Replies
No one has replied to this post.
Not really... We should be returning everything that we're delivering (it's in the contracts).
This is the problem with the bandings on the non-reg aims, that there's cliff edges, particularly this one, which is one of the steepest. Assume you're running the non-reg in the 70s (72 hours is a classic)? So you can't realistically claim they're only doing 2 hours on the regulated aims (and, of course, we can't claim non-reg hours for hours we're delivering towards a regulated qual, they'd need nice and clear outcomes on their RARPA for the non-reg that were separate to the English aim outcomes).
I'm afraid the answer is "you'll have to suck it up"?
Richard Heath
Claiming non regulated rather than qualification funding
Created
We have a group of LLDD learners on a course that is currently funded on a non regulated aim (69-92 hours). We have identified some Entry Level units of qualification that could be appropriate for them to undertake; however, if we were to add those learning aims and reduce the non regulated band by the qualification GLH (20 hours) it would result in a lower overall funding claim (£100 + £300 instead of £450). What should we do? Is it appropriate to deliver the qualification but not add the aim to the ILR?