I am just querying a restart and calculation of end dates.
Wehn restarting a learner, must the duration added on be the remainder that the apprentice had left on programme initially? Or, can this be increased further to support timely completion for the learner?June 2, 2020 at 6:53 pm #447264
My understanding is that it must only be the remainder and nothing else added on in order to ensure that the OTJ Hours in the App agreement remains the same. There is wording to this effect in the funding rules.
ThanksJune 2, 2020 at 7:01 pm #447266
My understanding is slightly different. If, for example, I had a learner coming back from a break in learning who perhaps was on a phased return to work, or required time to get back into their role, I would – through discussion with the employer and learner – agree a realistic planned end date, and it may be longer than anticipated previously. Yes the OTJ may need increasing but that wouldn’t be too much of an issue as the agreement would need re-signing anyway because the original PED will been amended.
SueJune 3, 2020 at 8:18 am #447272
My understanding comes in-between the answers above as a BIL should not be used to fudge timely achievement as planned end dates must not be changed and only the balance remaining can be used although as previously said where there is a change in working hours when the end date should be extended in proportion to reflect the same OTJ hours and retain in principle the original end planned date.
HTHJune 3, 2020 at 9:05 am #447274
Thanks Martin and Sue.
How exactly would you go about calculating revised planned end date if the working hours were reduced upon return? E.g. if they were doing 37 hours per week for first 6 months of a 12 month programme before going in BIL but then return on 20 hours per week, what would be the revised duration for the restart?
And similarly, if a BIL returner was now working more hours on their return (e.g. were part time and are now full time), should the new planned end date reflect this in terms of it being brought forward?
Thanks againJune 3, 2020 at 10:10 pm #447427
P39.3.3 extend the minimum duration using the following formula:
12 x 30/average weekly hours = new minimum duration in months; or
52 x 30/average weekly hours = new minimum duration in weeks
You would need to calculate the hours required for the current period and add the hours for the new period.
For your example
26 X 30/20 = 39 extension to be added to the 26 weeks already completed at 37 hours
Total weeks over Apprenticeship = 65
The planned end date would not reflect the extended duration but should be based on the original extended by the duration of the BIL. You would note on the commitment statement the revised duration and anticipated end date.
There is no requirement to recalculate the duration where the change if from part time to full time.June 4, 2020 at 8:24 am #447433
Sorry, are you saying that we would extend the planned end date on the ILR at point of processing the restart (due to the revised hours), or that a provider wouldn’t do this and should only make note of it in the Commitment Statement?
And what impact would this have on OTJ hours? The original minimum calculation would have been for 344 hours (12 months at 37 hours per week), however, they only completed 6 months at these hours – so minimum of 172 at this point. Even if now extend the duration using the published formula at restart, 20% OTJ for this second period would only be 139 hours (due to the formula for calculating duration using 30 hours per week). Therefore, would only evidencing 311 hours in total be compliant as it deviates from original calculation at start date?
Thanks again for the helpJune 5, 2020 at 9:42 am #447636
When returning from a BIL you reset the planned end date to account for the duration of the BIL and would not extend this to account for the reduction in hours, but you should record the extended date on the commitment statement.
You would use the original OTJ hrs from the commitment statement as if the original hours were other than 30 hours any recalculation that included the reduction in hours would be incorrect.June 5, 2020 at 10:17 am #447640
So, that would mean that a BIL returner who has dropped to part-time is always likely to go past expected end date due if we should not extend at point of return?
And also, if we have to use the hours originally planned at original start date, then they will also likely fall short of OTJ hours as they no longer work enough hours to achieve the 20%?
Thanks very much againJune 5, 2020 at 10:28 am #447644
As it is the rule that you cannot change a planned end date you record the extended end date in the commitment statement and use the OTJ hours originally recorded in the commitment statement.June 5, 2020 at 10:45 am #447650
I just fear that any BIL returners dropping to part time hours (which could increase in volume when any COVID BIls return), might struggle to satisfy OTJ hours unless they stay in learning even beyond the newly calculated extended duration (e.g. if they originally worked 37 hours as in my example) or are allowed more than 20% of their new hours to do OTJ.
Thanks again for your help – hugely appreciatedJune 5, 2020 at 11:14 am #447652
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.