Sharon Toothill

Unfunded apprenticeship

Created

Hi

We have be approached by one of our levy employers to carry out an apprenticeship without charging their levy account - charge them at a commercial rate.  Not sure why they would want to do this.  Is this allowed and if so, do we include them in the ILR return just unfunded?

Thanks

Regards

Sharon

Replies

No one has replied to this post.


Martin West

Yes record this against FM99 with no ACT record the learner will be included in the Non-Contracted Apprenticeships Activity Report, the overall process is the same and the EPAO will apply for certification in the normal way.

Sharon Toothill

Thanks Martin

Dean Cox

Does anything need to be included under Funding & Monitoring then if the 'ACT' is removed? Thanks.

Martin West

No, as no funding id funding down from the Levy or ESFA you leave this, the Apprenticeship Financial details and SOF blank.

HTH

Dean Cox

'Apprenticeship Financial Record' is missing. As you've returned the 'end point assessment organisation' ID, you also need to return the end point assessment financial details. Check apprenticeship financial record includes the end point assessment price.

Having removed the SOF & Financial sections (to be blank), the error returning is regarding end point assessment, do we still have to return the EPA ID, or does it not matter as not funded through ESFA?

Thanks.

Martin West

Leave it out.

Dan Hodgetts

Hi, following up on this. Does the provider/learner still need to evidence Functional skills L2 and 20% OtJ to complete Gateway and start EPA?

Martin West

Yes as it is a general (and specified) requirement in each Standard for an English Apprenticeship under the ACT.

HTH

Dan Hodgetts

Hi, another question relating to commercial learners....

What happens if an Apprentice resides and works more than 50% in Scotland or Wales - presumably they wouldn't be eligible for a commercial FM99 route as they don't meet ESFA residential eligibility criteria?

In that case could the Provider simply have a commercial agreement with the employer that doesn't get reported in the ILR and therefore Funding Rules wouldn't apply?

Thanks as always

Martin West

No, if the Apprenticeship is delivered in line with the funding rules for those who are ineligible for funding then they should be recorded on the ILR under funding model 99.

HTH

Ben James

If an employer hadn't reserved funding in time, could you record the apprenticeship as unfunded until such a time as they do reserve the funding? Considering the apprentice is on programme and is undertaking learning. 

Michelle Leonard

Ben James Just wondering if you had an answer to this, as I have a similar situation? TIA

Andrew Gilmour

Following on from Dan Hodgetts question - with an unfunded Scottish learner - how is the ULN generated as the learner will have no record on LRS but will have an SCN - is the ULN simply returned with 999999999?

Martin West

 If a ULN cannot be obtained for a learner then 9999999999 must be returned, except where an apprenticeship is funded through a contract for services with the employer (FundModel = 36 and LearnDelFAMType = ACT1)

Ben James

Michelle Leonard

Sorry, missed this tag completely. The answer unfortunately is no. We initially asked the ESFA but received no response, so went ahead and processed the first portion of the programme as unfunded, up until the time that funds were reserved, at which point we added a funded POT with the appropriate dates/prices. This worked, and we began to receive the proper funding. However, we recently finally received a response stating;

You previously raised an incident with our Specialist team.
 
The Specialist team have been in touch today to let us know the following information:
 
'A reservation of funds is intended to pay for the whole apprenticeship. Therefore, it is not possible to fund part of the apprenticeship privately.'
 
The period prior to the reservation can't be included as part of the apprenticeship and recorded as privately funded.

Michelle Leonard

No worries Ben James. I suspected as much. Thank you for confirming though, really appreciate it