Peter Hancock
Last activity
Member since
Votes
98
Subscriptions
60
Replies
Peter Hancock commented,
Jason Poole Thank you for the update you posted yesterday evening. Janine Brockwell Thank you for the post you made at 17:04 yesterday to notify us all that you were aware of the issue. Both of those posts were made out of normal working hours and realistically were not going to be read by many of the people who needed to see them. It is clear that the problems had existed for at least several hours during yesterday afternoon, during which time many providers had wasted a lot of time trying and re-trying to submit ILRs and also seeking support on this forum and from the support desk. Two things have disappointed me about this matter: 1) I'd like to know why could a public notice have not been published earlier in the day to acknowledge the problem? 2) When the decision was made (after 5pm) to extend the collection window to 7PM, why could the new deadline have not been today, say at 12PM or 5PM instead?
Jason Poole Thank you for the update you posted yesterday evening. Janine Brockwell Thank you for the post you made at 17:04 yesterday to notify us all that you were aware of the issue. Both of ...
Peter Hancock commented,
I know this is an old thread, but I think it is still relevant. The original question was about a learner repeating an aim in the same academic year as the original attempt. Whilst I can clearly see that we can claim the funding again in a later academic year, I wonder if we can claim funding twice in the same academic year if the learner fails at the first attempt. For example, if the learner takes functional skills English in the first term and fails, can we claim the funding again in term 2 for a 2nd course (noting the rule about not using the RPL adjustment for English and maths up to L2)? I can't see anything in the rules to prevent this.
I know this is an old thread, but I think it is still relevant. The original question was about a learner repeating an aim in the same academic year as the original attempt. Whilst I can clearly...
Peter Hancock commented,
Peter Hancock commented,
Hi Henry Wish, I was just wondering if you can possibly give us any update on the "mid to end of April" timetable you gave us a few weeks ago, please? Will the website have any filtering capability to help us to distinguish those quals with a confirmed LDNS of 31/7/23 from those that have not yet been updated?
Hi Henry Wish, I was just wondering if you can possibly give us any update on the "mid to end of April" timetable you gave us a few weeks ago, please? Will the website have any filtering capabili...
Peter Hancock commented,
Steve Hewitt, that's a really good point. I understand the difficulty of information flow, but as website users, we need to know the difference between: a) a real LDNS of 31/7/23 (ie the qual is definitely going out of funding), and b) a temporary LDNS of 31/7/23 (ie the date has not been updated yet).
Steve Hewitt, that's a really good point. I understand the difficulty of information flow, but as website users, we need to know the difference between: a) a real LDNS of 31/7/23 (ie the qual is d...
Peter Hancock commented,
Steve Hewitt I know what you mean about the spreadsheet, and I use it myself. It's a shame that is is not more user-friendly, though, and shown as a link on FALA. Every qualification has three relevant dates for funding (shown on the FALA website, but the spreadsheet has only 2 dates, with different names). 1) Funding start date, shown on the website as valid from, shown on the SS as FundingApprovalStartDate In an example I just looked at, these two dates did not match. 2) Funding end date, shown on the website as valid to, this is absent from the SS 3) LDNS, shown on the website as LDNS, shown on the SS as FundingApprovalEndDate For an example I just looked at, it did resolve the difference between LDNS for Adult Skills and ALL and show the correct LDNS. Did you notice that the website shows the download was updated on 19/12/22, but the date of snapshot in the SS is 22/11/22?
Steve Hewitt I know what you mean about the spreadsheet, and I use it myself. It's a shame that is is not more user-friendly, though, and shown as a link on FALA. Every qualification has three...
Peter Hancock commented,
I just received the following message from the helpdesk: We are aware that Submit Learner Data (SLD) is currently down and we are working hard to rectify this issue. We will respond to you with further information as soon as possible. I had asked if there would be an extension, but they did not mention that. At this time of day, and without any further information, they cannot expect us to keep trying indefinitely, can they?
I just received the following message from the helpdesk: We are aware that Submit Learner Data (SLD) is currently down and we are working hard to rectify this issue. We will respond to you with f...
Peter Hancock commented,
I have another question which is about the maximum amount of virement available. I have looked at the 19-23 year olds we brought forward from 24/25 and the funding value for them in 25/26 is more than the maximum amount of virement offered. Did anybody else find the same?
I have another question which is about the maximum amount of virement available. I have looked at the 19-23 year olds we brought forward from 24/25 and the funding value for them in 25/26 is more...
Peter Hancock commented,
Peter Hancock commented,
That's strange isn't it? That suggests the FRM report wasn't looking at the latest ILR data until R11.
That's strange isn't it? That suggests the FRM report wasn't looking at the latest ILR data until R11.