The Skills Funding Agency guidance note 2 explains that there will be a 25% reduction in funding for large employers for 2010/11. Our interpretation of this is that we will receive the reduced rate for those learners whom are employed by such large employers. Is this interpretation correct?
If so then how will these learners be recognised on the ILR and will ILR fields/codes be used to reduce funding automatically through the PFR. Also will this apply to just new starts in 10/11 and carry in and new starts?
PaulMarch 8, 2010 at 4:59 pm #509
Word is that the FA are developing a methodology by which the ULIN identifies such employers. This is not yet available.
JillMarch 26, 2010 at 12:15 pm #510
Doesn’t the ULIN identify the learning provider. Surely it would be the Employer number in A44 that would be used. This in turn means that the LIS would have to hold more details about every employer on EDS so that it can determine if they are a large employer or not.March 26, 2010 at 1:27 pm #511
I presume that the 25% reduction is applied to Large Employers who are also the Trainer
Otherwise, how would a training provider know if the employer is catoragized as ‘Large’ or not ?March 31, 2010 at 8:11 am #512
I read in the SFA Guidance Note 3 that they will be producing a list from EDS database at start of 10/11 of those companies classed as large employers and that A44 will be used to calculate the rate of funding for learners.June 17, 2010 at 9:08 am #513
The long list of large employer EDRS numbers that has been published is all very well, but how do providers ascertain if an employer is a large employer when they first engage with them for training? We can hardly go back to them after we’ve discovered the LIS is funding at a lower rate to ask them for a larger contribution.
I don’t understand why the list cannot contain the names, unless there is an alternative method of ascertaining the true size of an employer. It’s too late for providers to find out the true status of an employer after a commitment to provide training has been made.July 26, 2010 at 9:23 am #514
I agree with Tony and have had this discussion with the powers that be in Coventry. Seems there are problems with printing the names of the employers. It was suggested to me that the list could be downloaded and a lookup be done against our current employers, however this cannot be done in excel as the list exceeds 62k lines. Currently the only solution is to go through employer by employer, or to have code written to do the exercise – both of which are time consuming and costly.July 26, 2010 at 10:41 am #515
I don’t have a problem with current employers who we have in our MIS system, as we obviously need their contact details to invoice them. I have downloaded the list into a SQL table and matched against the employers we are currently working with.
Its any new employer who we haven’t worked with before that is going to be difficult to verify the size of. It’s hardly a busines like approach to pose the first question to a prospective client “How big are you?” !!!!
Seriously, business development managers are going to have to know the size of the employer before they negotiate a training deal, so how do they find this out?July 26, 2010 at 10:46 am #516
Indeed – however, we do ask our employers how many employees their are in their group at an early stage in discussions. Better to do it that way round than to have a nasty surprise which needs unexpected nogotiations later. It would be simpler for the SFA to publish the list with names; of course, that would not tell us which companies are in which groups so the questions would still need to be asked.July 26, 2010 at 10:53 am #517
Is this not maybe a Freedom of Information Request? And, if denied, a page long article in the TES about the bureaucratic madness of working in Further Education, which might get picked up by the Mail and Express with a bit of luck and eventually John Hayes just telling the SFA to release the list to stop him looking stupid? Seems like the long way round to me, but probably the most likely to work…July 27, 2010 at 9:52 am #518
The list names is available via the EDS (EDRS etc) portal or web service. We do a lot of data mining with some of the publically available information listed on web sites or web services and write some very simple, very useful tools to get the data.
To get the name of the organisation from a URN, you can use Excel
I have written a simple Excel Template to get the details from EDRS. Download it at https://www.cognisoft.com/files/exceledsurnlookup.zip
Run setup to install the Excel Template and then open the xltx in Excel 2007, enter your Web Service credentials in the username.password box and click ‘Get’. You can ask for several at a time. (or the whole Large Employer list!)
Our main applications can do much more.
email@example.comAugust 11, 2010 at 3:03 pm #519
What is the URL for the EDS portal and/or web service please?August 11, 2010 at 4:38 pm #520August 12, 2010 at 9:14 am #521
Thanks, TonyAugust 12, 2010 at 10:06 am #522
I’m hoping someone can help me with my code.
I’m trying to pro-grammatically update our employer details on a daily basis via the the web service: https://services.edrs.lsc.gov.uk/lookup.asmx
I cant seem to store the results of the method “ByURN”
‘// Declare the EmployerLookup Web Service object
Dim svcEmployer As New emplookup.EmployerLookup
‘// URN parameter
Dim intURN As Integer
‘// credentials parameter
Dim strCredentials As String = “user.password”
‘// Employer lookup method results object
Dim svcStructure As emplookup.ConciseEmployerStructure
intURN = Convert.ToInt32(txtURN.Text)
svcStructure = svcEmployer.ByUrn(intURN, strCredentials)
Catch ex As Exception
I get the following error when i attempt to use this code:
Value of type ‘1-dimensional array of emplookup.ConciseEmployerStructure’ cannot be converted to ’emplookup.ConciseEmployerStructure’.January 13, 2013 at 5:52 pm #523
It’s been a while but I think ConciseEmployerStructure is an array…
wsEL = new EDSURNLookup.uk.gov.lsc.edrs.services.EmployerLookup();
wsOrg = wsEL.ByUrn(iUrn, sWSPassword);
Works – so try to convert that to VB.NET?
TonyJanuary 15, 2013 at 11:03 am #524
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.