Paul Taylor commented, 27 January 2025 15:56

We've spoken to them about this and the point I made was that the funding system is preventing providers from reporting achievements. Being able to send through an improvement achievement rates is in everyone's best interests, but we cannot because we have tied it to the funding systems. Our MIS allows us to force the update into the ILR, but the Agency's systems do not pick the update up for QAR purposes.  It does not feel like the right solution or fully thought through as per the comments in the other thread (I agree that it is a useful thread Ruth!), but I suspect the volume of these is small enough for the Agency not to want to invest the time in resolving. We get one or two a year.  

1. EPA recorded as fail in last academic year but wants to resit

We've spoken to them about this and the point I made was that the funding system is preventing providers from reporting achievements. Being able to send through an improvement achievement rates is ...

Paul Taylor commented, 27 January 2025 15:02

Yes, we have had a few of these. The issue you have is that you once you have claimed the income in one year, it is not possible to send the achievement through in a following year. There is lengthy discussion about it here where key points are covered.   Further education and training providers community - Completion Status/ Payment processing

1. EPA recorded as fail in last academic year but wants to resit

Yes, we have had a few of these. The issue you have is that you once you have claimed the income in one year, it is not possible to send the achievement through in a following year. There is length...

Paul Taylor commented, 22 January 2025 17:51

Hi Eileen You can find detail on how this is collected in the specification document below although it is not as detailed as it could (should!) be.   Apprenticeship training provider accountability framework and specification - GOV.UK One of the things I have asked the Agency for is the ability to get to the detail behind these feedback scores so you can address issues with particular employers or areas of delivery, but that is not likely to happen and you can understand the rationale behind the value of the anonymity in collecting such data. However, as providers we should be and in most cases are collecting learner and employer voice ourselves at regular intervals in the learner journey and feeding that into our quality improvement process. This valuable information can then be used in any conversations with the Agency around this element of the AAF.

1. Employer and Apprentice Feedback - Accountability Framework

Hi Eileen You can find detail on how this is collected in the specification document below although it is not as detailed as it could (should!) be.   Apprenticeship training provider accountability...

Paul Taylor commented, 22 January 2025 15:28

Hi  We are seeing the same thing in our data so the action is to raise with the service desk which you have done. I would also advise being on top of the data by having your own internal reports that mimic these measures so that you are in control of managing these risks internally and can explain your performance with the ESFA. Many MIS providers have these built into their systems now so speak to them in the first instance, but this can be derived from your data through some simple reporting.  Although we do not have a technical document in the detail we need the updated specification linked below gives you most of what you need to do this: Apprenticeship training provider accountability framework and specification - GOV.UK Total number of apprentices = all zprogs that have been in learning in the current academic year excluding those that did not quality as a start. Past planned end date = all of the above where the zprogs are 90-180 days or 180 days+ passed their planned end date. This includes learners that have completed.  Withdrawals = all Zprogs (excluding the 42 day leavers not qualifying) that have withdrawn in the current academic year.  Breaks in learning = breaks in learning is a little bit more difficult to do as you need to exclude learners that have returned so will need to cross check against other lines of data which QAR data may do for you if you have that available in a reportable format. Other than that complication the process is the same in that you need to identify which zprogs have been on a break for 180-365 days and 356 days+ and measure them against your total apprentices number.

1. AAF PPED dashboard not reconciling with associated data export

Hi  We are seeing the same thing in our data so the action is to raise with the service desk which you have done. I would also advise being on top of the data by having your own internal reports th...

Paul Taylor commented, 07 January 2025 14:16

This is the response below that I have had back. The top line clearly states that they are not changing this from an error to a warning but this is what I am asking for clarification on. The rationale needs challenging; 'it is triggering correctly in some circumstances' could mean that it working correctly 5% of the time and and not 95% of the time which in such a scenario should require further work by the technical team. The broader issue here is around the approach to dealing with this, the timing, and proactively supporting the sector to deal with the issue. As per my previous posts many providers will submit, or have already submitted, not understanding the workarounds that can be applied to resolve this and I suspect that a significant amount of income will be missing nationally because of this, which then requires another set of conversations, effort, and work to explain to associated parties.     The error will not be changed to a warning as it is triggering correctly in some circumstances for providers. The LDM code is a requirement to be fully funded as per the Adult skills fund: funding and performance management rules 2024 to 2025 (updated 18 July 2024). Guidance as follows: - Unemployed We will update the Universal Credit (UC) thresholds to align to any revisions made by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). For funding purposes, we define a learner as unemployed if one or more of the following apply. They: receive Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA), including those receiving National Insurance credits only receive Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) receive UC, and their take-home pay as recorded on their UC statement (disregarding UC payments and other benefits) is less than £892 a month (learner is sole adult in their benefit claim) or £1,437 a month (learner has a joint benefit claim with their partner) are released on temporary licence, studying outside a prison environment, and not funded by the Ministry of Justice Providers may also use their discretion to fully fund other learners if either of the following apply. The learner: receives other state benefits (not included in the list above) and their take-home pay (disregarding UC payments and other benefits) is less than £892 a month (learner is sole adult in their benefit claim) or £1,437 a month (learner has a joint benefit claim with their partner) not receiving any benefits, wants to be employed and you are satisfied that the identified learning is directly relevant to their employment prospects and local labour market needs. In order to claim full funding for learners who are unemployed and not receiving benefits, you must indicate that they earn below the earnings threshold by using LDM code 391 and FFI code 1 If the learner is unemployed and is claiming benefits, you must complete the Benefit Status Indicator (BSI) to identify the learner is in receipt of JSA (BSI 1) UC (BSI 4), or ESA (all categories) (BSI 5). Earnings threshold We have introduced the earnings threshold as part of a new eligibility criteria that enables learners to be fully funded if they earn below £25,000. The policy entitlement includes learners who are employed or self-employed. You may fully fund learners who are employed, or self-employed, up to and including level 2 and the level 3 offers, if they earn below £25,000 annual gross salary. You must have seen evidence of the learner’s gross annual wages in these circumstances. This could be a wage slip or a UC statement within 3 months of the learner’s learning start date, or a current employment contract which states gross monthly/annual wages. Please note this is not an exhaustive list, but you must evidence your decision to award full funding to an individual who would normally be eligible for co-funding. To claim full funding for learners who earn below the earnings threshold, you must use LDM code 391 and FFI code 1. Adult skills fund: funding and performance management rules 2024 to 2025 - GOV.UK www.gov.uk.

1. Rule violation LearnDelFamType_124

This is the response below that I have had back. The top line clearly states that they are not changing this from an error to a warning but this is what I am asking for clarification on. The ration...

Paul Taylor commented, 02 January 2025 08:55

I have received the reply below on this issue with the ESFA confirming that they will switch the error to a warning before the R05 deadline if it is not resolved before then. This is not really sufficient, so I will be feeding this back to them and would encourage others to do the same if you have business processes affected by this. We want to use the associated funding reports to know what out income position is every week, not only at month end, and we are currently missing a significant chunk of YTD income due to this error. Similarly, we need to know our position for devolved ASF contract monitoring and forecasting. Fortunately, R05 is not a performance management point for any of our devolved ASF contracts but again we want to know where we are at any given point and not just find out what our income is post month end. Again, if you are feeling the pinch of any of these issues then please communicate this back to the Agency.    The LearnDelFAMType_124 is currently on the know issues log linked below as it is not triggering correctly. The rule is currently being investigated by our technical team. Submit_Learner_Data_Known_Issues_2024_to_2025_101224.xlsx Unfortunately, I cannot give a date for when this will be resolved but if it is not fixed before the R05 deadline it will be switched off so errors do not trigger and funding is unaffected.

1. Rule violation LearnDelFamType_124

I have received the reply below on this issue with the ESFA confirming that they will switch the error to a warning before the R05 deadline if it is not resolved before then. This is not really suf...

Paul Taylor commented, 27 August 2024 14:39

Yes you will receive the 20% payment once the learners complete (completion status and achievement date added). If there are differences in your values than the obvious thing to cross check are the prices. Do these differ? Do have learners that have returned from a break in learning? The completion payment will be 20% of total price or the residual price for any restarts.   

1. 20% Retention

Yes you will receive the 20% payment once the learners complete (completion status and achievement date added). If there are differences in your values than the obvious thing to cross check are the...

Paul Taylor commented, 31 July 2024 16:41

The other point to note is that these are indicators and failing a test does not necessarily mean action action will be triggered. Regional ESFA teams will ask for explanations and justifications and there should be sensible dialogue between provider and the agency. If you have an example that temporarily makes your data look odd, then explain that in your meetings with your agency contacts.

1. Past Planned End Date - AAF

The other point to note is that these are indicators and failing a test does not necessarily mean action action will be triggered. Regional ESFA teams will ask for explanations and justifications a...

Paul Taylor commented, 31 July 2024 15:24

I think this is one of the elements that is not particularly intuitive but the Agency are only able to work with the measures available to them and it will allow them to benchmark and see outliers. Providers will have learners passed planned end, particularly as they approach the gateway period but there could be other reasons for this which the Agency are interested in.   The learning actual end date is measured against the planned end date and as both of these relate only to the learning period then they should be broadly in line with each other. I think what they are really testing for are two things; - do you have large numbers where the LOS is shortened and you are therefore condensing programmes for funding purposes.    - do you have a significant number where learners are taking too long to achieve because progress / training delivery is slow.   If you have a large number in this group then you need to check your planned lengths of stay against actual length of stay for completers and look at whether or not you need to amend these for future cohorts, dependent upon the reason why learners are going significantly passed planned end date.  

1. Past Planned End Date - AAF

I think this is one of the elements that is not particularly intuitive but the Agency are only able to work with the measures available to them and it will allow them to benchmark and see outliers....

Paul Taylor commented, 25 July 2024 08:57

These are all continuing learners that have a future yet to be determined hybrid end year because we don't know what the end/achievement date is yet. 

1. QAR hybrid dates

These are all continuing learners that have a future yet to be determined hybrid end year because we don't know what the end/achievement date is yet.