Peter Hancock
Last activity
Member since
Votes
84
Subscriptions
54
Replies
Peter Hancock commented,
Here is another related query. I have downloaded the three spreadsheet-friendly data files from here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/adult-education-budget-aeb-postcode-files#full-publication-update-history The files themselves don't seem to have any marker, date stamp or version number to show when they were created, yet the website update history says that the postcode datasets were updated on 10/08/2023. Looking in the files, there is no "valid from" date after 1/11/2022. So, I wonder if this means that all postcodes added after 1/11/2022 have a "valid from" date back-dated to 1/11/2022?
Here is another related query. I have downloaded the three spreadsheet-friendly data files from here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/adult-education-budget-aeb-postcode-files#full-pub...
Peter Hancock commented,
Thank you Timmo, That must be the relevant part. I thought it was surprisingly difficult to find, especially as they could have linked directly to that paragraph instead of linking to the main PSM page. So, learners whose postcode is not in the postcode dataset can be funded by all providers, regardless of the devolved area boundaries (so long as the postcode is recorded as ZZ99 9ZZ).
Thank you Timmo, That must be the relevant part. I thought it was surprisingly difficult to find, especially as they could have linked directly to that paragraph instead of linking to the main PSM...
Peter Hancock commented,
continues...... I have checked the provider support manual, but can find no guidance about what to do when the postcode is absent from the dataset. This situation must crop up regularly when new postcodes are created, so there must be an established process for dealing with it, but I just can't find it.
continues...... I have checked the provider support manual, but can find no guidance about what to do when the postcode is absent from the dataset. This situation must crop up regularly when new ...
Peter Hancock commented,
Hello Henry Wish, I can't find any release notes for the FIS 23/24 release. I have checked the following page, but there are no notes for 2023/24: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/check-how-accurate-your-ilr-data-is-with-fis Are there any changes to specification of the FIS for 23/24?
Hello Henry Wish, I can't find any release notes for the FIS 23/24 release. I have checked the following page, but there are no notes for 2023/24: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/check...
Peter Hancock commented,
Henry Wish Hello Henry, I'm picking up this issue with the R108 rule as I'd like to know if the validation rule is a correct implementation of the funding rules. When a learner only has aims funded by FM10, there is no need to return D&P data, and R108 does not trigger the error condition. But, if a learner has an FM35 aim, and has a valid D&P record, and then subsequently has an FM10 aim in the same academic year, then R108 does trigger the error condition unless a new D&P record is returned with an outcome start date after the FM10 aim has ended. I have noticed that this rule still stands for 2023/24, but could you confirm if the rule is correctly implemented, please?
Henry Wish Hello Henry, I'm picking up this issue with the R108 rule as I'd like to know if the validation rule is a correct implementation of the funding rules. When a learner only has aims fund...
Peter Hancock commented,
Now that the funding rules are online and unavailable in a PDF, it is harder to refer back to older versions. Has anybody found a place on the web where the version history of the funding rules for the current year is available? I know the online version has a change history, but this is only a summary and does not show exactly what the changes are.
Now that the funding rules are online and unavailable in a PDF, it is harder to refer back to older versions. Has anybody found a place on the web where the version history of the funding rules fo...
Peter Hancock commented,
Ruth Canham-James, in the example you gave, wouldn't the learning aim have funding model 99? I did not think that the "other" line on the website related to FM99 - I thought it related to FM81, and possibly FM82.
Ruth Canham-James, in the example you gave, wouldn't the learning aim have funding model 99? I did not think that the "other" line on the website related to FM99 - I thought it related to FM81, and...
Peter Hancock commented,
Thanks :Steve Hewitt. I've just checked a couple of ours and they have been updated as well. :) I was going to ask you about your comment this morning, when you said that it didn't look like there had been an update: what did you mean? Did you mean that you had seen no news? Or did you mean that all the aims you checked still had an LDNS of 31/7/23?
Thanks :Steve Hewitt. I've just checked a couple of ours and they have been updated as well. :) I was going to ask you about your comment this morning, when you said that it didn't look like the...
Peter Hancock commented,
Hi Henry Wish, Will the website be updated with new LDNSes only on the dates shown in the timetable that Steve Hewitt posted earlier today? (ie Friday 28 April 2023, Thursday 11th May, Thursday 25th May, etc....) Or, could the LDNSes be updated on any date?
Hi Henry Wish, Will the website be updated with new LDNSes only on the dates shown in the timetable that Steve Hewitt posted earlier today? (ie Friday 28 April 2023, Thursday 11th May, Thursday 2...
Peter Hancock commented,
Hello Henry Wish, Thanks for your reply. Could you add some further clarification to your answer to question 1, please? Will the LDNS for 23/24 be added to all qualifications at the same time? If you are to do it on a rolling basis, we won't know which aims are really ending on 31/7/23, and which show 31/7/23 just because you have not changed the date yet.
Hello Henry Wish, Thanks for your reply. Could you add some further clarification to your answer to question 1, please? Will the LDNS for 23/24 be added to all qualifications at the same time? ...