Charmaine Keeley
Last activity
Member since
Votes
0
Subscriptions
19
Replies
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Hi Paul Taylor, Thanks for taking the time to respond - that's very helpful (and again, reassuring it's not just us). I do have my own internal measures which I run after each months ILR submission and have been reporting to our Governance board every 6-8 weeks. We moved to a new MIS last year but we still have historic learners not on that system, so it's a bit of a faff combining/checking various data sources. Since the AAF was now in place for this FY, I wanted to check my manually calculated stats against theirs - they are very close to what's in the learner export from the AAF (and I can now account for the difference since I realise I hadn't excluded 1 or 2 withdrawn learners), but it doesn't match the numbers and percentages reported in the dashboard (which we've also established doesn't match their own data export) - hence the confusion! I'm fairly confident that my calcs are correct - a shame as their figures are lower! And yes, I always have much fun with the BILs - I highlight the rows with the re-start indicator, sort by ULN and then exclude the rows not required. Seems to be working ok, but is another step in the process. It's certainly keeping me on my toes.
Hi Paul Taylor, Thanks for taking the time to respond - that's very helpful (and again, reassuring it's not just us). I do have my own internal measures which I run after each months ILR submissio...
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Eleanor Piper ah - whilst that's not good for you either, I'm glad I'm not the only one! I have also raised a query via the Help Portal, but as you say, I'm not expecting a prompt answer so thought I'd ask here also as I've found people to be very knowledgeable and helpful in the past. I'll also update here if/when I get a response.
Eleanor Piper ah - whilst that's not good for you either, I'm glad I'm not the only one! I have also raised a query via the Help Portal, but as you say, I'm not expecting a prompt answer so thought...
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Thanks Steve Hewitt, a bit annoying but noted. More annoying is the current 'unable to connect to data model' message on the dashboard, so I can't even see the stats that were there previously! Ho hum...
Thanks Steve Hewitt, a bit annoying but noted. More annoying is the current 'unable to connect to data model' message on the dashboard, so I can't even see the stats that were there previously! Ho ...
Charmaine Keeley commented,
There's lots that I'd find useful which seems to not exist, sadly. You've been really helpful - thank you!
There's lots that I'd find useful which seems to not exist, sadly. You've been really helpful - thank you!
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Ben James - thank you so much. I've followed your guidance and the maths now works 😁 Have I missed a document somewhere that would have told me this info?
Ben James - thank you so much. I've followed your guidance and the maths now works 😁 Have I missed a document somewhere that would have told me this info?
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Just to come back with an update on this one, I have been in contact with Apprenticeship Service Support about this as I was after a definition of 'key impact' referred to in 89.4.1. Their response: This matter was escalated to Specialist Support and their advice is as follows "The rules that would apply here is: 89.4.1 We only expect the training plan to be agreed and re-signed by the employer where a) new content is added or removed; b) the planned learning end date has changed; or c) any re-planned off-the-job training (that was missed or not delivered) has a key impact on the hours which employers need to release learners for in future. 89.4.2 Changes to the training plan that fall outside of the examples above do not need an employer signature. The training plan should guide the delivery and so if they are changing things significantly than I'd say the plan should be updated. But as per the above the employer doesn't need to sign. If it's just rescheduling a missed class then the plan does not need to be updated." So for us, the OTJ associated with the rescheduled activities does not change, therefore unless rescheduling it results in a change to the planned end date, we won't be updating the training plan. I'll keep the email they sent me in case of any issues at future audits!
Just to come back with an update on this one, I have been in contact with Apprenticeship Service Support about this as I was after a definition of 'key impact' referred to in 89.4.1. Their response...
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Thank you both, well do as you did Ruth. That option makes the most sense.
Thank you both, well do as you did Ruth. That option makes the most sense.
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Ah, yes that makes sense for the stretching FS aims, thank you Ruth Canham-James.
Ah, yes that makes sense for the stretching FS aims, thank you Ruth Canham-James.
Charmaine Keeley commented,
Thanks Ben James. So if the last thing they complete is their Functional Skills, would we use the date from that activity as the AED against the ZPROG and the FS component aim? I'm assuming the AED for the ZPROG can't be earlier than any of the component aim AEDs.
Thanks Ben James. So if the last thing they complete is their Functional Skills, would we use the date from that activity as the AED against the ZPROG and the FS component aim? I'm assuming the AED...