Guidance

Common findings from funding assurance work on post-16 education providers: 2022 to 2023

Updated 4 September 2024

Applies to England

Part 1: Summary

About this report

1.1: The purpose of this report is to raise awareness of common post-16 funding rules’ compliance issues, so that with providers can ensure and/or improve their compliance.

1.2: The Education and Skills Funding Agency’s (ESFA’s) Provider Market Oversight Assurance Team (PMOA) perform an annual programme of assurance work on post-16 funding claims, submitted by education providers, schools, FE colleges, independent training providers (ITPs) and higher education institutions.

1.3: This report sets out the common compliance issues identified by the assurance reviews of 2021/22 funding claims, delivered as part of our 2022-23 assurance programme, for the following funding:

• 16 to 19 study programmes
• apprenticeships
• Adult Education Budget (AEB)
• Advanced Learner Loans

1.4: The report also includes generic findings on additional learning support and sub-contracting.

1.5: The primary purpose of the work performed by PMOA is to verify the completeness and accuracy of data provided in support of the funding claimed. ESFA produces a range of documents, which set out the funding rules for different funding streams. Further details can be found in Annex A.

1.6: At the conclusion of each assurance review, PMOA issues a report to the provider, setting out the areas of non-compliance with funding rules and recommendations to address them. Where funds have been incorrectly claimed, ESFA will seek to recover funding including funding overclaimed in prior years.  Where funding and / or data errors are identified, the provider is required to correct their learner data, so that funding adjustments can be made to payments, where appropriate. Where it is not possible to do this in the individualised learner record (ILR) and funding is at risk, funds are recovered by offset from future payments or by invoice, where there are no future payments.

Who is this report for?

1.7: This report is for:

• Principals / headteachers / CEOs, senior management, managers and staff in academy trusts / schools with six forms, colleges (general further education, sixth form, agricultural, specialists etc.), Higher Education Institutions and independent training providers, to help ensure they submit complete and accurate funding claims
• Members of governing bodies / boards of providers in raising their awareness of common issues, and
• local authorities funded by ESFA, auditors / advisors, the Association of Colleges (AOC) and Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) for raising awareness of issues to their members / clients.

1.8: For the purpose of this report, we have described all colleges, independent training providers and institutions as ‘providers’ and have used ‘learners’ as a generic term for learners, students and apprentices funded by ESFA.

Data accuracy

1.9: The individualised learner record (ILR) is a learner level data return that publicly funded providers must collect and return at specific periods for each funding year. The ILR is the primary data source used by ESFA to make payments to providers and by auditors to reconcile against the evidence held by providers at learner level. Therefore, it is essential that the ILR reflects not only learner activity, but also the information and evidence held within the learner files.

1.10: We expect providers to maintain ILR data and other learner documents properly and accurately and retain evidence, as required by DfE’s and ESFA’s funding rules. ILR transactions, including learner starts, withdrawals and breaks-in-learning must be recorded promptly and accurately, so that ILR data accurately reflects the providers’ learner population at any point in time.

1.11: Providers must ensure that their ILR data is regularly reviewed to ensure that only accurate ILRs, which comply with the funding rules and other requirements, are submitted drawing on the ILR guidance available.

1.12: We have tools which we expect providers to use to test the credibility of their data frequently (that is, at least monthly). The tools include guidance on how to provide and maintain accurate claims data and related technical guidance, as well as the Provider Data Self-Aassessment toolkit (PDSAT online).

1.13: PDSAT analyses the ILR data and produces reports that providers can use to identify and investigate potential anomalies in the data.

1.14: Many funding and data errors identified during assurance visits could be prevented, if providers review their learner data in these reports for completeness and accuracy throughout the year. The ESFA also produce post 16 monitoring reports Financial Assurance: Monitoring post-16 funding for 2023 to 2024 and provide guidance on how to correct ILR data quality or funding errors. It is recommended that providers also review these reports and take the necessary action to ensure data returns and funding claims are correct. Such regular reviews should reduce the risk of data errors and possible clawback of funding; thereby providing greater certainty over funding.

Part 2: 16 to 19 study programme (including high needs)

Funding issues

Planned hours

2.1: We check that the number of planned hours has been correctly recorded within the ILR and there is evidence to support this. The incorrect recording of planned hours on the ILR is the cause of the majority of funding errors identified for the 16 to 19 study programme. There are a number of different reasons why these errors occur, some of which can result in a funding overclaim:

• Planned hours do not reconcile to the evidence held. For example, hours stated on the learner’s timetable do not match those in the ILR; no evidence of learning against learning aims recorded on the ILR or individual learning plan; and incorrect start and end dates.
• In a number of instances, too many learners were found to be completing full time funding very early as “early completers/achievers”. Providers were found to have been claiming for full time funding, but learners had only attended for much shorter time periods. When institutions calculate planned hours using expected standard student attendance, they must use the average planned hours attended by students. This average must take account of students who both complete early and finish later than average.
• Errors have also arisen from learners enrolled on distance learning provision. The planned hours on the ILR are not always supported by timetables or attendance evidence usually leading to funding overclaims.
• Where learners had withdrawn from a learning aim within the first 42 days of the study programme, the remaining planned hours had not been amended correctly in a number of cases.
• Planned hours for learners enrolled on study programmes of less than 450 hours and between two and 24-weeks duration, who complete, transfer or withdraw within the first six weeks must be amended to match the actual hours delivered. A number of providers had not updated the ILR to reflect this requirement.
• Instances were noted where the core aims were flagged incorrectly on the ILR; this would have implications on funding claims in future years as it is used to calculate the retention factor.
• Activities not eligible for funding, in particular self-study, were incorrectly included in the planned hours recorded on the ILR.
• Planned hours were incorrectly calculated or recorded, resulting in a change to the funding band.
• Planned hours not accurately apportioned over two funding years.

2.2: Providers should refer to the advice: funding regulations for post-16 provision included in 16 to 19 education: funding guidance to ensure that the correct planned hours are claimed.

Qualifying periods

2.3: We check that the learner has met the qualifying period^{[footnote 1]}, especially checking attendance where the learner withdrew shortly after the qualifying period.

2.4: There were instances where learners did not meet the start qualifying period for their programme of study, because they had withdrawn within that period. Their evidenced last day of actual learning showed that they left before the end of the qualifying period. This resulted in a funding error where the full planned hours were claimed for the aims that were withdrawn.

Learning start date

2.5: We check that funding for a learning aim or programme has been claimed only from the date on which learning activity directly related to the learning aim or programme started and is evidenced.

2.6: There were instances where the start date was incorrect on the ILR and/or there was no evidence of attendance. These resulted in funding errors.

Withdrawals

2.7: We check that the actual learning end date recorded in the ILR reflects the last date that there is evidence of learning activity for each learning aim and the completion status and planned hours have been recorded correctly.

2.8: There were instances where the ILR had not been updated with the withdrawal date, or the wrong date had been used, which did not reflect the last date of learning activity as evidenced by attendance records.

Data issues, which could lead to funding errors

Condition of funding

2.9: All providers delivering 16 to 19 study programmes have to apply the condition of funding requirements set out in the funding rules. Providers, which do not comply with these requirements, may find that their lagged funding allocation is reduced in future years if they breach published tolerance levels.

2.10: The main issues identified in respect of the condition of funding were:

• exemption codes recorded incorrectly or omitted from the ILR
• learners not undertaking an appropriate learning aim or enrolled onto a learning aim that they had already achieved
• inaccurate recording of the learner’s prior attainment level and grades
• where learners were considered to be exempt, there was no evidence to support the exemptions.

Qualification hours or non-qualification hours and planned employment, enrichment and pastoral hours (EEP)

2.11: The incorrect recording on the ILR of the split between planned qualification hours (planned learning hours) and planned employment, enrichment and pastoral (EEP) hours is a common data error.

2.12: This issue usually arises from providers not fully understanding which learning aims contribute towards qualification or EEP hours, or not capturing sufficient details on the individual learning plan and other supporting documentation to evidence how the planned EEP hours have been calculated; for example, the learner’s timetable and attendance records required to support the ILR data.

2.13:ESFA expects non-qualification activity to be a coherent part of study programmes, which support the delivery of nationally recognised qualifications for all students. Where the number of planned hours towards EEP activity makes up more than half the total planned hours for the programme, funding claimed for EEP hours will be recovered from providers who are not able to evidence costs that can be directly related to the delivery of education. Examples of recognised educational costs can be found in Advice: funding regulations for post-16 provision 2023 to 2024 (see Annex B Table 1b).

Work experience

2.14: On occasion, the code used for work experience was recorded in the ILR without evidence of any work experience taking place. The work experience code must not be used under these circumstances. Prior approval is required from ESFA before any paid employment arranged by any student can be included in EEP hours.

Data quality and compliance

Individualised learner record (ILR)

2.15: The ILR is the primary data source used by ESFA to make payments to providers. It is therefore important that the ILR reflects the evidence held on the individual learning plan, the learner’s timetable and the provider’s attendance records and that this is consistent across core documentation.

2.16 Particular attention should be paid to the correct recording of learning aims, planned hours and the split between qualification and EEP hours, start and planned end dates, actual end dates, and achievement outcomes. Any changes or amendments should be recorded and evidenced within the appropriate documentation.

2.17: To assist providers to make accurate 16-19 funding data returns, we have set out in funding guidance for young people: ILR funding returns at Annex E recommended minimum data checks that use both our funding monitoring reports and PDSATs.

Part 3: New apprenticeships

Funding issues

Off-the-job-training

3.1: Off-the-job training (OTJT) is the main cause of apprenticeships funding errors and control recommendations. All apprentices must spend at least 20% of their normal working hours (capped at 30 hours per week from 2022/23, unless part time) engaged in off-the-job training. We check that the calculation of OTJT is correct, OTJT is planned and there is evidence of delivery.

3.2: In many instances, there was a lack of documentary evidence to demonstrate how OTJT was calculated, planned and how it could be achieved within the available time, as well as the details of the eligible activity that comprised off-the-job training. There were many instances where there was no quantified evidence or insufficient evidence of the off-the-job training hours delivered.

3.3: OTJT is a legal requirement of an apprenticeship and an essential criterion for funding. If this condition is not met, there is a risk that the whole apprenticeship for that learner is ineligible and, therefore, all funds paid in respect of that learner are at risk.

3.4: Consequently, it is important that providers comply with the OTJT requirements, including evidence requirements, set out in the Apprenticeship Funding Rules. Providers should also refer to the apprenticeships off-the-job training guidance.

Apprenticeship agreement and commitment statement / training plan

3.5: We check that there is a valid apprenticeship agreement and commitment statement (training plan) for all learners. Many issues were identified in this area. Non-compliance with the funding rules included:

• no apprenticeship agreement and / or commitment statement
• the agreement / commitment statement did not meet all the criteria set out in the funding rules
• details within the agreement did not match the ILR or the commitment statement and visa versa
• the agreement / commitment statement was not fully completed or signed
• the agreement / commitment statement was not updated after a break in learning or change in circumstances
• the agreement and commitment statement were one document.

3.6: If there is no apprenticeship agreement between the employer and apprentice, then this is classed as an ineligible apprenticeship and all funds for that learner may be at risk. Whilst we can work with providers to rectify this in most cases, this issue can be avoided by providers establishing appropriate controls to ensure they have apprenticeship agreements for all apprentices.

3.7: Providers should refer to the apprenticeship rules and the apprenticeship agreement template. A template for the training plan is also available on GOV.UK.

Negotiated price / ineligible costs

3.8: We check that funds are being used for evidenced eligible costs and activities within the agreed price. Documentation and costs relating to negotiated price were also an area where funding and control issues were identified. These included:

• ineligible costs being included in the price
• actual costs not being charged where the provider is the employer
• no cost breakdown provided
• the ILR not matching supporting evidence.

3.9: Providers must retain evidence to confirm how the total negotiated price for delivery is calculated for each learner and must include a breakdown of the total negotiated price. It must be clear that only eligible costs have been included and costs related to end-point assessment are not included. Ineligible costs included in the total price will give rise to a funding error.

3.10: Please refer to the paying for an apprenticeship and eligible and ineligible costs within the apprenticeship funding rules for details of the requirements.

Learning start dates

3.11: We check that funding has been claimed only from the date on which learning activity, funded by the apprenticeship budget, begins, and is evidenced. It can include off-the-job training and English and Maths.

3.12: The common errors identified were:

• The start date is not supported by evidence of learning activity.
• The induction date has been used as the start date when no learning activity had taken place.
• The ILR start date does not match the Apprenticeship Agreement or Commitment Statement (Training Plan).

3.13: Where incorrect start dates result in a potential funding error and the learner is still in learning, this can be rectified by an ILR adjustment. However, where the learner has withdrawn, funding will be recovered as monthly payments are likely to be claimed in error.

3.14: Please ensure you refer to the apprenticeship funding rules for learning activity as funding can only be claimed from the date on which learning activity, that is directly related to the apprenticeship and documented in the training plan, starts and can be evidenced.

End dates

3.15: We check that the actual learning end dates reflect the last date of learning activity, where a learner has taken a break in learning or has withdrawn.

3.16: There were many funding errors where learners had either taken a break-in-learning or had withdrawn without achievement, the actual end dates were not recorded or incorrectly recorded on the ILR and were not supported by underlying records. This results in a funding error for the time from the learner’s last learning activity for any of the funded learning aims. We seek to recover funding where an overpayment has occurred.

3.17: Please ensure you refer to the apprenticeship funding rules in respect of active learning, learning end dates and recording learner absence or withdrawal in the ILR Provider Support Manual.

Knowledge, skills and behaviours (KSB) including recognition of prior learning

3.18: We check that an appropriate KSB assessment has been performed and that there is evidence of the outcome.

3.19: Many issues were identified, including:

• lack of evidence of an appropriate assessment to confirm the learner’s knowledge, skills, and behaviours prior to commencing the apprenticeship.
• assessment outcomes were often lacking the identification of any recognised prior learning (RPL) and what has therefore been considered in the Total Negotiated Price (TNP).

3.20: No evidence of initial assessment may result in a funding error (full recovery from the start of learning), as we are unable to ascertain if the learner is eligible after RPL or on the correct programme, especially where they have already achieved or withdrawn. Retrospective evidence can be considered for continuing learners.

3.21: Where this assessment is missing or lacking information, we may be unable to confirm that the TNP is correct and there have been instances where providers have had to retrospectively check the assessment / TNP for a high number of learners and where funding has been recovered.

3.22: For functional skills in English and Maths, where a learner resumes learning (following a break in learning or transfer), errors have been identified in the ‘funding adjustment for prior learning field’ in the ILR causing too much funding to be paid.

3.23: Please ensure you refer to the apprenticeship funding rules in respect of programme eligibility and recognised prior learning and the ILR Provider Support Manual for ‘Funding adjustment for prior learning and other funding adjustments’.

English and Maths

3.24: We check that the apprentice has been assessed to see whether they have English and Maths exemptions.

3.25: We identified a number of apprentices, where they were undertaking English and Maths functional skills, but held an exemption or where they had no exemption but were not undertaking English and Maths qualifications.

3.26: We recognise that there are times when the learner does not declare or have proof of prior attainment at the start and the provider has acted in good faith by putting them forward for their functional skills. Nevertheless, it is important that the provider has a robust process to show they have tried to ascertain the learner’s prior attainment. Where it is identified that the learners have an exemption, the provider must stop payments immediately. Funding errors may occur, if payments have been made in error.

3.27: Please ensure you refer to the apprenticeship rules in respect of Recognised Prior Learning and support for English and Maths.

Apprenticeship duration

3.28: We check that the apprenticeship satisfies the minimum duration requirements, both planned and actual. This is after the content, duration and price have been adjusted to recognise prior learning.

3.29: A number of issues were identified where the apprenticeship did not meet the 12-month minimum duration, mainly due to ineligible activity being included, incorrect start dates, planned duration not being extended after the learner restarted or the minimum duration had not been extended for part-time working. The minimum duration is an essential criterion for funding, and if this condition is not met, the whole apprenticeship for that learner may be ineligible for funding, giving rise to a funding error.

3.30: Please ensure you refer to apprenticeship funding rules sections, covering minimum duration and employment hours.

Learning activity and breaks-in-learning

3.31: We check the learner’s continued participation in learning (including English and Maths) by reviewing evidence of learning activity.  The apprentice must be involved in active learning (off-the-job training or English and Maths training) throughout the apprenticeship from the learning start date to the actual learning end date (the practical period). We also test that a break-in-learning has been used, where applicable.

3.32: We found a number of issues where there was no evidence of learning activity provided or the learning activity did not cover the period of the ILR claim. Evidence was often poor in quality and, where the learner was not planned to be in learning for 4 weeks or more, a break-in-learning had not been applied.

3.33: Where there had been a break-in-learning, often there was little evidence to confirm the reason why and/or the last date of learning activity to support the date of the start of the break-in-learning and/or the ILR had not been updated.

3.34: Where there is no evidence of learning activity and a break in learning has not been used or a break has not been applied from the correct date, a funding error may arise.

Data quality and compliance

Individualised learner record (ILR)

3.35: Government contributions (including additional payments) are driven by the underlying ILR data, which must agree with information confirmed by the learner in the evidence pack, including planned and actual off-the job training hours in the respective ILR fields. It is important that the data fields, used to match with apprenticeship service for funding purposes, are accurate.

3.36: The ILR is the primary data source for funding claims and ILR data accuracy is critical. There were large volumes of data errors found in providers’ ILRs, when reviewed alongside the evidence required to support that data.

3.37: It is important that providers hold evidence that they are using apprenticeship funding appropriately and that the ILR data is correct. The apprenticeship funding rules list all evidence requirements. Most evidence will occur naturally from the normal business process. If evidence is not held funds may be at risk.

3.38: Please ensure that you refer to the apprenticeship funding rules, which provide details of the evidence required.

Part 4: Adult education budget (AEB)

Funding issues

Prior attainment

4.1: We check that any qualifications or other certificates, already held, are taken into account when establishing whether a learning aim can be funded and whether accreditation of prior learning applies and calculating the proportion of funding remaining.

4.2: Our testing found a number of errors in this area (as with apprenticeships programmes) relating to providers claiming funding without taking into account the learners’ attainment and study of prior qualifications. Where the proportion of funding has not been correctly calculated, we classify any overpaid funding as an error.

4.3: We also test to ensure that the level on which the learner is enrolled for English and Maths is correctly determined by the outcome of the initial assessment. Learners were found to not be enrolled on a level of learning in English and/or Maths (and ESOL qualifications) that was beyond their assessed level. There were numerous examples of learners studying at the same level at which they had been assessed. This resulted in funding being claimed incorrectly.

4.4: Please ensure you refer to the AEB funding rules in respect of Recognised Prior Learning and English and Maths for those aged 19 and over.

Learning activity

4.5: We check that funding claimed for the learner’s continued participation in learning is confirmed by evidence of learning activity from the start date of each aim up to the learning actual end date.

4.6: Instances were identified where funding claimed for learners’ continued participation on the AEB programme could not be confirmed from the evidence of learning activity, usually for periods of learning, or occasionally from a learner’s start date.

4.7: Please ensure you refer to the AEB funding rules in respect of participation.

Full and co-funding

4.8: We check that claims for full or co-funding are supported by an assessment of the learner’s circumstances and the learner has confirmed that they are eligible for a financial contribution from the government, where applicable.

4.9: There were instances where full funding was claimed incorrectly for learners who were not entitled to full funding or co-funding had been claimed, where full funding should have been claimed. In addition, where unemployment had been used as the eligibility criteria to claim full funding, the evidence was insufficient.

4.10: Where the wrong level of funding is claimed this will be classed as an error.

4.11: There are details within the rules covering the criteria for full and co-funding. Please ensure that you refer to the AEB rules, including the government contribution charts.

Part 5: Advanced Learner Loans

Funding issues

5.1: We check that details recorded in the Learning and Funding Information Letter, the loans portal, learning agreement and ILR all agree.

5.2: Issues were identified where learner files had different data and information compared with the ILR, Student Loans Company’s (SLC’s) learning provider portal data, individuals’ Learning and Funding Information Letters (LAFIL) and learning agreements, resulting in inaccurate ILR data. This predominantly included learning start and planned end dates.

5.3: Errors were found in advanced loans funding, where providers had claimed for learners, who were otherwise entitled to be funded for their first level 3 qualification and the learner had not waived their entitlement. Errors were also identified where learning was delivered outside England, which is not eligible under the funding rules. Issues identified included:

• Learning aim reference numbers were recorded incorrectly.
• The fee charged to the learner/value of the loan wasn’t recorded consistently.
• Where learners had withdrawn, the change in status had not been recorded correctly on the SLC’s learning provider portal.
• Where learners had achieved their aim, achievement details were not always recorded on the ILR.
• There were instances where the loan had not been approved and the learners’ data had not been removed from the ILR.
• Providers had not retained a copy of the Learning and Funding Information Letter issued to the learner and / or the letter did not hold all relevant information.

5.4: Please ensure you refer to the Advanced Learner Loans Rules and template for the Learning and Funding Information Letter.

Part 6: Generic issues

Data quality and ILR - duplicate learners

6.1: Duplicate claims for learners were noted through review of sector wide ILR data across all funding lines. There were instances where learners were incorrectly enrolled and funded at one provider for learning aims or part/ full time courses, whilst also being correctly enrolled and funded at another provider in part of full-time courses during the same academic year or undertaking the same aims at the same time.

6.2: We share data reports with providers, which would identify these duplicate learners, through the post-16 monitoring reports dashboard on View Your Education Data. This dashboard contains a set of reports which identify data quality and eligibility issues. Please ensure you review the reports and correct data regularly.

Learning support

6.3: Learning support (LS) is claimed at a monthly rate of £150 (on the ILR) and excess learning support is claimed on the earnings adjustment statement (EAS).

6.4: For all funding streams the funding rules clearly specify that the learning support is available to meet the costs of putting in place a reasonable adjustment, as set out in section 20 of the Equality Act 2010, for all learners with a learning difficulty or disability where this affects their ability to continue and achieve their learning goal.

6.5: In addition, for apprenticeships we provide learning support for apprentices with learning difficulties or disabilities as defined in Section 15ZA(6) of the Education Act 1996 (as amended by section 41 of the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009). This includes individuals who self-declare a learning difficulty or disability, and those who do not have a diagnosis of a learning difficulty or disability but in relation to whom the main provider has identified a learning need to us.

6.6: We check that the claims for learning support are for learners with disabilities and difficulties and that there is evidence of an assessment to determine the support required and evidence of delivery of that support. We also check that the support is being reviewed monthly to ensure it is still fit for purpose or continues to be needed. Unfortunately, often the evidence did not support the claims being made for learning support.

6.7: We also found that learning support was either claimed for learners who did not have a disability or learning difficulty and/or the reasons for the support were to fill a skills gap. We check the assessment and the support plans and, in particular, what reasonable adjustment has been considered. Where there is no evidence to support eligibility, all learning support funds for the learner are at risk.

6.8: Where the learner is eligible, but there is a lack of evidence to support delivery and/or review each month where learning support is claimed, we class this as a funding error for those months where this is missing.

6.9: Please ensure you refer to the relevant funding rules for Learning Support, including, for apprenticeships.

Learner eligibility

6.10: We check whether learners are eligible. We identified learners ineligible for funding, where providers did not carry out appropriate checks when learners start their programme, specifically to ensure that they meet the eligibility criteria set out in the relevant funding rules. Providers must retain evidence that appropriate checks have been carried out to confirm eligibility but should not retain copies of passports or birth certificates on the learner’s file.

Subcontracting

6.11: We check subcontracting provision for compliance with the funding rules (but not the subcontracting standard). A number of common issues were identified where subcontracting arrangements were not fully compliant (resulting in funding errors):

• Subcontracts were not always in place or were signed after delivery had started.
• Funding delivered under subcontracts exceeded the limits set out in the contracts.
• Contracts did not contain all the minimum clauses required by the funding rules, including adequate document retention clauses. For new starts, the document retention clauses are detailed within the provider agreement and non-levy contract.
• The most common findings for AEB and apprenticeships were that the details and subcontractors listed on the subcontractor declaration did not reconcile to the details recorded on the ILR; the provision was not declared where required, either on the subcontractor declaration, or on the ILR, or both.
• The volume of training and / or on-programme assessment that a provider directly delivers for each employer must have substance and must not be a token amount to satisfy the funding rules i.e. the subcontractor is not delivering the majority of the training. There were instances where the subcontractor delivered the majority of training and the provider only delivered a token amount.

Annex A

All references to the following documentation relate to the latest versions available at the time of release of this document. The documents that set out the ESFA’s funding rules are available on the following ESFA pages of the GOV.UK website:

• 16 to 19 funding: information for 2023 to 2024

• Advanced learner loans funding rules 2023 to 2024

• Advice: funding regulations for post-16 provision

• Advice: funding regulations for post-16 provision 2023 to 2024

• Adult education budget (AEB) funding rules 2023 to 2024

• Apprenticeship agreement: template

• Apprenticeship funding rule

• Apprenticeships off-the-job training guidance.

• Carry-in apprenticeship frameworks and standards (for starts prior to 1 May 2017)

• Financial Assurance: Monitoring post-16 funding for 2023 to 2024

• Funding guidance for young people: ILR funding returns

• Funding rates and formula guidance

• Individualised Learner Record (ILR) technical documents, guidance and requirements

• ILR data: provider data self-assessment toolkit (PDSAT)

• Support for apprentices with a learning difficulty or disability

• View Your Education Data

Documents that set out the technical requirements of the ILR and guidance documents for completion of the ILR are available on the following ESFA pages of the GOV.UK website:

Individualised Learner Record (ILR)

1. The start qualifying period is set at 6 weeks for students with study programmes of 485 or more planned hours or programmes of more than 24 weeks and 2 weeks for all part time students below 485 planned hours whose programme is due to take between 2 weeks and 24 weeks. You can find more information on the qualifying period in the Funding rates and formula guidance. ↩