An update from the information authority secretariat…
March 9, 2010 in The information authority Blog by Selvy
The information authority board met on 3 March 2010. One of the main items of business was the consideration of two late ILR change requests, which had been submitted by the Skills Funding Agency. In brief these were to enable the Skills Funding Agency to identify large employers so that their funding could be implemented at a lower rate and to allow volunteer providers to send data for unfunded apprentices. The summary of the board’s decisions is on our website. The papers and the minutes of the board meeting will be shortly published on our website.
Most of you will know Nick Linford – one of his strengths being his ability to describe further education funding concisely. In partnership with the information authority and The Data Service, he has written the hands-on guide to post-16 performance and data. The contents include the Individualised Learner Record (ILR), Learning Aims Database (LAD), Learner Information Suite (LIS), the workings of Success Rates and highlight the importance of good Data Quality. The book will be launched on 13 April 2010 to coincide with the College Data Conference. Although the conference is now fully booked, The Data Service will be sending a copy of the book to LSC funded Employer Responsive and Learner Responsive providers. This book is a good introduction to the way performance is measured and data is used in the FE sector. Additional copies will be available to purchase from the data guide website in mid April.
In last week’s blog, Paul told you about his Connexions meeting and how things have changed since we agreed the datasets which would be collected. The board agreed that the secretariat should engage with Connexions and other stakeholders to agree the new way forward. Paul is therefore organising a meeting at the end of April with Connexions, local authorities and various training providers to decide what information needs to be collected and how it will be administered. Our aim is to reduce the data burden on training providers while ensuring Connexions get the information they need.
Whilst on reducing the data burden, you may have noticed that we have modified the Reducing the Data Burden pages on the website. All the information you need is now on one page with links to other areas. We hope you find it easier to use – as usual send us your feedback.
The work on the Learner Data Strategy continues. This week sees the last workshop with training providers. KPMG will be reporting their findings to the project board in April. We will update you then.
Our next Employer Responsive Advisory Group meeting is on 19 March and twenty training providers have already confirmed attendance. Although the meeting is full, don’t despair as the outputs will be on the website a week after the meeting.
The information authority secretariat is currently exploring the possibility of engaging with awarding bodies. I therefore met with a colleague at the National Open College Network (NOCN) in Sheffield to assess the potential benefits of an advisory group dedicated to awarding bodies. I will also be liaising with other government agencies and awarding bodies to further consider the merits of awarding body engagement – so watch this space!
Selvy
So wait, why did the board agree the untimely request from the SFA? In what way is it an exceptional circumstance? How will the “list of large employers” work? What happens if they miss one off?
I worry (and have done since its inception) that the information authority doesn’t have the power to stand up to these late change requests from funders, given that there’s little evidence of requests being refused over the last two years…
Do you know when the Information Authority will clarify how the mechanics of the reduction in funding for learners with large employers will work?
It is important for providers to understand how and which learners will be affected from a business planning point of view. We like many providers are in the process of business planning for 10/11 and this change raises a number of questions which I am sure you are grappling with but there are a few below which we would like to send on;
- Does this affect priority sectors?
- Will this be for all learners of just new starts? Are there transitional arrangements for carry over if it is just new starts?
- If the EDS is to be used to automate this then how can providers report on this data for their own means?
- What happens where employer size changes?
Any update would be appreciated
I echo Pauls comments and add
Is this intended as a fishing trip for 2010/11 to collect data to support funding rates changes for 2011/12 or a new funding rate / rule to be implemented in 2010/11.
If it is the latter the SFA need to
advise colleges if this change will have any impact on contract values
issue guidance on this funding change very soon as colleges will need to make adjustments delivery plans.
The information authority is working with colleagues from the Skills Funding Agency and the Data Service to finalise the requirements and we will keep you updated.
Funding policy colleagues have confirmed that further guidance will made available later this month.
Regards
Anita
Hi all
Following the posts above, the secretariat has prepared responses that we hope will answer your queries sufficiently.
Paul – in response to your query – a solution is being developed in partnership with the Skills Funding Agency (as Anita mentioned) and we hope to provide details of it by 30th April and to publish a revised ILR Specification (if necessary) by 14th May.
Stephen – just to clarify, the Skills Funding Agency submitted two late ILR change requests to the board meeting – one change was agreed and the other was rejected. The board, which compromises of both providers and consumers of data, has a duty to ensure that funding bodies have access to information for decision-making purposes.
More details about the Skills Funding Agency’s requests and how they were presented to the board can be found in board paper 3 at http://www.theia.org.uk/meetings-events/BoardMeetings/papers/board_march_2010.htm, which explains why the late requests came about, how they were processed and what the secretariat’s recommendations to the board were. As with all ILR change requests, they were assessed against our criteria (http://www.theia.org.uk/ilr/RequestforChange/assessmentcriteria/) before being considered. All through the process we negotiated with the Skills Funding Agency to come up with solutions that would supply them with the data they need to make funding decisions, but that would create the least burden to providers.
The first request from the Skills Funding Agency was that providers should complete a field on the ILR to indicate where provision was being delivered to a large employer. After negotiation, the secretariat put forward a preferred ‘fully automated’ solution based on using the employer identifier field. We also put forward a short-term, pragmatic solution based on providers using a list of large employers supplied by the Skills Funding Agency to complete a field in the ILR.
Details of how the large employer list will work are not finalised, but the board was clear that the list should be made available to providers, along with the criteria used to determine which company is a ‘large employer’. It was pointed out at the board meeting that a list of large employers is already held by the Office of National Statistics that could possibly be used, so this is being investigated.
The second request – to allow non LSC-funded Apprenticeships to be returned on the ILR for Employer Responsive for those providers who wish to submit them – was not agreed by the board as a late request to the 2010/11 ILR. Instead, the board agreed the secretariat’s recommendation that a full assessment of the charge should be carried out as part of the change process for 2011/12, with a view to implementation in 2011/12.
Over the last two years, the information authority has received far more requests for changes to the ILR than it has agreed. For the 2010/11 ILR specification alone we received 60 requests – only 27 went forward to the board for approval, and of those only 21 were eventually approved, including the removal of four fields.
Any board member can raise an item at the board meeting for consideration – the Skills Funding Agency and the Young People’s Learning Agency are both board members and, like the LSC before them, will not be treated any more or less favourably than any of the other representatives. Any of our stakeholders who are not happy about any decision that the board makes is welcome to lobby whichever board member represents their interests. For providers, these are:
- Julian Gravatt (AoC)
- John Collis (ALP)
- Bob Powell (HOLEX)
There are also two provider practitioners on the board – Ian Pryce (Bedford College) or Caroline Miller (Newcastle College).
We hope these responses answer your queries, and any further questions that other feconnect users may have.
Anna