Paul Baker
Last activity
Member since
Votes
3
Subscriptions
15
Replies
Paul Baker commented,
The ILR spec currently says it is a requirement for FE colleges to return unfunded apprentice data in the ILR but does not stipulate this for private training providers and says it is voluntary. EPAOs could always claim certification at the end without them appearing in our ILR but now all of our sudden one of our EPAO are now saying they cannot claim without them appearing in the ILR. What's changed? I can't find any ESFA notification that is now required for all apprentice learners, funded or not.
The ILR spec currently says it is a requirement for FE colleges to return unfunded apprentice data in the ILR but does not stipulate this for private training providers and says it is voluntary. EP...
Paul Baker commented,
Sorry just to add we checked the R10 in-year QAR figures released at by the ESFA and this confirmed any learners in EPA who have not yet completed are not in the count for leavers in the 2020/21 hybrid year.
Sorry just to add we checked the R10 in-year QAR figures released at by the ESFA and this confirmed any learners in EPA who have not yet completed are not in the count for leavers in the 2020/21 hy...
Paul Baker commented,
Pellcomp Support This still doesn't look to have been addressed in the PICS QAR reporting. The 2020/21 QAR technical spec states "If the Programme Type is 25, and the Funding Model is 36, and… the achievement year is unpopulated, and the ILR data was last reported in 2020/21 or after…" Then they will be carried across into the next QAR hybrid year (2021/22) and not counted as a leaver in 2020/21. This will be applied to anyone who is in EPA i.e. coded as Completion status = 1 and Outcome = 8 and the achievement date is unpopulated, then it should be carried across into the next QAR hybrid year (2021/22) and not counted as a leaver in 2020/21.
Pellcomp Support This still doesn't look to have been addressed in the PICS QAR reporting. The 2020/21 QAR technical spec states "If the Programme Type is 25, and the Funding Model is 36, and…the a...
Paul Baker commented,
Thanks. Yes we currently use a similar e-portfolio and the apprentices also undertake a thorough induction where learners are given access to the on-line learning materials. They also have to complete a reflection piece based on what they done. I say this as induction activity is listed in the funding guidance as ineligible costs so we steer well clear of saying induction is their start date. I guess with my pessimistic hat on my question is were they happy to accept evidence the apprentice has been given access to the course material as 'learning'. It's there in black and white in the text but an auditor may take the stance that until the learner has accessed and started an activity within it, then learning hasn't happened.
Thanks. Yes we currently use a similar e-portfolio and the apprentices also undertake a thorough induction where learners are given access to the on-line learning materials. They also have to compl...
Paul Baker commented,
Hi, I have just noticed the same thing in our R09 indicative earnings. The report displays two rows both showing the same Employer identifier and employment status date. The only thing that is different is the price episodes and total price that relate to the new TNP 3&4 that were entered. I've double checked and even looked at the XML file itself which shows the new employer identifier. Confused as to why the IE report doesn't reflect this.
Hi, I have just noticed the same thing in our R09 indicative earnings. The report displays two rows both showing the same Employer identifier and employment status date. The only thing that is diff...
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...