Sue Bishop

Last activity

Member since

Votes

4

Subscriptions

22

Replies

Community Reply

Sue Bishop commented,

Community Reply

Sue Bishop commented,

Dan, thank you for sharing your audit experience, it is really valuable and very useful. Sue

Dan, thank you for sharing your audit experience, it is really valuable and very useful.Sue

Community Reply

Sue Bishop commented,

I think one of the issues is caused if you have a learner with records with two different subs but in the same contract year.  Have you tried adding the previous ID number on the latest record? Sue

I think one of the issues is caused if you have a learner with records with two different subs but in the same contract year.  Have you tried adding the previous ID number on the latest record?Sue

Community Reply

Sue Bishop commented,

Community Reply

Sue Bishop commented,

Hi Jess If you take the last date in learning being (for example) the date that the learner was submitted for Gateway approval, and the achievement date being the date EPA was either passed or failed, you are bound to have seven days difference. Sue

Hi JessIf you take the last date in learning being (for example) the date that the learner was submitted for Gateway approval, and the achievement date being the date EPA was either passed or faile...

Community Reply

Sue Bishop commented,

Hi Simon We have literally just done this and moved from learner entry tool to APTEM.  It didn't go well, I had lots of missing learners in my R02 return and we subsequently decided to roll back both learner entry tools to R13 and R01 and re-enter all achievements and withdrawals/breaks in learning, whilst using the new system for learners onboarded since August.  In hindsight we probably should have waited until after R14 :).  It's caused a lot of heartache, stress and much more work! I'm currently using filemerge and have managed to merge two ILRs successfully and upload R03 without errors. In terms of pitfalls, my experience was with late notified achievements and an algorithm which needed amending within APTEM as it didn't recognise that it should take the later date of either last date in learning or achievement date so I had a number of standard learners who finished learning and moved to Gateway at the end of July but the achievement date was in August.  I was expecting payment in R02 as they were late notified but in fact the learners didn't appear in R02 at all because of the algorithm thing.  I think that is worth addressing with your software people.  It's all very lovely doing a batch file export and just selecting the relevant year but if you've got learners missing it sets off alarm bells at ESFA.  I had a long exchange of emails with my partnership manager explaining why so many learners had literally dropped off the submission. Happy to chat through anything with you if you think that might be useful. Sue

Hi SimonWe have literally just done this and moved from learner entry tool to APTEM.  It didn't go well, I had lots of missing learners in my R02 return and we subsequently decided to roll back bot...