Paul Baker
Last activity
Member since
Votes
3
Subscriptions
15
Replies
Paul Baker commented,
Thanks Martin. I couldn't find any mention of reducing funding for E&M (other than for BILs and returns) but it doesn't feel right claiming for a full £471 if learners are only having to do minimal learning over a short duration as oppose to an apprentice undertaking a full FS programme over several months. Are you aware if any funding can be claimed to cover the costs of just sitting the FS assessments (Reg/Exam fees) if the learner is confident and provider feels they can attempt E&M without any additional learning?
Thanks Martin. I couldn't find any mention of reducing funding for E&M (other than for BILs and returns) but it doesn't feel right claiming for a full £471 if learners are only having to do minimal...
Paul Baker commented,
As it stands no we are not accepting anything that states 'Provisional' but this is mainly down to the legacy of the rules around the frameworks and the examples provided here by awarding bodies who did not accept provisional statements of results Acceptable Evidence | ACE - Website (acecerts.co.uk) Strangely the ESFAs acceptable evidence list mentions provisional statements of results under the acceptable evidence heading. Acceptable Evidence If an apprentice does not have a certificate and/or a provisional notification of results or a statement of results from the awarding organisation, the provider can ask the apprentice to get a replacement certificate from the relevant awarding organisation (there will be a cost for this).
As it stands no we are not accepting anything that states 'Provisional' but this is mainly down to the legacy of the rules around the frameworks and the examples provided here by awarding bodies wh...
Paul Baker commented,
Thanks Steve. I'll do a bit more digging and I'm also waiting hear back from the EPA involved but I assume if we administer it and deliver it as we would any other i.e. OTJ hours requirement, the need to complete Fskills prior to EPA gateway etc. then we shouldn't run into any issues.
Thanks Steve. I'll do a bit more digging and I'm also waiting hear back from the EPA involved but I assume if we administer it and deliver it as we would any other i.e. OTJ hours requirement, the n...
Paul Baker commented,
I would be interested to know if anyone has any experience of the process of funding claw back. The FRM guidance for FRM 27 states the ESFA action as "Year-end funding recovery". My assumption therefore is that we annotate the report and note the amount of OPP that requires claw back ready for an ESFA funding audit or does this happen automatically. Does anyone have an experiences of this they can share to confirm this?
I would be interested to know if anyone has any experience of the process of funding claw back. The FRM guidance for FRM 27 states the ESFA action as "Year-end funding recovery". My assumption ther...
Paul Baker commented,
Hi Martin, I'd agree that for the most part the overall duration of the programme should be retained however not in all circumstances. What if the learner has been off for a year (or more) and on reengaging with the training provider it is assessed that they hadn't retained the knowledge previously gained and needs to re-do most of the the knowledge elements that was previously learnt? It would simply decrease the OP payments received by spreading these out over a longer time period. I can't see any other negative impact. What if the learner had already exceeded the planned end date prior to going on a break but hadn't reached EPA gateway? Would you not add some time in for the apprentice to satisfy the requirements the apprentice will still undertaking training?
Hi Martin, I'd agree that for the most part the overall duration of the programme should be retained however not in all circumstances.What if the learner has been off for a year (or more) and on re...