EPA resit costs

Home Forums Data issues EPA resit costs

This topic contains 11 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Martin West 4 days, 11 hours ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts

  • Sue Bishop
    Participant

    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?

    Many thanks,

    Sue

     
    #264283

    Martin Locock
    Participant

    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.

     
    #264699

    Martin West
    Participant

    Hi Sue,
    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.
    HTH

     
    #264714

    Sue Bishop
    Participant

    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.

    Regards,

    Sue

     
    #265410

    Martin West
    Participant

    Hi Sue,
    You would not need to increase the training cost (TNP 1) by £200 as the change is for EPA costs.

     
    #265444

    Sue Bishop
    Participant

    Hi Martin

    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?

    Regards,

    Sue

     
    #265454

    Martin West
    Participant

    Hi Sue,
    TNP 1 is the training costs only, you then add the EPA costs TNP 2 to get the total negotiated cost.
    HTH

     
    #265462

    Sue Bishop
    Participant

    Think I need to go and do a spot of amending…..

     
    #265464

    Ruth CJ
    Participant

    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.

     
    #265734

    Martin West
    Participant

    Hi Ruth,
    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.
    HTH

     
    #265737

    Ruth CJ
    Participant

    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.

     
    #265757

    Martin West
    Participant

    Hi Ruth,
    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.

     
    #265763
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.