Replies
No one has replied to this post.
Ooooh, didn't realise this was a thing! How exciting!
Interestingly, looking at V4 of the Rules Violation spreadsheet that came out last week, one of the (few) changes was:
| FundModel_11 | If a T Level programme has been returned, it must be 16-19 funded or non funded (error where LearningDelivery.ProgType = 31 and LearningDelivery.FundModel <> 25 or 99) |
(bold bits are new) Which implies 81 aint going to work if the ProgType is 31.
Here's the thing, do you *need* a ProgType on the ZPROG if it's FM 81? This suggests you don't?
ILR Specification 2022 to 2023: Field: Programme type (submit-learner-data.service.gov.uk)
Certainly worth giving it a try? Would a s s u m e SOF 105 would be OK (in fact, LearnDelFAMType_09 implies it has to be)?
Teaching you to suck eggs, I'm sure, but you've got LDM 384 on them right? That seems to knock out a bunch of validation rules about progtype etc (and also says that it *must* be FM81), if you go to the the Learning delivery rules tab and then filter for 384 in the Rule Description column is shows you what it's doing/exempting you from.
(EDIT: Steve beat me to it about this!) There appears to be an LDM code for this too;
We desperately need adults to be able to do T Levels if they're getting rid of the equivalent Level 3 quals. Even where a similar qual still exists for AEB, with all the 16-18 year olds being on a T Level, our adult cohorts would become uneconomically small, meaning we wouldn't be able to offer anything.
Yep, tried removing the programme type and now we get ProgType_01 errors. We've been round in circles. Might just try stripping out all the "usual" bits and see if I can return just the core qualification on its own.
Yes, think the update to FundModel_11 was my fault too - someone in their wisdom decided to take a non-funded learner on one of our T-Levels. Grrrr....
ok, so FM81, SOF105, LDM384, all Aim Types set to 4, all Programme Type/Framework/Pathways removed. ZPROG enrolment removed completely. Nearly there - just getting a WorkPlaceStartDate_04 on the IP enrolment (which they are supposed to still be doing according to the guidance)
STEPHEN BECKINGHAM
Adult T-Levels
Created
Hi,
Has anyone managed to successfully return an adult T-Level on the ILR? We've been told they need to go under FM81, but how should the rest of the record be coded? Whatever combination of Programme Type, Aim Type, Funding Source we try, we can't make it valid.
Thanks