We currently delivery ESOL Mandatory Skills Conditionality courses which I understood to be ring fenced provision as far as funding is concerned. I just wondered whether this was other colleges understanding of this provision.
The reason I ask is that we had a small allocation toward the end of last year which we fell short in delivering. I would have expected the difference to be clawed back but it wasn’t?
I thought this was ring fenced as well (an ‘of which’ in the ASB line). I think at the time detail around clawback was a little ambiguous, along the lines of 13/14 under delivery may be clawed back.
We also under delivered slightly on ESOL mandated (not getting enough referrals), but also slightly under delivered on ASB, so we have had it clawed back (the combined shortfall in ESOL mandated and general ASB).
It would be useful to know whether it is a ring fenced part of provision. If it’s supposed to be then we potentially shouldn’t have had clawback on that part of ASB, if others have who also under delivered didn’t.
We hit our mandated ESOl provision targets in 13/14 but we have had a slight hiccup in referrals this year. Does any one know if this provision is monitored by learners numbers or by funding achieved??? If it’s byt numbers which I believe we were told for last years allocation that may be why no clawback.