I’d appreciate some help with this if at all possible?
Access to HE where the course is planned to run for 450 hours brings in the listed rate of 520 – does this mean lsted rules or unlisted rules apply?
i.e. A learner could attend for say for example 450 GLH but due to poor attendance only attends for say 320 GLH – would this result in us needing to ammend to the actual GLH.
Also for Prince’s Trust the guidance states to enter 420 but at an unlisted rate – so again if the attendance is below the 80% threshold do we need adjust GLH on actual individual learner attendance?
Finally entitlement funding – do we need to register evidence of thirty hours of actual delivery in order to be audit proof for entitlement funding – or is it simply generated by completing the relevant ILR field?October 25, 2012 at 2:26 pm #284
good questions all. I think I can help for most of them.
1. Access to HE courses are WEIRD. they are both listed and unlisted depending on how many hours you deliver them in. if you deliver them in 450 or above, you are paid a listed rate of 520, but once you drop below 450, even to 449, it becomes an unlisted qual and you are paid by the hour. There are historical reasons for this that I can’t remember, but it’s been like it sort of forever…
2. FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY GLH does NOT equal attendance. if you plan to deliver 450 to the learner (and can show 450 hours worth of register) that is what you claim, NOT the hours a learner attends. You only change GLH for late starts and early completers where a learner *couldn’t possibly* have attended that many hours. Princes Trust might even be a special exemption to that rule.
3. soz, you’ll have to ask someone else about entitlement. i think the answer is currently “just tick the box”, but 16-18 isn’t my specialist subject…October 25, 2012 at 3:46 pm #285
Thanks for the detailed responses – is the general jist as long as you can evidence register potential of 450 regardless of the fact that a student may only attend 75% of the planned guidance learning due to ill health etc then we do not ammend actual GLH?
I am guessing we would do so though if it was an early completion i.e. a SFL learner completing mid year when we’ve planned to deliver a full year?October 25, 2012 at 3:58 pm #286
assuming the learner started at the same point as everyone else then yes, you’d leave her at 450 hours. the provider argument sis “well, we’ve still paid out for the tutor to teach/to heat and light the room etc, why should we be penalised?”
precisely right on the SFL example (that’s where a lot of mine are too), if they complete with more than 20% of the year to go, knock their hours down. the other classic example is the odd learner who starts after xmas on a year-long course, they’d need reducing as well.October 25, 2012 at 4:04 pm #287
As far as I’m aware (I’ve never had to provide evidence at audit) there’s no requirement to provide registers to evidence entitlement acitivity (providing you can show that the learner has at least 420 GLH of learning aim activity which the DSATs will “check” for you) so flagging the learner in the ILR as requiring entitlement does the job.
In terms of the other two, what steveh said! Access to HE are unlisted if they drop below 450 but listed at 450+. Prince’s Trust is specifically mentioned in the funding guidance at 420 and I think that’s what you should get.October 25, 2012 at 4:04 pm #288
Thanks Matthew and Steve I must admit that you have confirmed my thoughts on this matter – any other info or conflicting views welcome though…October 25, 2012 at 4:15 pm #289
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.