticeship standard programme aim where both the training and end point assessment activities have been completed.
So we have tension between AAF approach and the ILR specification. I have raised a query with DfE, will post here if I hear back.
Thanks Gosia, I think as always with DfE they update and implement changes without thinking about and taking into consideration all elements of other guidance documents.
As usual some contradiction in their guidelines. If code 1 is continued to be used to align with the ILR spec then all learners will continue to show on the AAF for all providers.
Thanks for logging, will await their interesting reply!
Gareth Luke No, it's only Prog aim, not M&E, so that's one less thing to worry about!!!
Chris Roberts 2&8 isn't valid for Apprenticeships or, at the very least, shouldn't be used. Completed learners should only be Achieved or Failed (I *think* the validation rule that catches them is actually based on AchDate, if there's no AchDate, you can't have Comp 2)
I have just checked our learners showing on the report as I had the same questions as everyone, as the info doesn't seem to be definitive.
On our P5 learners, everyone that was coded in EPA (1&8 on the Zprog and other applicable aims 2&8) with the LDOL in the learning actual end date didn't show so it looks like these are being excluded, the only PPED we have showing are coded as 1 for still being on programme and no other end information in the ILR.
I also put a ticket in about this last week with the helpdesk, and asked the people on the webinar for clarification but haven't heard anything back yet, if I here before anyone else on this I will update on here.
Did everyone else find the number of learners counted to be what was expected if they checked for learners with a completion staus of 1 continuing and an outcome of 8 awaiting results. Where the learner is 1 day over their planned end date on 08/01/2026?
I can't work out if the fact that our numbers match is random chance, as the learners identified in the data really don't match.
It's odd that they use the freeze point as I guess there may be learners who have achieved or gone through gateway on the 3rd, but they wouldn't be included in this file export? As it relates to December?
Thinks that's a different Chris Roberts Steve Hewitt
I have also raised the question of the Completion Status/Outcome with DfE, as there seems to be a clear conflict between the description on the dashboard ("it will now track the number of apprentices who are past their planned end date and have not yet reached gateway, excluding those who have completed training and are awaiting end-point assessment") and the definition which includes learners coded 1/8.
I will share the response when I get it.
Martin Outlaw our dashboard also seems to exclude a couple of learners who are past planned end date by more than one day but fewer than 30.
Thanks Steve Hewitt I didn't realise that.
Does anyone know where this update was accounced, it wasn't included in the DFE update last week. I was expecting it today but it's not there that I can see. We found out about it changing through the article in FE week.
Um, hey, so, I just checked the AAF spec here:
and, um, I think it IS working as intended...
Total
Set to 1 if any of the following conditions are true.
If the Completion Status is 1 and the Learning Actual End Date is not populated and the difference between the Learning Planned End Date and the ILR Freeze Date is greater than or equal to 1 day.
If the Completion Status is 1 and the Learning Actual End Date is populated and the difference between the Learning Planned End Date and the Learning Actual End Date is greater than or equal to 1 day.
So learners who went to Gateway "late" are still included in the count on purpose...
But, hopefully, the change mentioned in the helpdesk response above means that the second If here will just go away?
I wonder if that is as intended. As above it says those lines it specifies the below. When gateway has passed training is complete. Also it seems to specify continuing learners. It feels like their definition of what a continuing learner is, is wrong.
This indicator now focuses solely on apprentices who are continuing (or intending to continue) training and are past their planned training end date. Prolonged extension of training can indicate barriers to timely completion, reduced momentum and an increased risk of non‑completion.
Hi Steve,
That is a valid point, it is what the guidance says, yet the dashboard itself says differently, and has a further updated message stating there is an issue as per Lisa's message.
We will need to wait for the updated dashboard and technical specification before we know. Hopefully, by the time they have loaded R06 data, we will know which side the coin has landed.
Well, at least they've updated the definition now so *all* learners in Gateway are excluded, is only looking at those continuing PPED without an ActEndDate.
(scroll down a bit!)
Will have to see if it's picked up in the R06 data in AAF, VYED not updated yet (arguably a good sign if they're tweaking it).
Well, kind of, but they don't need to, anyone who is 8 will have an ActEndDate, so the rule:
Set to 1 if any of the following conditions are true.
For the programme aim, if the learning actual end date is not populated and the learning planned end date is at least one day before the ILR Freeze Date.
doesn't need to think about Completion or Outcome at all.
What will be *really* interesting is providers who just haven't bothered with recording Gateway as an interim position between on prog and completed (and, y'know, no shade, there wasn't really any need to do it in-year if everything was tootling along as expected) will totally have to do it now or risk a dodgy looking AAF metric...
(personally, I think "Planned End +30 still blank" would be an even better metric, this update will still pull through a lot of false positives *particularly* for providers with a very cohort-based delivery model where big chunks of learners have the same PED, so you could go from 0% to 15% in a month and then back to 0% the next month (exaggerating for effect, but you get me?))
Sam Bern
Past Planned End Date AAF Checking learners
Created
We're reviewing the AAF now the Past Planned End date percentage has changed. We noticed something odd and I wanted to see if others have also experience this.
It now counts learners who are still in learning, excluding those in gateway who are are at least 1 day over their planned end date at the census point which I think is the same as the ILR return hard close 4th working day of the last return.
Based on last months return we were expecting to see 48. The number of learners is correct, but when we look at the names of the learner data on the learner data tab, it displays a different 48 learners. It displays learners who are in EPA and excludes other learners who are over their planned end date. Is anyone else also experiencing this?