The second provider only needs to capture on their enrolment form confirmation that the learner is not in learning with any other provider at the start of learning in order to immediately start and claim funding for the learner in the ILR.
ILR reporting requirements for Collecting and submitting ILR data does require a provider to meet the timeliness specification and this only includes where there is a reference date a requirement to accurately report up to the start of the preceding month.
If I were the Prime I would not only consider this request to be unreasonable, unnecessary but also impractical and I doubt that any provider could implement this in the time scale required especially when you consider the Prime is responsible for their learners anyway.
What if the learners complete with you the day after the period has closed the Prime would not be able to return an updated ILR until the next period opened which could be two weeks away.
Over complicating things seems to be an understatement.
Reading between the lines I assume that the second provider is only asking that when end dates are sent through that that they do not overlap with start dates of the second programme as this would make them ineligible for funding and that they would appear on funding and monitoring reports.
As Martin says, it’s almost impossible for the ILR data to be sent through in these timeframes but anyone involved in this process would understand that. As long as the data is right when it is sent that then it will be fine.
Hold on, a learner can do two overlapping AEB courses without a problem, even if they’re at two entirely different providers, as long as they’re not the same thing, can’t they? The F&M report only brings back learners on the same aim…