information about how you use ‘Get help with ESFA services’. We use this information to make the
website work as well as possible and improve government services.
You have accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any
This is a new service – your feedback will help us to improve it.
Created 08 January 2021 15:57
we have a full time EFA learner (funding model 25) who has transferred from full time to an apprenticeship.
The learners full time programme started on the 14/09/2020 and they transferred off on the 04/12/2020 to the apprenticeship.
Am i correct in saying we cant claim the full years worth of hours and have to reduce the planned hours to actuals to account for the time they were on the FT programme only so from Sept to Dec?
No one has replied to this post.
Q15 in Additional Clarification on withdrawal advice, 16-19 Funding Guidance p 56
Q15 When a student completes a study programme earlier than planned but after the initial 6 week period to start an Apprenticeship with the same institution are there any circumstances in which the planned hours should be amended?A15 A student should only be in receipt of one ESFA type of funding at any one time at any individual funded (or their financially related) institution. If a student is recorded as having successfully completed a study programme early and is then transferred onto an Apprenticeship programme at the same institution, the institution must make sure it is not drawing down two sources of ESFA funding for the same period of time. In determining what constitutes early completion our advice is to review students who complete before the equivalent of the start period needed to qualify for funding. For full time students this would be those students completing their 16 to 19 study programmes more than six weeks early and for shorter part time students more than two weeks early.It is particularly important that this advice is followed where multiple students are completing early and any average student planned hour calculations are not taking into account the number of students completing early.The institution has a choice for students who have attended for more than six weeks of either reducing the planned hours down to the period of the student’s actual attendance or making sure that the Apprenticeship funding is reduced to remove any overlap in the period where two sources of funding are being claimed for the same period. We are content that in these circumstances planned hours can be reduced even after the initial six week start period has passed as this maybe a much easier calculation than assessing the impact of the funding over lap on Apprenticeship funding.
I'd say the last sentence is the key bit!
08 January 2021 16:05
Thank you Steve, thought that was the case, just wanted to double check!!! Thanks again
11 January 2021 08:56
What if the learner withdraws from their Study Programme in order to transfer to Apprenticeships i.e. they are not an early completer and therefore not retained for 16-19s funding purposes and therefore their withdrawal will negatively impact on retention factor. In that scenario I would assume that you do not adjust the planned hours claim for the 16-19 episode because the provider is hit with a lagged funding penalty. Reducing their hours would in fact result in a double penalty?
17 June 2021 10:44
Well they're not a withdrawal if they're transferring? I realise the use of "completion" in Q15 above is a bit weird, now you come to mention it, but it's definitely legit to use 3, 3, 40 on their study prog records (which means they would be excluded from the retention factor calculation, as far as I'm aware)?
17 June 2021 10:53
When I look in FIS access.mdb export (Rulebase FM25 table) I can see that our learners in this scenario, flagged as withdrawal/transfers, are counted as not retained. Maybe this is just a limitation of FIS but it certainly seems that they will be impacting on our retention factor
17 June 2021 13:58
I also think the term "successfully completed" is making a clear distinction - i.e. this requirement to reduce hours shouldn't apply to withdrawals and I'd guess it doesn't apply precisely because the ESFA will be hitting us with a 50% lagged penalty for these withdrawals so surely no need for us to reduce the planned hours when it's already taken care of... albeit lagged. That is how lagged funding is supposed to work is it not?
Unless we are allowed to record them as completers? Even though they've dropped out of their Study Programme without completing...?
17 June 2021 14:16 (Edited)