Richard Phipps
Last activity
Member since
Votes
0
Subscriptions
34
Replies
Richard Phipps commented,
Hi Ruth, We've made ESFA aware of this some months ago, they were working on it.. Richard
Hi Ruth, We've made ESFA aware of this some months ago, they were working on it.. Richard
Richard Phipps commented,
I've just checked and our 23A-103 report does have those columns and is populated. Did you use an ILR file or an MDB one for your report? For the others Darren mentions, for us: 23A-213: Broken and giving a lot of false positives when we use an ILR file it thinks a lot of employers are non-small when they are marked as small in the file and in other reports. 23A-215: We are not aware of any issues in the report? 23A-216: Broken as the entries it's bringing up have met the 20% OTJ calculation.
I've just checked and our 23A-103 report does have those columns and is populated. Did you use an ILR file or an MDB one for your report? For the others Darren mentions, for us: 23A-213: Broken and...
Richard Phipps commented,
We've seen this too. I have also previously emailed the ESFA about this report.
We've seen this too. I have also previously emailed the ESFA about this report.
Richard Phipps commented,
Ah! Thank you :) I was looking at the latest validation rules (released in April) and missed that bit as well: Rule Name Rule Description EmpId_10 If the learner is undertaking an apprenticeship programme (DD07 = Y), and the aim is a programme aim (LearningDelivery.AimType = 1), and is 'in paid employment' (LearnerEmploymentStatus.EmpStat = 10) on the programme start date, then there must be an Employer identifier that applies to the programme start date (error where LearnerEmploymentStatus.EmpID is unknown)
Ah! Thank you :) I was looking at the latest validation rules (released in April) and missed that bit as well: Rule Name Rule Description EmpId_10 If the learner is undertaking an apprenticesh...
Richard Phipps commented,
I got a reply after I finished work on Friday: There seems to be an internal issue with the LearnDelFAMType_102 error in SLD returns – the ILR team are dealing with it now and it should be turned off later today. Please can you do another data file submission, either later today or Monday.
I got a reply after I finished work on Friday: There seems to be an internal issue with the LearnDelFAMType_102 error in SLD returns – the ILR team are dealing with it now and it should be turned o...
Richard Phipps commented,
Hi Rachel, Have you checked on here against the Maths and English they already have? https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-and-maths-requirements-in-apprenticeship-standards-at-level-2-and-above/english-qualifications-for-apprenticeships Thanks, Richard
Hi Rachel, Have you checked on here against the Maths and English they already have?https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-and-maths-requirements-in-apprenticeship-standards-at-level-2-...
Richard Phipps commented,
Just looking at the Guidance: Recognition of prior learning requirements for apprentices aged 16 to 18 Relevant prior learning or experience is unlikely to exist for apprentices aged 16 to 18, unless they have: previously started or completed an apprenticeship done other training aligned to an occupational standard, for example, a T-level been in post-16 employment relevant to their apprenticeship You need to: check the apprentice’s personal learning record (if it exists) have a discussion with the learner to check if they have any relevant prior learning or experience It sounds like this apprentice might nor have prior learning, but does have prior experience because of being shown carpentry skills or practising it with his father at home?
Just looking at the Guidance: Recognition of prior learning requirements for apprentices aged 16 to 18 Relevant prior learning or experience is unlikely to exist for apprentices aged 16 to 18, unle...
Richard Phipps commented,
Hi Rebecca, Yes, that's correct. The problem is there is no flag in the ILR to indicate that RPL has taken place, so any OTJ values that appear too low have to be listed in the report (even when this is due to RPL). For older starts the report uses the Duration to calculate the minimum OTJ, but for starts on or after the 1st August 2025 the report just checks against the new Apprenticeship Standard Minimum OTJ values: Identify learners with ZPROG learning aims WHERE FundModel = 36, Either( (LearnStartDate >= 01/08/2019 AND LearnStartDate <= 31/07/2025) , RES <> 1 AND and Phours < minimum planned hours, based on apprenticeship programme planned duration in weeks (adjusted for statutory annual leave entitlement) x least number of weekly employment hours, derived from EII (capped at 30 for starts from 01/08/2022) x 20%). OR LearnStartDate >= 01/08/2025 derived from Apprenticeship funding rules annex C - off the job training minimum requirements ) Thanks, Richard
Hi Rebecca, Yes, that's correct. The problem is there is no flag in the ILR to indicate that RPL has taken place, so any OTJ values that appear too low have to be listed in the report (even when th...
Richard Phipps commented,
That's true Steve, the DSATS report details just says 'likely': "When a learner returns from a break in learning, the resumption in learning needs to be planned to account for the time spent on the break in learning, with a revised learning planned end date that is likely to be different to the original learning planned end date." (My bolding)
That's true Steve, the DSATS report details just says 'likely': "When a learner returns from a break in learning, the resumption in learning needs to be planned to account for the time spent on the...