Paul Taylor commented, 07 October 2021 09:44

No - the general rule is that the ILR planned end date can only be changed in the first year. Changing after a year end submission will lead to you under or overclaiming funding.  Just leave the end date as it is and when the learner completes early then you'll draw down the remaining monthly payments. You'll have to document this as evidence and explain the impact on actual OTJ  hours v planned OTJ as you'll probably fall short of that test by reducing the delivery time

1. Change of mode - How to record on ILR and DAS

No - the general rule is that the ILR planned end date can only be changed in the first year. Changing after a year end submission will lead to you under or overclaiming funding.  Just leave the en...

Paul Taylor commented, 28 May 2021 13:26

If the learner passes their EPA with and achievement date in 21/22 then the learner will be counted in that cohort. 18/19 was the last year for minimum standards and at the moment there is no replacement for this. The Agency have said that they will use a wider set of measures to manage risk with the sector but they have not clarified what these are.

1. QAR confusuion

If the learner passes their EPA with and achievement date in 21/22 then the learner will be counted in that cohort. 18/19 was the last year for minimum standards and at the moment there is no repla...

Paul Taylor commented, 01 September 2025 13:51

Hi Martin I suspect these learners will have planned end dates in the 25/26 or beyond so will belong to those hybrid years. The QAR shows all future hybrid years as 2024.5 or whatever the future year is. Thanks Paul

1. QAR - leavers and hybrid end year

Hi Martin I suspect these learners will have planned end dates in the 25/26 or beyond so will belong to those hybrid years. The QAR shows all future hybrid years as 2024.5 or whatever the future ye...

Paul Taylor commented, 23 July 2025 12:24

Hi Steve It is entirely possible that I am not getting this, and appreciate the response you have shared from DfE above, but will explain my thinking below.  I keep going back to the QAR spec which is the published guidance and therefore should be the source of the truth. In the overdue planned breaks section the first logic is clear to me. If a break in learning does not return in that ILR year or the subsequent year, then they will be flagged as an overdue break in learning and therefore counted as a withdrawal. My reading of the "continuation of break record" is that this explains the process by which the continued submission of the BiL means that the learner is not counted as an overdue break through year 1 and year 2, but that if they have not returned by the end of year 2 then the earlier logic is then applied. Again, I appreciate the DfE info that you have shared but that is not what the guidance says and yes, we are seeing some of these in our data. Infinite BiLs (sounds like one of those recurring MIS staffers recurring bad dreams) would be a significant change in approach which is not communicated in the changes part of the spec but again note your point above on approach through the accountability process. We know where BiLs as QAR exclusions have taken us before so this would seem like a departure for the DfE. It is a slightly different point, but Sam Bern in the other QAR thread has fed back that late notified breaks to withdrawals with end dates in the previous year have not been acknowledged as an error so possible an issue with BiLs in the data extracts.  I suppose that leaves two points; can someone from the DfE pick up this conversation and bring some clarity to our discussion – I will also take this to them – and can the QAR people talk to the sector about such changes. I did raise this again at the latest tech user group that we need more conversation and openness on what is the most important metric in the sector. 

1. Qualification achievement rates 2024 to 2025

Hi Steve It is entirely possible that I am not getting this, and appreciate the response you have shared from DfE above, but will explain my thinking below.  I keep going back to the QAR spec which...

Paul Taylor commented, 23 July 2025 10:02

Hi Sam I don't think that is right. The information in the QAR specification is pretty clear on this. In the example of learner going on a break in July 24 they have until July 25 to return. A restart in August 25 would not meet the criteria below.   Overdue planned breaks We also treat learning aims as withdrawals in the QAR methodology where they have a Completion status of 6 (‘Learner has temporarily withdrawn from the aim due to an agreed break in learning’) and where either:  they do not have a corresponding restart record in the same funding year  they do not have a corresponding restart record or continuation of break record in the following funding year. 

1. Qualification achievement rates 2024 to 2025

Hi Sam I don't think that is right. The information in the QAR specification is pretty clear on this. In the example of learner going on a break in July 24 they have until July 25 to return. A rest...

Paul Taylor commented, 23 July 2025 07:58

Hi Carrie Yes, I think that is correct. I'm assuming if you had her in R12 that she would also been in R14 as a break.as well. 

1. Qualification achievement rates 2024 to 2025

Hi Carrie Yes, I think that is correct. I'm assuming if you had her in R12 that she would also been in R14 as a break.as well. 

Paul Taylor commented, 18 July 2025 16:47

Hi I think the QAR is correct. The DFE note is clumsy but says that they have excluded prior year data from the final extract, and not from the calculation so the 24/25 calc should be as per the spec which is what we are seeing. It would be madness not to have done this. We have also noticed the inconsistency with standard names. Looks lake a poor reporting process to me where they have merged the description from whichever year a leaver was reported in. This means that any standard names that have changed may be duplicated. Use the standard code if you are cross referencing to internal data. Overdue breaks are often the explanation of where data differs. If you have changed a break from last year into a leaver this year then that is likely to show in a future year depending on planned end date. There is an explanation in the spec but you'll need all of your fingers to work it out.

1. R10 in-year QAR data for 2024 to 2025 now on VYED

Hi I think the QAR is correct. The DFE note is clumsy but says that they have excluded prior year data from the final extract, and not from the calculation so the 24/25 calc should be as per the sp...

Paul Taylor commented, 18 July 2025 16:30

I think that response contradicts what is in the spec, and we think our R10 data shows no change in process for BiL. If they do not return by R14 of the year after they went on a break, then they get treated as a withdrawal in the QAR. The section on breaks in full below. Overdue planned breaks We also treat learning aims as withdrawals in the QAR methodology where they have a Completion status of 6 (‘Learner has temporarily withdrawn from the aim due to an agreed break in learning’) and where either: they do not have a corresponding restart record in the same funding year they do not have a corresponding restart record or continuation of break record in the following funding year If this scenario happens, we will set the reporting year to 1 year after the later of either: the expected end year the actual end year For example, if you recorded an aim with a planned end date in July 2024 that had a break in learning beginning in April 2023, this will be a withdrawn aim in the 2024 to 2025 funding year if there is no restart record or continuation of break record in either: the R14 ILR return in 2023 to 2024 the R14 ILR return in 2024 to 2025 When we treat records as withdrawn due to the situation described they become flagged and described as ‘overdue planned breaks’. An ILR record is a restart record if it has a Learning Delivery Funding and Monitoring Type of ‘RES’ with a Learning Delivery Funding and Monitoring Code of 1 (Learning aim restarted). We match restart records to planned break records by matching the UKPRN, Unique Learner Number and the Original learning start date on the restart or continuation of break record where it matches either the: learning start date original learning start date (to allow for situations where the planned break was itself a restart) of the planned break record for either: Programme type and Framework code for apprenticeships or Learning aim reference for other aims

1. Qualification achievement rates 2024 to 2025

I think that response contradicts what is in the spec, and we think our R10 data shows no change in process for BiL. If they do not return by R14 of the year after they went on a break, then they g...

Paul Taylor commented, 03 July 2025 11:16

I don't think that is any change from the current process.  If a learner is on a break in learning in 23/24, then that break in learning continues to be submitted in corresponding years until either the learner returns and restarts their learning, or you report the learner as having withdrawn .  If the learner has not returned by R14 24/25 then this will be counted as a withdrawal in the QAR. Where a learner is retrospectively changed from a break to a withdrawal in 24/25 but with a 23/24 learning end date, then this learner stops being included in the ILR return. In this instance learners get added into the QAR as withdrawal and labelled as an overdue break in learning and added to hybrid end year based on planned end / actual end +1 year.  My reading of that is that, aside from the R04 change, this is the same as it was previously but interested to see what the combined response is from the service desk is. 

1. Qualification achievement rates 2024 to 2025

I don't think that is any change from the current process.  If a learner is on a break in learning in 23/24, then that break in learning continues to be submitted in corresponding years until eithe...

Paul Taylor commented, 02 July 2025 17:20

My reading of this Steve is that the process is as it was but you just have 4 months less to return. If you are a BiL then you have up to the end of the following academic year to return in order to not be counted as a leaver in the QAR. The difference is that you no longer get the first 4 months of the 3rd academic year to return in now that they are no longer using the R04.  The process was already inequitable in that a learner going on a break in July would have 16 months to return (now 12) whereas an August break had 28 months (now 24). Obviously most breaks are shorter than a year but suspect there will be some small impact on headline achievement rates as a consequence of this. 

1. Qualification achievement rates 2024 to 2025

My reading of this Steve is that the process is as it was but you just have 4 months less to return. If you are a BiL then you have up to the end of the following academic year to return in order t...