Recalculate OTJ for an early completion?

Home Forums Data issues Recalculate OTJ for an early completion?

This topic contains 9 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  Ruth CJ 7 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts

  • Steve Bowler
    Participant

    Morning,

    Another OTJ related question, I’m hoping somebody has come across this situation before and can advise.

    If we have a learner who completes their Apprenticeship early, do we have to/are we able to recalculate the number of OTJ required?

    For example, if we have a learner who had an 18 month Target Date and perhaps needed to do 450 OTJ hours by that point, but actually the learner managed to complete the necessary elements in 15 months, it’s probable that the learner hadn’t completed 450 hours by that point. It doesn’t seem right that they would still need to reach that original number, would we recalculate the OTJ require based on 15 months?

    Thanks

    Steve

     
    #356132

    steveh
    Participant

    Hi Steve

    I asked about this in October:

    Dear Steve

    Thank you for your email regarding the 20% off the job training.

    The commitment statement will have set out what needed to be achieved and this should have totalled 20% of the apprentice’s paid working hours over the duration of the programme. If the apprentice has, for whatever reason, been able to complete in a quicker timescale, then so long as the content of the commitment statement has been delivered and you can evidence this, then this is fine. The ESFA will however monitor where actual and planned end dates are significantly different.

    Many thanks
    Susan
    Service Desk

    So it’s basically fine as long as it’s not whole cohorts.

     
    #356134

    Steve Bowler
    Participant

    Thanks for the reply Steve, thing is I’m thinking that there will be OTJ hours in the Commitment Statement that were planned to be delivered in the final few months of the Apprenticeship, so if a learner achieved early they wouldn’t have had this delivered yet?

    So the learner would’ve met the requirements to achieve the elements of the Apprenticeship (Admin Diploma and Functional Skills for example), but may not have had all of the planned OTJ content delivered due to finishing 3 months early…

    Steve

     
    #356150

    Ruth CJ
    Participant

    Same question. That answer from the Service Desk seems to suggest that they would need to have done the full 450 hours, using Steve’s example, as that’s what’s in the commitment statement.

     
    #356152

    steveh
    Participant

    Hmmm, I guess I see what you mean. here is my original question, which explicitly talks about fewer hours:

    If an apprentice was on a programme planned for 18 months but they whizzed through it (no prior attainment, just a quick learner) and completed in 13 months, their commitment statement would contain a number of hours for OTJ. Does the learner need to hit this number or 13/18ths of the number?

    *planned* duration is mentioned in para 31:

    P31. To attract government funding at least 20% of the apprentice’s paid hours, over the planned duration of the training period within the apprenticeship (for standards this is called the practical period, which ends at the gateway for end-point assessment), must be spent on off-the-job training.

    But there’s nothing explicit about those who complete after minimum duration but before their planned end?

    It would seem reasonable for it to be 20% of the actual in these circumstances, having a learner sitting around for 5 months effectively just “keeping warm” and using up their 20% seems wrong?

    In this context I read the reply as “it’s fine not to deliver all the hours”

     
    #356162

    Gaz_Marsden
    Participant

    I agree it sounds as if the OTJ hours can be reduced to reflect the shorter programme. Certainly would be the logical thing to do so long as programme is still the minimum required length.

     
    #356440

    Ruth CJ
    Participant

    It would be absurd to expect us to deliver a full 18 months of OTJ in just 15 months. I assume they do allow for this, but it’s not documented anywhere. With the best intentions to get the right duration, some apprentices are just determined to complete quickly. We wouldn’t hold them back.

    I’m thinking that we may need to do a recalculation when an apprentice completes early. Then, if an auditor queries it, we can show our working quickly.

     
    #357005

    KateW
    Participant

    Hi all,

    I asked this of the data service last week:

    ‘Please could you advise on the below situation:

    Learner is planned to be on programme for 14 months but is ready to complete in 12 (assuming this is acceptable as per funding rules and framework)

    Would the learner only be required to complete the off the job based on 12 months of being on programme, or would they need to evidence off the job for the planned 14 months as per the original off the job plan?’

    The response was as follows:

    ‘They would need to evidence the off the job training for the original planned 14 month job plan.’

    So whatever is planned, must be evidenced, even if the learner completes early.

     
    #357038

    Martin West
    Participant

    Hi All,
    It seems again we have conflicting advice from the Service Desk but as Steve had fully described the situation of early achievement I would go with ‘as the content of the commitment statement has been delivered and you can evidence this, then this is fine’ as against the response to Kate for the same scenario ‘They would need to evidence the off the job training for the original planned 14 month job plan’.

    The reason I interpret that the correct answer is related to evidencing delivery of the commitment statement content and not the off the job training hrs specified in it is that off-the-job training is defined as ‘training which is received by the apprentice, during the apprentice’s normal working hours, for the purpose of achieving the standard or framework connected to the apprenticeship’ and where the learner has achieved early and the contents of the commitment statement has been delivered then as long as a minimum of 20% OJT has been delivered over the actual training period then this should be acceptable.

    This does however raise the other scenarios where the Apprentice either completes late or withdraws:
    Apprentice completed late:
    P31 indicates that the 20% requirement is only over the planned duration of the training period, but should it be recalculated to 20% of the apprentice’s paid working hours over the actual duration of the programme as they may have failed to meet the requirement for the apprentice to spend 20% of their time in off-the-job training.

    Apprentice withdraws:
    P31 indicates that the 20% requirement is still over the planned duration of the training period and not the actual training period but P199 indicates the apprenticeship is ineligible for funding where they fail to meet the requirement for the apprentice to spend 20% of their time in off-the-job training (as set out in paragraph P31).

    The wording of P31 where it contains ‘planned duration’ could be reworded to clarify that this applies to the commitment statement only and not the actual training period.

    Any thoughts

     
    #357927

    Ruth CJ
    Participant

    I agree that they need to clarify all this in the funding guide. Common sense tells me that you have to prove 20% OTJ for actual delivery.

    What’s your opinion on late completers? I really don’t know.

    We’ve got an apprentice going on a BIL starting after their Planned End Date. That sounds wrong, but I’m told they are way behind in their learning, and are now off sick for at least a month. I can’t see any rules saying we can’t do that. To make sure I’m not being fibbed to just so that they can avoid an untimely achievement, I told the team that they will need to continue to evidence 20% OTJ for the period of time when the apprentice returns, and that this should be at least a month. In truth, they already have evidence for the 20% OTJ for the Planned Duration. If what they’ve told me is true, this won’t be a problem. If they can’t continue to evidence OTJ, then I think they may have been creative with the truth. So in this case, I’m interpreting the rules to say that 20% OTJ has to cover Actual Duration.

     
    #357944
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.