Ben James
Last activity
Member since
Votes
214
Subscriptions
342
Replies
Ben James commented,
Does anyone know if this flexibility still applies? I know it's still published in the funding regulations for post-16 provision.. but are we still in the throws of COVID-19 restrictions?
Does anyone know if this flexibility still applies? I know it's still published in the funding regulations for post-16 provision.. but are we still in the throws of COVID-19 restrictions?
Ben James commented,
Thanks Martin West. I think some people in our team were getting a bit nervous as this is the first time we've had completions, so they wanted to be doubly sure.
Thanks Martin West. I think some people in our team were getting a bit nervous as this is the first time we've had completions, so they wanted to be doubly sure.
Ben James commented,
Thank you gents. For all of our BILs we ensure we capture the information you mentioned Martin, either via email or via our BIL form. In this particular case the learner has some pretty significant health issues which his employer has confirmed/explained to us both at the outset and whenever we reach out to enquire as to whether he is still planning on returning (which we'd done recently as hard close is approaching). I must admit it took me aback a little, and I confirmed with the Service Desk who suggested they didn't know of any provision which required we collect further substantiation past what you mentioned Martin.. but as with most queries, I prefer to get a consensus on here too.
Thank you gents. For all of our BILs we ensure we capture the information you mentioned Martin, either via email or via our BIL form. In this particular case the learner has some pretty significant...
Ben James commented,
Marvellous. Haha, yes definitely in year! I don't fancy any additional FRMs thank you very much. Do you anticipate there being any DAS related issues with re-opening a closed learner? They'll obviously re-appear on the ILR with their original start date.. but the initial DAS entry for them will have presumably been closed by the employer at this point..
Marvellous. Haha, yes definitely in year! I don't fancy any additional FRMs thank you very much. Do you anticipate there being any DAS related issues with re-opening a closed learner? They'll obvio...
Ben James commented,
The 'completed date' will be the date that all learning activities were completed. Once they complete their EPA (whether pass or fail) you'll enter the 'achievement date' as the date all EPA activities concluded, update the completion status to 2, and the outcome to whatever the outcome was (1 for pass, or 3 for fail) but this will be in the 21/22 ILR by the sounds of your first post.
The 'completed date' will be the date that all learning activities were completed. Once they complete their EPA (whether pass or fail) you'll enter the 'achievement date' as the date all EPA activi...
Ben James commented,
Yeah i've been having weird issues with ESFA Communities the last couple of days where my posts have been disappearing! Thanks for your input though both, always appreciated. Regarding un-withdrawing, do you mean simply removing the withdrawal from their ILR (i.e. setting them back to '1 - continuing' etc.) or processing them as a restart?
Yeah i've been having weird issues with ESFA Communities the last couple of days where my posts have been disappearing! Thanks for your input though both, always appreciated. Regarding un-withdraw...
Ben James commented,
Short answer: No. You mustn't change the planned end date unless to correct errors where it's been identified as being significantly incorrect; This data should only be changed when it is identified as incorrect due to administrative errors. The Learning planned end date must not be changed to take into account a revised planned end date due to a change in circumstances such as illness, slow progress or unemployment. If the planned end date is identified as being incorrect and the date prior to 1st August of the current year. This data error cannot be corrected. You will be required to acknowledge this administrative error in the learner evidence.
Short answer: No. You mustn't change the planned end date unless to correct errors where it's been identified as being significantly incorrect; This data should only be changed when it is identifie...
Ben James commented,
Completely agree Martin, these are just conversations I've been having with people who are fairly new to the sector and are basing their assumptions purely off the funding rules and associated guidance
Completely agree Martin, these are just conversations I've been having with people who are fairly new to the sector and are basing their assumptions purely off the funding rules and associated guid...
Ben James commented,
That's fair enough, and it kind of tallies with my thoughts! I think the confusion is that, at least to some, it's presumed that all learning must be recorded on the ILR in the form of dedicated aims. So if the Standard has a single component aim that's due to finish on 01/08/2023, but you're saying that there's other learning that needs to take place as part of the practical period of the Standard because you're programme aim PED is 01/10/2023, but you're not recording it on the ILR as a discernible aim.. some are concerned that this may get questioned by the agency.
That's fair enough, and it kind of tallies with my thoughts! I think the confusion is that, at least to some, it's presumed that all learning must be recorded on the ILR in the form of dedicated ai...
Ben James commented,
Thanks all, appreciate the help as always. So if there's a consensus that in practice there may be recourse for learning to take place after the completion of the sole component aim (despite it potentially being a tad unusual) and therefore the Programme PED would be later than the component aim PED to account for it.. would the ESFA question why we're saying on the ILR that there's still learning to be done after the only component aim has finished, but that we're not recording it on the ILR? EDIT: Just noticed your last comment Martin West, that is worth considering, thank you
Thanks all, appreciate the help as always. So if there's a consensus that in practice there may be recourse for learning to take place after the completion of the sole component aim (despite it pot...