This is a hypothetical question. We negotiate a price for an apprenticeship standard with a levy employer which is £500 below the band maximum.
The cost of the EPA is £600, which is included in the original negotiated price.
The learner fails all or some aspects of EPA and needs to resit.
As we have not used the maximum band value in the first instance, can we claim £500 towards the resit and if so, how do we claim for this on the ILR?
SueJune 12, 2018 at 1:52 pm #264283
I don’t think the band maximum is intended to be used in that way: once the price is agreed, that sets the delivery and EPA price.June 14, 2018 at 9:42 am #264699
Guidance from the Funding Rules
A new price may also be negotiated if the apprentice requires additional learning for re-taking mandatory qualifications or their end-point assessment.
Guidance from the ILR support manual:
The assessment price is later re-negotiated (for example to include additional costs or further assessment). A new end point assessment price of £3,000 is agreed to apply from 1 May 2018. The financial details for the programme are updated to reflect this:
AFinType AFinCode AFinDate AFinAmount
TNP 1 01/08/2017 13000
TNP 2 01/02/2018 2000
TNP 2 01/05/2018 3000
Where this would take you over the cap then this is an issue but most cover this in the employer contract by including that any addition costs in excess of the funding cap will be paid by the employer.
HTHJune 14, 2018 at 10:36 am #264714
Thank you, Martin. In theory then, I could state TNP 2 of £600 being the initial EPA cost and then add a further TNP 2 of, say £800, meaning £200 resit cost? I’m guessing a further TNP 1 with a revised date of negotiated price would also have to be added with the £200 resit cost included?
Let’s see how many errors that will give me!
Appreciate your support, Martin.
SueJune 18, 2018 at 9:06 am #265410
You would not need to increase the training cost (TNP 1) by £200 as the change is for EPA costs.June 18, 2018 at 10:54 am #265444
The TNP1 is the total negotiated price (including EPA costs) isn’t it? Under TNP2 we are just highlighting the actual cost of the EPA aren’t we?
SueJune 18, 2018 at 11:12 am #265454
TNP 1 is the training costs only, you then add the EPA costs TNP 2 to get the total negotiated cost.
HTHJune 18, 2018 at 11:34 am #265462
Think I need to go and do a spot of amending…..June 18, 2018 at 11:38 am #265464
This may be a really dumb question, but the example used in the PSM seems odd. The second TNP2 price is higher than the original one. Is that because the newer price will override the old one (and it’s £1,000 extra), or is it just a weird example, and the two TNP2 records will be added together to make a total of £5,000? I am assuming the latter.June 19, 2018 at 10:40 am #265734
It goes on to say ‘The latest price records, based on the financial record date, are used in the funding calculation’ so it would not be the total of the TNP 2 records but only the latest one.
HTHJune 19, 2018 at 10:49 am #265737
Ah, I missed that bit! Thank you. So not a completely dumb question. That seems counter-intuitive to begin with, but when you’re retrospectively reducing a price, that makes complete sense, as you can’t enter negative values.June 19, 2018 at 12:14 pm #265757
One of the issues I have come across is the dates that are applicable to the TNP records are also important in that they reflect when the revised amounts take effect from (as a new price episode)
Some providers have experience Dlock issues were the data is identical, but it is thought that this could be down to incorrect dates being entered for the TNP records.
It is just another thing to watch out for.June 19, 2018 at 12:40 pm #265763
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.