I don’t feel I am being unreasonable here, but I would like to be able to reconcile:
– funding summary report per the Hub
– remittance advice
– monthly co-funding reconciliation reports
so that it all agrees.
Am I the only one pulling my hair out ?November 9, 2017 at 11:16 am #212959
You are not alone on this one Sophie. This has been a nightmare for the word go.
Its is about time that the “systems” all talked to each other and tried to make our lives a bit simplerNovember 9, 2017 at 11:36 am #212961
Absolutely Sophie and now made even worse by confirmation from the period end reports that what were considered to be levy payers with very large salary bills coming through as 90% ESFA and 10% employer contribution due with now possibility of actually seeing from our end what has gone wrong. I doubt the Service Desk would have a clue either.
Rapidly descending into (another) shambles.
ChrisNovember 9, 2017 at 12:25 pm #212982
Agree Sophie. I am now almost hairless 🙁
One month, I think I have it, then look at the next, and it’s gone again. I am trying to reconcile now, and I am making little headway.November 9, 2017 at 12:46 pm #212994
I’ve been trying to do this for months and it doesn’t work, but it’s always nice to know that it isn’t that you don’t understand, or that you’re missing something simple, but that everyone else that DOES understand (which isn’t everybody!) isn’t able to do it either.
Especially when you’ve got subcontractors, it’s really important to know which of these is ultimately correct!
Queried it a couple of weeks ago with the Service Desk, they passed me on to Accounting, and Accounting passed me back to the Service Desk. It’s almost as if they don’t know themselves…November 9, 2017 at 2:20 pm #213013
just an update from me. I have spent some considerable hours triangulating the apps indicative report to the period end reports, which does include some apprentice records with start dates going back into a previous period having not been processed in time for the actual start period plus some apprentices that had a DAS to ILR mis-match and not included at period 2 and now included at period 3. I also have a situation where as I mentioned yesterday three levy paying companies that for some bizarre reason have incurred the ESFA 90% co-contribution and therefore being reported and due to pay their 10% contribution which I don’t believe for a minute (I am talking about three Premier League football clubs!). One of these companies we received levy funds for periods 1 and 2 and all of a sudden at period 3 they have gone into the 90%/10% bracket!
I can now see how it is possible to reconcile but I can assure you I have done this kind of stuff for many years and it is a nightmare and mark my words when I say this is going pear-shaped and quickly!! It is a significant task and I can’t imagine what new people to this are thinking or doing.
Where do we turn because as “Access” says, it is unlikely even the people that should know at the ESFA actually do know and certainly not from the user perspective?
ChrisNovember 10, 2017 at 5:55 am #213136
Worth pointing out also that as per a thread on here a couple of weeks ago, they’re still taking co-investment payments for learners who are 16-18 and at a small employer, despite assurances that it would be fixed this month.November 10, 2017 at 9:46 am #213170
We were able to reconcile August, but since then it has proved impossible. We have been over-paid significantly by the ESFA as a result (according to both the IER and final payment report). The Co-contributions report is also showing learners twice in a number of instances.November 16, 2017 at 3:42 pm #214761
Caspar VerneyParticipantNovember 16, 2017 at 3:52 pm #214765
I am also completely lost – have never been able to reconcile and our records and the remittance never ever matches!!!November 16, 2017 at 4:31 pm #214774
Same here! I feel I spend more time trying to reconcile then ever 🙁
It would also be great if a separate report could be produced for the employer incentives remittance, rather than having to trawl through the whole Apps Monthly Payment report to reconcile these.November 17, 2017 at 10:51 am #214936
I agree with previous comments, an absolute nightmare trying to reconcile. We managed to reconcile R01 but that’s it, nothing actually matches, according to the reports and remittance advice we have been underpaid. I did notice that learners that leave early disappear completely from subsequent reports so their funding is pulled back but you would easily miss it, unlike the old occupancy reports for pre May starts where the learner remained on the report their with funding adjusted.
Perhaps someone somewhere within the ESFA will realise the mess caused and provide guidance on how to reconcile, if they know themselves!November 20, 2017 at 3:18 pm #215853
We gave up in the end and emailed the ESFA for guidance so waiting to here what help is available (if any).November 20, 2017 at 7:54 pm #215894
There is no finer example of a system being developed by IT people who have no clue how the data is used in practice than this one. I have seen this so many times and the only way to successfully develop something like this is to listen to the users and not after the event but as part of the development of the specification. Furthermore there needs to be flexibility after the initial implementation to tidy up any anomalies like the numerous ones that are still emerging and as identified by the users and not the developers. There is more expertise for that element in providers than anywhere in the ESFA and subcontracted companies used but to some within the ESFA I am sure we are viewed as the necessary evil.November 21, 2017 at 5:41 am #215969
Good luck David Swales. We put a request in 2 weeks ago for the same thing, as we didn’t get the 48 hour response we left it for over a week and resent the “incident”, guess what? We are still waiting for a response. So frustrated with the lack of feed back from ESFA. How long do you think it will take them to request any overpayments back – quicker than their response times I think.November 21, 2017 at 8:33 am #215992
We’re having a similar issue and we’re struggling to come to an answer. Our Apps Pay Monthly report doesn’t reconcile with the Monthly remittance statement. This is the first month that we’ve had this happen. Only for one line 19+ Levy paying Apprentices. We’re being paid significantly less for this line in the remittance advice then is indicated in the apps pay monthly report and we can’t see why. It’s a shame that with these systems there seems to be no guidebook on correct practice for these reports.
We’ve queried this with the ESFA Service Desk last week they’ve so far been unable to come to an answer. As today is the end of the five days, they’ve sent us an email saying ‘they’re seeking further advice from a colleague.’
Out data-match report shows no errors, which is where we first assumed there would be an error (we have had a few in previous months however these were all resolved by last months return).November 22, 2017 at 2:38 pm #216418
Well I have now just seen the period 3 remittance detail and all I can say is that it is the workings of an idiot!!
Chris BradleyNovember 23, 2017 at 5:25 am #216562
I have emailed the service desk 3 times over the last week, with a direct link to this thread asking for advice and help.
Response = Nothing
I am scared every month when the remittance advice comes through, I am literally petrified of opening it to see what we have actually been paid against what we were expecting and it’s just not acceptable.
I’ve actually had enough of this.November 28, 2017 at 12:58 pm #218012
I feel sorry for the Service Desk, not down to them. It is the people in control that have no clue. Heads need to roll in my view.
Chris BradleyNovember 28, 2017 at 1:02 pm #218016
Without a doubt Chris. But how could we collaborate together to escalate this and who to? No-one seems to help, they all just refer you back to the service desk.
I’ve thought about FE Week, I have tried Twitter, but no one seems to listen.
I have even written to our local MP regarding other issues such as funding bands etc and they all come back saying their diaries are too busy…November 28, 2017 at 1:10 pm #218024
just tried a communication outside this forum, fingers crossed for some kind of follow up.
ChrisNovember 29, 2017 at 4:42 am #218240
I raised this 3 months ago (http://feconnect.sfa.bis.gov.uk/forums/topic/apps-co-funding-contributions-report-3/) and am still waiting for an answer for the ESFA….December 4, 2017 at 8:45 am #219602
I have also raised several issues with the R03 reconciliation. As a very large employer we have millions in our Levy account yet last month I had over £20k taken in co-investment. As an employer provider I can see both sides of the DAS account and have even provided the helpdesk with learner details this has directly effected so they can investigate.
It appears they have recalled 90% of the funding for every Levy learner I have on programme despite them being eligible for funding from my Levy.
I have raised this via the ESFA helpdesk but they have no idea what I am talking about and cannot give me an explanation for it. I’ve simply been told to wait for this months reconciliation to see if the money is paid back as they are aware there is an issue with the DAS matching to the ILR file.
Hugely frustrating and no sight of any resolution!December 4, 2017 at 4:37 pm #219734
I was looking at this with a provider last week.
The key thing about/problem with the Apps Pay Monthly report is it seems to be based on academic years, so if you’ve got unusual learners who started before 1 Aug it’s likely to struggle to calculate what you’ve actually been paid for them, particularly if you’ve not added them until this academic year? This is the first time we’ve had funding that hasn’t been expressly tied to academic years*, but this doesn’t seem to have occurred to the report designers…
In these cases I don’t think it’s using actuals, just calculating what funding *should* be left which is why it won’t tie up to your remittance.
Added to the other issues (found an NHS trust flagged as 90/10 last week!) and it’s definitely a mess…
*apparently MSC/TEC money in the 90s was on a financial year, but even then, it wasn’t effectively limitless like the Levy is.
December 4, 2017 at 4:41 pm #219736
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by steveh.
I agree steveh there seems to be no correlation between the payments and the reports which leaves you at a loss for reconciling what funding you should be paid.
We are a direct grant holder with the ESFA and a Levy paying employer provider so we receive 2 different kinds of payments, this month it resulted in them taking the £20k from my direct grant funding to pay back the incorrect 90% but trying to get the helpdesk to understand what I am saying is useless.
The ILR submission for funding model 36 is correct but this does not match the reporting generated and therefore they cannot identify the correction that needs to be made.
All of my Levy learners started before Aug 1st and have been paid normally up until R03 which seems an error in itself as surely if there was an error this would of effected R01 and R02.
It just feels like a huge mess with no light at the end of the tunnel. I feel for the guys on the helpdesk as they are getting it from all sides with no training or insight in how to amend the situation.December 4, 2017 at 5:12 pm #219747
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.