Matt Collishaw

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 50 total)
  • Author
    Posts

  • Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Martin,

    You make a valid point i have removed the information.

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: R01 opens in 6 days #280947

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Removed information in case it is not allowed πŸ™‚

     
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by  Matt Collishaw.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by  Matt Collishaw. Reason: Removed as information is in BETA and may contain issues
    in reply to: R01 opens in 6 days #280936

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    As Martin has stated i have also noticed this. I really hope this will only apply from starts after the 1st August 2018.

    This information needs to made available to providers and easily accessible on the DAS (maybe shown on the cohort page). It would be ridiculous to expect the provider to ring/chase each employer to get this identifier. Even more so to expect this to be backdated for all pre 2018 starts.

    This is not in the the best interest of the employer or the provider.

     
    in reply to: DAS agreement identifier #269824

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Thanks Martin. I was of the same opinion

     
    in reply to: Agreement Identifier not currently showing on DAS #251119

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Martin,

    Thanks for this – couldn’t see the forest for the trees πŸ™‚

     
    in reply to: Funding rules 18/19 #244527

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi All,

    Just for my sanity more than anything having read through this it looks like nothing major has changed and all the funding rules remain the same as this year. Do other concurr

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: Funding rules 18/19 #244508

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    As a side note – its a shame they are not as quick to publish the reports every month, as they are to send letters complaining what the provider hasn’t done.

    Is now the the 22nd of the month and the BI reports are still not available.

    Complete joke as always πŸ™‚

     
    in reply to: New FRM Report 30 #244208

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Sarah,

    In that case the only other think i can think off is that the ACT Type record for the non levy learners in incorrectly set the ACT type 1.

    The match report will only match data with the act type of 1. Non levy should have an ACT type of 2 and the data match will not be applied.

     
    in reply to: Apprenticeship Data Match Report #240459

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Sarah,

    These will still show as not matching until the employer has approved the payments. If you have submitted your cohort for approval by the employer but they have not approved it, they will appear on the Data Match report with the error above.

    If the employer approves the cohort before the R07 deadline, when we get the period end reports the data matching report contained within it should not have the errors

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: Apprenticeship Data Match Report #240455

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi All,

    Just a update for this in case anyone has the following issue in the next week or so

    Response from the service desk

    Thank you for contacting the service desk to enquire about learning aim reference: 60059643 and the subsequent error triggering on FIS.

    I have reported your concerns to our LARS Team who advise the “other” category has now been updated, this should be reflected in LARS by 08 March 2018.

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: Non-Funded Learner – LearnAimRef_16 #238904

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Ruth,

    Same issue here, While awaiting the promised report I have just been using a user defined field in oour MIS system to flag what month the payment was made. Using the monthly payment report to filter for the Β£500 in each month accordingly.

    We also have noticed a few months were we were missing payments from the ESFA but the learner is showing on the MPR and have took the stance they will have to reconcile any missing payments at year end or in future months

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: Incentive Payment Tracking #237368

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Thanks Martin,

    Seemed odd to be so just wanted to get a real answer before i have the service desk saga.

     
    in reply to: Non-Funded Learner – LearnAimRef_16 #236014

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Thanks Ruth.

    To the service desk i go. Several times i’m sure πŸ™‚

     
    in reply to: Non-Funded Learner – LearnAimRef_16 #236012

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Regrading the Co-investment report.

    1. As stated above the percentage collected does not work

    2. We have apprentices that at fully fulled and have the SEM flag tick yet they are still showing in this report. I believe this has happened because the SEM flag was missed in a previous month this has been corrected yet they are still showing. The report should update as per the updated ILR. We are all human and all make mistakes πŸ™‚

    3.The report should calculate the ‘maximum/expected total 10% to be collected’ in the funding year based on the number of month between start and end date in a separate column for each learner. In addition to the total column we currently have that cumulatively adds every month. Some employers do not want to pay monthly, this is also very confusing to look it is a YTD total and not maximum/expected required 10% figure.

    4. There should be ‘maximum/expected 10% total payments collected’ based on the same criteria of point 3 so these 2 columns can be easily reconciled

    Thank you for taking the time to listen to all the feededback.

     
    in reply to: Q&A with the apprenticeship service developers #229774

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi,

    Just to add to the remittance and the ability to forecast funding as a provider. This is what I was told by the service desk in order to find out EFSA funding received/to come

    ‘There are a number of fields on the Apps Monthly Payment Report that will need to be discounted from the Total Payments column to establish how remittance has been calculated. Firstly, Employer Incentives will need to be removed from the Total Payments as Employer Incentives are paid under a separate piece of remittance. Provider Incentives are included as they are paid in relation to mainstream contracts. Employer / Provider Incentives are shown in column CB and CC for August, CU and CV for September, DN and DO for October and will be available in column EG and EI when all of Novembers reports are available.

    Secondly, the Apps Monthly Payment Report may also include Employer Co-Investment Contributions in any particular month where insufficient funds have been identified in an Employers Levy account. These outstanding payments will then be broken down, in relation to the Funding Rules as 90% paid by ESFA and a further 10% contribution from the Employer and you will need to be claim this directly from the Employer and ensure this is recorded in the ILR when received.’

    I’m sure you can understand expecting provides to do all of this every month is unacceptable there should be a column within the report that calculates the funding to date and year end funding or a totally separate report calculating funding to date and to come.

    This would allow providers to forecast and submit funding claims and better financial planning for colleges as a whole. Any forecasting/planning we are expected to provide should have a report/tools available to help providers.

     
    in reply to: Q&A with the apprenticeship service developers #229665

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Some of these have already been metioned however it shows a list of ‘most wanted’ features we all would like

    Reporting
    Is there a report that can be released to identify which incentive payments relate to which learner and their respective employer?

    DAS
    Would it be possible to receive a notification of when an employer β€˜Stops’ an apprentice on their digital account And also, a date of when it took effect?

    We have just enrolled an apprentice onto the DAS however it appears his ULN is already on the DAS site for another employer\provider. The message you receive tells you there is a duplicate but nothing else. a UKPRN should also be included in the message so this can be identified. as currently we have no information to go on

     
    in reply to: Q&A with the apprenticeship service developers #229190

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Just checked this morning still no sign – I guess seen as half of the reports we get now a days are incorrect they have decided to fix them by just not supplying any πŸ™‚

    I must submit my return after the deadline seen as everyone is equal in the new world! I Look forward to wasting more time checking today

     
    in reply to: AGE Grant Report #223774

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi All,

    I reported this to the service desk and got the usual useless response of this is on the known issue list.

    An issue has been identified with the Apprenticeship Funding Calculation where it is incorrectly classifying learners as co-funded and reporting an expected employer contribution for learners who should be fully funded. This issue will appear on the Apprenticeships Monthly payments report.

    This issue has been raised with our technical team as a defect and they are working on a fix.

    I’m just glad I spotted this before we started invoicing small employers! for safety I am no longer using the co-investment report and instead using the monthly app report filtering out the is small employer flag and then filtering the co-investment column

     

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Thanks all for your reply s… I am lost for words πŸ™‚

     

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    James – you could post the sql here and do the job for them at leas then we will have a working version tomorrow πŸ™‚ chips and cheese for me!

     
    in reply to: R01 2017 to 2018 #190719

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    I take it that the ne version just released is not same? don’t really want to waste more time reinstalling the whole software again πŸ™‚

     
    in reply to: R01 2017 to 2018 #190681

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    I have just had to completely reinstall my FIS after trying to run an 17/18 ILR through it got stuck in an loop and crashed – Wouldn’t advise it πŸ™‚

     
    in reply to: R01 2017 to 2018 #190591

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Steve,

    Thanks for that the part written ‘Our auditors are also aware of the revision to the text in the 2017/18 rules and what they should expect to see when they conduct an assurance visit.’ basically tells me that these will not be funded and the rules are expected to be followed

    Would of been nice to know before the start of the year given the implications this will have.

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: Adult Care Qualifications – AEB 17/18 #186627

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Christina,

    I was aware of this however the latest one I can see on the SFS is May!

    Thanks

     
    in reply to: Age Grant Report – June #174789

    Matt Collishaw
    Participant

    Hi Martin,

    That’s great thanks.

     
    in reply to: Appreticeship Standard Programme Makeup #160901
Viewing 25 posts - 26 through 50 (of 50 total)