Wayne Hosking

Apprenticeship restarts – RPL and 187-hour minimum

Created

None

Hi all,

I could really do with some advice on apprenticeship restarts, as this is an area I am struggling to pin down from the guidance and have a helpdesk query open for nearly 2 months.

We have an apprentice who previously completed a significant proportion of their electrical apprenticeship, including most of the associated qualification. Following a number of issues around changes of employer and the apprenticeship service account, we eventually had to withdraw them.

They now wish to restart the same apprenticeship, but there is likely to be relatively little training remaining.

My current thinking would be to undertake a fresh skills scan/initial assessment at the point of restart, identify the remaining KSBs and training required, plan the remaining off-the-job training accordingly, and reduce the negotiated price to reflect the learning already completed.

The point I am unsure about is the 187-hour minimum OTJT requirement on a restart.

The 2026/27 funding rules define a restart as where an apprentice “restarts after withdrawing from the programme and joins the same apprenticeship programme from the point that they previously left”.

Paragraph 78.4 also specifically allows an apprentice to return to the same apprenticeship after withdrawal, and paragraph 79 says that, for these exceptions, the total time spent on the apprenticeship may include more than one episode of learning when meeting the minimum duration requirement.

However, paragraph 39.1.1 states:

“If there is insufficient content remaining (i.e. less than 8 months or 187 hours), the individual will be ineligible for apprenticeship funding.”

And paragraph 86.2 states:

“No programme must fall below 187 hours of evidenced delivery.”

My question is therefore:

If a learner is genuinely restarting the same apprenticeship from the point they previously left, and a new skills scan shows that fewer than 187 hours of further OTJT are required, are they ineligible for funded restart?

Or can the OTJT delivered across the original and restarted episodes be considered collectively, in the same way that paragraph 79 expressly allows multiple episodes to be considered for minimum duration?

The combined duration across both episodes is several years, so duration is not the issue; it is specifically how the 187-hour minimum should be interpreted for a restart following withdrawal.

Any clarification or examples of how others are approaching this would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks,

 

Wayne

Replies

No one has replied to this post.


Steve Hewitt

As long as they've done 187 *in total* across the two (or more!!!) episodes of learning, it's fine. We had someone who only did 39 hours with us because they'd done the rest of it with another provider.

Wayne Hosking

Many Thanks Steve,

  It does make sense in line with the duration across multiple episodes, it just wasn't clear in the rules for restarts.

I'm assuming the OTJ will be based on the new standard minimums as they are restarting in 26/27.

Wayne

Ruth Canham-James

You can drop below minimum hours for a restart (even the 187), including after a full withdrawal. Just make sure you flag as a restart (don't include original start date). All validation rules for hours exclude restarts (such as this one).

Yes, do another Skills Scan, but know that any price reduction you calculate will likely being immaterial (unless the student was way ahead of plan on delivery when they withdrew), because you can still only have what's left in the band. I asked DfE whether the reduction needed representing in the new HRS 4 and RIP fields for restarts, but didn't get a clear answer.

39.1.1 doesn't apply to restarts if it was originally determined there was enough content. It doesn't say that, but you can infer it from everything else (not least the exception in the validation rules). I interpret 86.2 to be talking about the whole programme, however many episodes that falls into.

Steve Hewitt

Yes? No other way of doing really as it's not "properly" linked to their original start like a BIL would be.

I guess you could end up in a situation where what they had left when you do the RPL calc plus what they'd done before *didn't* hit 187, which would be problematic, but can't see it happening with Electrical somehow!!!

Wayne Hosking

Thanks both,

   It was my initial thoughts but sometimes where the rules are not 100% clear your tend to doubt yourself and edge on the side of course.

kind regards

Wayne

Wayne Hosking

Hi both,

  Just as a side issue to the above, the only way this will go into the DAS is to put no RPL as if you put anything less than 187 it will not let you create the cohort and errors out.

I assume you also had this issue Steve.

Kind regards

Wayne

Steve Hewitt

Um, no? Not to my knowledge anyway? We've been paid for her (not much), that's all I care about!!!

Wayne Hosking

This is what we had when i tried to enter a value below the 187. There isnt an option to say its a restart etc, something i believe they have overlooked.
Wayne

Steve Hewitt

Just had a check and... we did not put the "correct" RPL in AS for the learner I mentioned above!

I mean, I don't think it "matters", the Price Reduction matched to the TNPs which is the only thing it's really driving and the Plan and Actual OTJ in the ILR also matched reality.

But, thinking ahead, when they switch off entry directly to AS, will they allow values below 187 in that field if they're coming from the ILR (I'd have to assume "yes" but we know what assume does...)?

(Edited)