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 25 January 2022 11:50
Hi all,We have a situation whereby a learner has passed their planned end date (by five months) and is still in learning, however must now attempt Level 2 functional skills after completing Level 1.The learner is on a Level 2 apprenticeship standard and as a requirement only needs to achieve Level 1 functional skills, however as they did/have not reached gateway before the 31st December 2021 (as advised in the Apprenticeship Funding Rules for Main Providers 21-22 V2) they must now also attempt Level 2 functional skills before we can submit them for gateway review.Can anybody advise how we record this situation accurately on the ILR or even if it’s possible (to start a new component aim after the programme planned end date?)I’ve trawled through the provider support manual and ILR specification but can’t seem to find anything that suggests this can be done.Many thanksEmma
No one has replied to this post.
Just add the aim it should be ok.
25 January 2022 11:54
Many thanks Martin...do we still use the original programme planned end date for the new aim even though the start date would be after or do we use a new planned end date just for that aim. We've never encountered this situation before so I'm a little unsure as to what we're doing.Emma
25 January 2022 12:56
No, you record the dates over which you plan to deliver the aim irrespective if it is after the programme end date as the ILR must reflect reality.
25 January 2022 13:00
Be careful with the ILR when adding aims after the original programme aim ZPROG001 planned end. Some MIS systems ILR exporters will change the ZPROG001 Planned end date to be the latest PED of any aim and so you would be changing the PED of the whole programme which will lead to complications with Audit and QAR as well as affecting any remaining OPP payments for this academic year (assuming that 5 months ago is a PED in September).
27 January 2022 15:12
Many thanks both. I have added the required aims as Martin advised (the service desk also confirmed this is what we should do) and run an xml export file from our MI system through FIS and Submit Learner Data successfully without error.We have also checked the original programme planned end date remains the same in the xml export file (which it does) so hopefully we won’t be presented with any problems with regards to the above further down the line. Thank you both for your help.Emma
27 January 2022 15:44
That’s a stupid thing for an MI system to do as it specified that the planned end date must not be changed.
Do you know what systems do this?
27 January 2022 15:53
Maytas has done this for pretty much as long as the ZPROG has been around. In the early years it helped to avoid errors and i do seem to remember a validation rule error (possibly around 13/14) would trigger if you tried to have a component aim PED later than a ZPROG PED. It is a perfectly sensible thing to ensure the programme aim covers the full length of the planned components of a programme otherwise it makes a mockery of having a programme aim at all. Also, since the introduction of FM36 having a shorter programme planned end makes it possible to draw down OPP funding faster than you should if the system allows the programme aim to be shorter than the component aims.
Having rules change on providers after a learner's start date and forcing additional unplanned learning is more stupid in my opinion.
27 January 2022 16:04