Hi, have a query that I am hoping someone (with more knowledge than I have) can help with.
We have transferred some learners in from another provider, same framework, pathway etc, considered re-starts and with RPL recorded accordingly in the Proportion of Funding field. All good so far, and we know that the 12 months and 1 day minimum duration includes the time with the previous provider (only because they are transfers). Re-start indicator used, and original start date and UKPRN etc in place.
However, we have one learner whose job role does not suit the Apprenticehip they were originally recruited on. Progression is slow because the job spec doesn;t fir the requirements of the framework Now as far as I can gather transfers are only considered a re-start if the same framework / pathway is continued, so if we change the framework to the more suitable option the learner will no longer be a transfer. The learner is happy to change, but is not happy with having to spend 12 months (and 1 day) completing (they have already been on course for 9 months). The learner is 18, so no options to reduce the 12 months with APL.
Any idea on this one? We need to both have the learner on the correct framework, but they will only change if they can progress at speed (which is entirely possible with the right support) and not have to complete another 12 months.
Thanks in advanceMarch 11, 2015 at 10:12 am #14326
Well this is a conundrum that does not fit with funding rules.
What you mean I think is that the learner is on the wrong framework and although I have never experienced this I have had cases where learners have needed to change the framework because one of the aims expired before their planned end date. These learners were transferred to a new framework which still supported their job role as electricians and had no issues with regard to the minimum duration requirements. For these learners even though this is not allowed under the funding rules I was willing to risk and justify this at audit if required as there were no funding issues and it was in the interest of the learner.
The issue you have could be more problematic especially if the occupations covered by the frameworks are different and the learner is unwilling to comply with the minimum duration requirement for the framework which the SFA will always consider as mandatory so there is no way around this as far as I can see.
There are no validation rules that pick this up so whatever you do you should be prepared to justify this at Audit the only other option is to ask CDS if you can do this but as I have said the minimum duration issue may still be the problem.March 11, 2015 at 11:03 am #14332
I would suggest that you talk to your SFA Program Adviser as they should be able to see what is required in a pragmatic light. I would suggest that you get written confirmation from them so that you can present it at Audit.
CasparMarch 11, 2015 at 12:56 pm #14349
Many thanks for the advice, I think it is going to be an SFA one for approval and audit evidence. We need to get this learner on the right framework (one where the framework criteria actually match his job would be a good start) but also make sure he can progress as quick as he wants to where we are not held back by the 12 month rule.
RichMarch 11, 2015 at 3:40 pm #14356
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.