Presentation on theme: "Gaynor Bray RACC. 16-19 Funding Statement Dec 2010 “Real-terms reduction in the funding per learner”; “...redirected investment towards provision for."— Presentation transcript:
16-19 Funding Statement Dec 2010 “Real-terms reduction in the funding per learner”; “...redirected investment towards provision for disadvantaged young people to help narrow the gap in educational performance, and we have maintained the budget for specialist provision for LLDD aged 16-24.”
“Convergence of funding...” Convergence of funding for 16-19s between schools and colleges. Reduction in average funding per learner of around 3%, although current rates for LLDD will be maintained. Funds will be redirected using the disadvantage uplift and the ALS elements of the funding formula.
Overview of ALS funding: ALS forms part of the funding allocation; Based on a historic formula which is updated annually to reflect change in learner make up; It is meant to reimburse the costs incurred in providing support to a learner to allow them to achieve their primary learning goal (overheads currently have to be covered through core funding).
Overview of ALS funding (continued) 16-18 learners funded by YPLA (60% based on GCSE points of entry, 40% negotiated); Adult learners funded by SFA (low-level claims – historic level of study) LDD Learners aged 19-24 will continue to be funded separately. (Needing over 5½ k is the SFA/ YPLA definition for an LDD learner, not whether they have a 139a statement or not).
What do you need to do? Try to record broadly the same amount of activity on the ILR as the funding you have been allocated. Not subject to funding audit (but not clear if this will remain the case). Not subject to reconciliation, but focus will be placed on ensuring the funds have been used for purpose intended. No virement between 16-18 and 19+ ALS, so monitor carefully in-year.
Other points of interest: ALS allocation and SLN numbers are unrelated, so the “ALS ratio per SLN” which you see on your MIS reports are meaningless. What matters is the “ALS in ILR” column (what you’ve recorded as your actual costs) compared to your allocation. If you run out of ALS money, do you still need to provide support because of DDA implications? The 5½ k for high-level support is the planned ALS at the start of the year; the guidance says you don’t need to change the forms to show what you actually spent.
Points of interest (continued) If a learner doesn’t attend a session, we can still claim against ALS allocation as the staff time/ pay is still a cost to us. Small group rate should only be applied because you decided that it would be a small group based on the learners’ needs, not because you couldn’t recruit enough learners! Instead of small group rate, you can recruit more learners and put in 2 tutors.
Points of interest (continued) You can’t make a “profit” on ALS, so your claim should reflect the actual costs incurred. Purpose of global reconciliation is to ensure you can support the volume of activity on the ILR, through demonstrating/ reconciling them to the costs incurred. Get as much ALS onto the system for the first ILR return as possible as the next year’s allocation is decided in Jan/ Feb.
The future of ALS For 11/12, no substantial change to funding methodology other than the fact that allocation for LLDD (i.e claims over 5½ k) will be shown separately. Merging the ALS LDD streams – piloting in 11/12, for 12/13. The3 ALS funding streams being merged are FE ALS allocation, Independent Specialist Provider ALS funding, and Schools SEN funding. FE colleges present better value for money than other providers, so possibly an opportunity to talk to LA and see if they’d like to send learners to us?