Forum Replies Created
If they are part of the same framework I’d change them to fully funded.June 4, 2015 at 10:32 am in reply to: 16-18 Apprentice – 19 at start of Functional Skills #16033
Yes I am aware, I think its just how learners interpret the statement. They don’t always choose code 11 as they aren’t available to start work in the next 2 weeks because the course they have enrolled to lasts 2 weeks. After the course they will hopefully be in a better position to get a job and will be available straight away. I suppose every learner will always read the two statements in a different way.
My interpretation of this combination :
e.g. employment status 12 and on JSA
would be the learner has read it that in the long term they are on JSA to get them in work, but they are not in an immediate position to start work as they are doing a course to help them get into work.
It does get confusing especially when they select option 12 and then are in receipt of other state benefits to try and claim fee remission.
Just co-funded if they are 19+ and studying as part of an apprenticeship framework
So its just a case a submitting the additional support costs on the EAS
Is this a typo on page 53 of the SFA Funding rules or is it referring to EFA Funded 19-24 year olds?:
208. You must report high-needs students using code HNS1 in the ‘Learner
Funding and Monitoring’ fields in the ILR.
Its in the provider support manual and mentioned on page 57 of the SFA funding guidance. If they had an EHC/LDA then they would be the responsibility of the EFA
It also says that you have to use HNS, which doesn’t add up as its not even collected.
Am assuming the costs are just claimed on the EAS
Its not collected for EFA study programmes and yes a lot of learners do obviously study more than 1 aim at a time, but this would be collected on one learning agreement. I.e. whatever framework and associated components a learner enrolled to on the enrolment form on a certain date, we would apply that household situation to all those aims as that was there situation at the time of enrolment and the learning agreement.
We’re not looking that deeply into it and thinking what is their situation at the start date of each aim. To be honest we have other ILR fields that concern us more so we’re just asking the questions to fit in with the ILR fields (not using the example given in the provider support manual) and aren’t really worrying about it any further.April 17, 2015 at 3:29 pm in reply to: Online Q&A on the ILR specification for 2015 to 2016 #15180
You ve not mentioned what country they have been in for the past 3 years, but I would think that they are not eligible for funding.
There is no mention of a Tier 1 visa in paragraphs 26-29 and they can’t claim eligibility through there parents as they also have Tier 1 visa and are not one of the following:those who are accompanying or joining parents or spouses or civil partners who have the right of abode or leave to enter or remain in the UK (or accompanying or joining relevant family members, usually parents, who are EEA nationals), or those who are children of diplomats.
I think you’d have to charge them your overseas full cost rate.
We’re adding the household bit onto our enrolment form, so every time they sign up to a new aim it is completed.
I assume it needs to be collected and recorded for each learning aim in case their household situation changes in between studying separate course and monitoring whether the previous course they have done has helped them into employment or something along those lines.April 17, 2015 at 3:02 pm in reply to: Online Q&A on the ILR specification for 2015 to 2016 #15171
At an event with one of the lead auditors Karl Bentley I attended he said you have to show that you have asked the question to the learner whether they have enrolled or are intending to enrol elsewhere i.e. on the enrolment form. If you asked the question and they declare no, when it turns out they have I think he said it would be up to the EFA to decide.
Auditors may look at your enrolment forms to check you have asked the question to cover your back. We ask this along with the students previous education establishment to highlight if they have studied at a previous college.
We have accepted students in the past ( one or two two) but just made them non funded and then when they progress the year after we can claim funding.
We go with the advice from auditors and determining what is fair and reasonable ( in terms of funding) and wouldn’t try and claim for a student who have received the full EFA funding elsewhere, as would it be fair to expect the EFA to fund them twice? In todays economy and all the points raised about spending public money correctly with good value for money, maybe not.March 6, 2015 at 4:10 pm in reply to: Eligible Learners who have been enrolled at a previous provider #14194
Sorry quoted the wrong paragraph:
Paragraph 13b and 13d of Funding guidance for young people 2014 to 2015 – Funding regulations
‘Institutions must not record funding for students who are enrolled on study programmes funded by EFA at other institutions’
‘Institutions must avoid recording EFA funding for any part of any student’s study programme that duplicates that received from any other source, for example other EFA funding, funding from either the Skills Funding Agency, Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) or from any other source,’
The learner would have passed the funding qualifying period at the other institution therefore receiving full funding. If you also enrol them it would mean the student has been funded twice by two different institutions.
At a Nick Linford event last year he quoted its something the EFA are keeping an eye on. If they find out that a student has been double funded in the year, they will remove funding from the second institution and the first institution would be able to keep the full amount.March 6, 2015 at 2:23 pm in reply to: Eligible Learners who have been enrolled at a previous provider #14142
No you can’t claim for her as the other institution will have received the full amount of funding for her.
See paragraph 15 of EFA Funding rates and formula booklet.March 2, 2015 at 11:45 am in reply to: Eligible Learners who have been enrolled at a previous provider #13957
Leave the Work experience aim on your MIS where start date = actual end date.
Exclude the aim from your ILR as they have not started. You only have to return learning aims on the ILR if they have attended once episode of learning. You should be able to flag somewhere on your MIS that you do not want this enrolment including in the ILR file. If its not in the ILR there will be no error.
I d mark them all as transferred. They ve transferred from an A level programme (made up of multiple learning aims) to a 90 credit diploma programme of study.February 12, 2015 at 9:02 am in reply to: Transfer from 3 AS Level course to 1 90 Credit BTEC #13470
The report displays at what points in the month your learners are withdrawing and the totals show the total for that month to identify points of interest for auditors.
It doesn’t actually display in a timeline as its January 2015 – July 2015 followed by August 2014-December 2014.
DSAT helpdesk just has an email (top right of the DSAT window) as far as I’m aware. They are quite helpful and get back to you pretty quick with an answer.
The auditors use exactly the same DSAT reports so they are helpful when preparing for assurance visits along with your normal data cleansing routines.
LSECT run DSAT workshops which go through crucial reports and what you should be looking for. They are normally run once or twice a year and I ve found them very helpful in the past.
We have this error too
I ve never had an email either but do have an email address supplied for notifications. I ve deleted it and entered it again to see if that makes a difference at the next return.
Its mentioned in the known issues document Peter, so its documented but not resolved yet. The workaround indicated is to just manually change it.
What is the name of the error?
You need to make them non- fundable. A student cannot be receiving funding from two different institutions as they will be double funded. Presumably the other institution is receiving the full time rate for the student and so will have already be funded at the maximum available rate.
I heard at an event last year that this is something the EFA are clamping down on. We ask students before they enrol whether they intend to enrol/have enrolled anywhere else so that we don’t end up in the situation of a student being double funded.
On the page where you add your xml file, the Rule Violations and Rule Violations Summary display next to your file after the job has finished processing.
Whether you want it back or not, it doesn’t mean they will give it back. All the Nick Linford events I attended last year quoted as Martin says:
To be fair during 13/14 they have said:
When you submit your ILR data to OLDC and to the Hub, please send in the files from your MIS system as these are a full and complete record of your learners. The output file from FIS may be missing those learners where the data has not been validated. By sending in a file from FIS, you may be submitting incomplete data.
Using the export from your MIS supplier means they get more data than when you use the FIS export which is better for them as they wouldn’t probably see as many fluctuations in learner numbers.
If your MIS supplier doesn’t offer you the option of ‘snapshotting’ your data, like we did in the past you’ d have to tell everyone to stop processing, clean and send the ILR and then tell them they can start processing again.
If they have sat the exam aren’t they considered a completion?
Quoting provider support manual:
336. A learner must be considered to have withdrawn from a programme when they have either:
• known to have made a decision to withdraw from the programme
• exceeded the provider absence and withdrawal policy; or
• been dismissed by the provider.