Fairway

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 68 total)
  • Author
    Posts

  • Fairway
    Participant

    Yes, sorry, I do mean the Apprenticeship Service.
    I’ve just taken the role over Steve so you can imagine my surprise to see so many issues!
    Lets hope they resolve them quickly as it does make it hard to see when there are real datamismatches on the AS.

     
    in reply to: Data Mismatches – Known Errors #461663

    Fairway
    Participant

    I definitly will! Thank you Steve! Cross fingers this doesn’t cause me any errors!

     

    Fairway
    Participant

    Ahhhh right, ignore what I’ve just said!! Further developments have come to light!!

    After investigating, it appears the learner WAS in fact on the 18/19 AND 19/20 submission BUT had his Learner Reference number changed in R04! (don’t you just love picking up work from someone else?!)!

    So… what do I do? Just change the number back I’m guessing?! I can see the reason for it (to do with our internal system) and I’m guessing the administrator at the time didn’t realise this would be a problem!
    What a mess! Can I change it without issue?

     

    Fairway
    Participant

    I’m following Martin thank you. I really hope we’ve got it right this time. It’s such a nightmare working all this out. We’re going to make this change for all our apprentices (including those that started before 1st August 2018 as, if I’m right, according to the guidelines we don’t get penalised for including holiday in with their OTJ calculation even if the rules didn’t mention about holiday deduction in that specific year!)

    We want all our Apprentices OTJ calculations to be streamlined so we can be clear on each commitment statement how it is calculated (even if this does mean new versions of commitment statement and signed statements to confirm the change in off the job hours!!).

    Thank you once again for your help.

     
    in reply to: OTJ Calculation #454282

    Fairway
    Participant

    Just to follow on from this post… I’d appreciate it if someone can please confirm the following for me:

    We have an excel formula to calculate the date difference between our Start Dates and Planned End Dates.
    We then convert this to weeks on programme but this tends to be a decimal number, as does working out the amount of holiday owed over the time on programme.
    We don’t round this up or down during calculation as you seem to have done here.

    When I calculate the above without rounding up/down theres a difference of about 30ish hours between our calculations which is obviously a fair amount to the Apprentice.
    I can set my formula to Round up/down as required but are we ok to do this considering this results in a lower OTJ calculation?

    Sorry to sound petty but we’re losing our minds with all these calculations and want to be sure we finally have this correct and doing the same as others!

     
    in reply to: OTJ Calculation #454241

    Fairway
    Participant

    Wouldn’t the minimum and maximum be 5.6 weeks for any full time learner based on statutory leave though?
    No full time learner would get less than the 5.6 weeks holiday but they may get more than this (such as my current learner) yet I have to cap it at 5.6 weeks when calculating off the job? Is that right?

     
    in reply to: Another Off the Job Training Calculation post… #453909

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Martin. It’s the wording that gets me! They’ve specifically said “maximum” on the commitment staemnet template but that wording is different on the funding rules.

    So am I to take it that my leaner with 33 days holiday wouldn’t be calculated with a 6.6 week annual holiday as I’m meant to cap it at 5.6 weeks?
    I wish they’d just use the same wording throughout!

     
    in reply to: Another Off the Job Training Calculation post… #453904

    Fairway
    Participant

    Thank you Steve.
    Yes especially at the moment where we are having to hold remote reviews!

    We do usually sign them all and I think this is good practise but we are having issues with some of our software and we’re deciding on whether to upgrade or to drop the requiremnt altogether.
    I never like to assume with the funding rules though- they never specifically say that they’re dropping a requirement (just trying to keep us all on our toes I suppose)! I’m asking the account manager for his thoughts also!

     
    in reply to: Progress Review Signatures #451459

    Fairway
    Participant

    Absolutely Mark. We hold regular progress reviews but I’m not sure if at somepoint over the last few years the requirement of getting the reviews signed, to confirm attendance, has actually been dropped?

    I did a quick search on here but couldn’t find what I was looking for. I’d be interested to know what everyone else is doing with this.
    I remember this being a big part of our audit many years back but of course the rules were different then. I can’t see why this would be dropped but it would be useful if so (especially considering the current situation and the increasing requirement for progress reviews to be held remotely).

     
    in reply to: Progress Review Signatures #451429

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi
    Yes we’re having the same issue. We’ve chased this numerous times and have been told that they are aware of the issue and it has been escalated to their IT department.
    That was last Tuesday…

     
    in reply to: Apprenticeship Vacancies Website – new employers #428725

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Mark

    Thanks for your reply. Is there any guidance on this?
    Especially concerning the 52 week year. Should we not be recalculating these OTJ hours to comply with the most recent rules where holiday is included?

    Would be grateful for others response on this also to see if everyone else is doing the same.

     
    in reply to: When was 20% off the job training introduced? #422192

    Fairway
    Participant

    We were told by the service desk “You can ignore any DLOCK errors within your R13/R14 Apps Data Match Report that show a price episode start date (column H) of 01/08/19 or after.”

    Hope this helps.

     
    in reply to: Mismatches- price episode 1/8/19 #406837

    Fairway
    Participant

    Thank you for your help Martin.

     
    in reply to: Disclosing Learning/Health Problems #406680

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Martin

    Thank you -I agree with everything you are saying but was just looking for confirmation. The learner in question did not disclose the information to the employer or us on application but has stated it on the ILR when starting a funded learning programme. We hold information in confidentiality after ascertaining that no additional support is required but obviously this is monitored throughout the programme. The employer has since found out and is unhappy with us not sharing the information so I was trying to find the official line on this- would love something in writing regarding this.

     
    in reply to: Disclosing Learning/Health Problems #406638

    Fairway
    Participant

    I believe many years ago there was a requirement to hold a copy of the contracts but it seems to have disappeared over the years. There is a lot of information held within a contract that you are required to have evidence of – working hours, holidays, confirmation that they are being paid over minimum wage for example.

    Many employers will not issue a copy of the contract anymore however (GDPR) and you could use other evidence to confirm these details.
    We’ve had letters from the employers in the past to confirm these details.

     
    in reply to: Learner File Contents #406034

    Fairway
    Participant

    It is my understanding that the registration and certification are charged for separately Martin. My role is only to submit the data I’m given.

    As Tech cert (for example) is required to cover the KSB element for some Apprentices, I would assume this would come out of the levy (subtracting costs for registration and certification)and would therefore need to be included as a qualification aim on the ILR?

     
    in reply to: What to record in the ILR for Standards #400771

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Martin

    Thank you as ever for your help.
    We’ve just had a call back on this from the service desk. The answer they gave was obviously different from the email they then followed up with!!

    Apparently we are to record ZPROG001 as aim type 1
    Then a generic class code component aim which will APPARENTLY include our mandatory qualification (as specified in our standard) but also includes all skills knowledge and behaviours that are required (even if this includes a certificated qualification that we subcontract to a college ie a Technical certificate).

    I think this is wrong however and we should perhaps be listing the mandatory aim and any tech certs as a component aim of their own and THEN a generic class code to cover the rest of the knowledge skills and behaviours.

    It’s very confusing!

     
    in reply to: What to record in the ILR for Standards #400753

    Fairway
    Participant

    Thanks Martin.
    Yes they will be used to deliver the KSB- therefore acceptable to included these within the TNP.

    Are we required to list these on the ILR or is it optional?

    If optional I’m just wondering if it could be more hassle than necessary to include. Everything is listed in their Commitment Statements, but if we don’t have to put them in the ILR we may as well just leave them out.

     
    in reply to: What to record in the ILR for Standards #400691

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Martin

    Sorry for the delayed reply.
    We actually only have one mandatory aim but I was wondering about subcontracted aims that are taking place and what the requirements were to record these, as they are non-mandatory yet would be the only way of us recording to the ESFA that this is a subcontracted element?
    Or is this all covered by the individual sub contractor agreements that we enter to the hub?

    Is there any guidance documents on this?

    I understand that Functional Skills would need to be recorded as they would be funded through the ESFA directly.

    Could you please advise what you mean by the class code?

    Thank you as ever for your help.

     
    in reply to: What to record in the ILR for Standards #400545

    Fairway
    Participant

    Ah thank you for clarifying!

    Our standard includes a QCF qualification, and at times functional skills also.

    Am I therefore right in thinking we enter ZPROG as main aim, then the qualification number and functional skills where applicable.
    The Z code wouldn’t need to be entered as a separate component aim in this scenario? Or would it?

    Just out of curiosity, has anyone found any specific documents as guidance on how to enter these?
    I can’t find any guidance for this anywhere- am I missing something?!

     
    in reply to: Aim Codes for Standards on ILR #385912

    Fairway
    Participant

    Thank you Martin. I think we’ve been over-thinking these Commitment Statements a little and treating them a lot more like the “working documents” that we keep.

    Of course if main contact information and learning requirements change these should be revised and resigned however we have working documents detailing the progression of learning and completion of each elements so it’s probably unnecessary for us to be listing these things again on a CS.
    I think this will make things a lot easier going forward. Thank you for your advise!

     
    in reply to: Signed Commitment Statements #307152

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Martin
    We have other documentation such as learner meeting reports detailing each learner’s progression, which are signed by the learner at every meeting.
    We have been audited on this (pre-commitment statements, when these were listed as part of the individual learning plans/agreements) and haven’t had an issue but I’m just curious to know how everyone else deals with this.

    The Commitment Statement (previously ILP/ILA) documents themselves we’ve only ever re-signed annually.
    It’s a struggle to refrain from constantly repeating information in each of these documents and bombarding learners/employers with constant requests to resign. Perhaps we’re approaching this the wrong way and I need to relook at the wording on our reports & CS’s to ensure the auditors see the reports as the working document part of our commitment statements…

     
    in reply to: Signed Commitment Statements #307135

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi Martin
    All our changes have taken place within this contract year. We do not overwrite or delete records, only add additional ones if required and this is usually done at the time of change so no backdating etc. (except where we have had to stop and start learners as of original start dates at the advise of the service desk).
    The only financial data in a previous year is the Start Date and first TNP for our stopped and started learners (May 17). The new price changes for these were made in 17/18.

    The AS told me the first TNP price for these three learners were not on the AS (yet the learners had been on the AS & ILR for 6 months before the first price change without DLOCK errors).
    Another TNP was added a month after this price change (so we had three TNPs in all, May 17, Nov 17 & Dec 17).

    When we did eventually get a DLOCK error we were told it was a know issue where 3 TNPs are entered.
    It was months later before they told us the original TNP was now not on the AS so we’d have to start from scratch.

    I think I’m understanding your description correctly but I’ve no idea how this relates to the errors we’re receiving. Our ILR has remained the same and correct.
    Any backdating of data (i.e changing stop dates) have been done by the service desk.

    In any case, this only applies to three learners, the rest of my learners with these errors started in 17/18.

    Many thanks for trying to help.

     
    in reply to: More DLOCK Errors #297819

    Fairway
    Participant

    Thank you.

     
    in reply to: Comittment Statement, Apprenticeship Agreement and ILP #277736

    Fairway
    Participant

    Hi All
    We were of the understanding that we could combine the Apprentice Agreement & Commitment Statement and I was under the impression a lot of providers were doing so after searching the forums a while ago.
    Just checking that this is a definite no now? Do we have to separate the two documents?

    Many thanks.

     
    in reply to: Comittment Statement, Apprenticeship Agreement and ILP #277706
Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 68 total)