Also note that SA are adding certificate no and issue date to the NAT00130 files from 1 July
Offer to provide copy of the “Keeping up with VET” document – at EMT stall.
Avetmiss Master Class 2
for funding claims in NSWand some future directions
Martyn Webster BSc (Comp) University of NSW Corporate IT Qantas & Fosters First Strike Solutions Customised MS-Access databases Enquiry Mate for Trainers VET Student Records System
Introduction What’s in the NAT files? Special rules for NSW DEC New features of the APL page site Reporting of non-funded students AVETMISS 7: evolution or revolution? What “National Student Identifier”? Is the MySkills web site the ultimate answer?
Change is the only constant I assume you are already experts Not a comprehensive tutorial... More a grab-bag of interesting special cases ..and then some musing about the future
NAT file structure Under the bonnet Provider Student No must be consistent Location Id must also be consistent
Outcome Codes under AVETMISS 6.1 In NSW: 66 – Did not start (blank) – Not yet available 70, 90, 52, 54 not valid for claims Note the change in terminology for outcome 30 ? What happened to: 53 - Recognition of current competency granted 54 - Recognition of current competency not granted
Your self-validation is not your own Claiming for groups of students When has a unit really started? TCID delay dilemma fixed New rules for Credit Transfer APL contract rules vs APL system rules When the first assessment is also the last Processing a withdrawal Course/Site Identifiers The “training plan completed” flag Future funding models
Your self-validation is not your own Every self-validation process is logged and recorded for several years at least. Those records can be used to evaluate your administrative capability in retrospect. More attempts and more errors are considered a sign of administrative problems. That record has been used in very superfluous ways to influence funding allocations. “Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull.” George Orwell “1984”
Claiming for groups of students DEC request that providers submit claims for multiple students when possible. Unless you have groups of students who consistently complete (or fail to complete) units on the same day, this is problematic. Re-assessment, absences and other delays make tracking the claim stages impractical. Our advice is to not even try (in most cases).
When has a unit really started? When the student has undertaken some assessable activity... and you can prove it! How to tell if a distance student has started a unit or a course Reporting all units as started in the initial claim is very risky ... (even if it’s true).
TCID delay dilemma fixed Initial claims due within 28 days if the later of: The student starting a unit OR The funding being approved (i.e. the TCID being allocated) So that headache has been cleared up at least
New rules for Credit Transfer Credit Transfer (outcome 60) is not a payable outcome All stage payments will be reduced on a pro-rata basis (but how is it calculated exactly?) If CT is involved, the initial claim must include all units that will be granted CT and all units. Units not yet started must be given estimated future start dates. Refer to NSW Training Market: Fact Sheet #38
APL contract rules vs APL system rules Two different sets of rules: APL Contract Mid-way claim is due within 28 days of completing an assessment activity in half of the non-CT units in the course APL Page Mid-way claim is LATE if not lodged within 28 days of the start of the last reported unit. Only the APL Contract matters... But easier if you can keep to the claim system rules too.
When the first assessment is also the last A strategy to mitigate late lodgements due to remote or external assessors delaying delivery of assessments: • Designate a properly qualified “chief assessor”. • Add a cover sheet to each assessment document. • The “chief assessor” signs off and dates each outcome, checking that everything has been done correctly and perhaps moderating selected results. • The sign-off date then becomes the official date the student was deemed competent by the RTO, allowing you to avoid late lodgements and also add rigour to your assessment process.
Processing a withdrawal Steps vary by state. In NSW... • Any units partly completed given Withdrawn (40) outcome. • Any units not started given a Did Not Start (66) outcome. • Create a NAT00130 (Qualification) record with “N” in the Certificate Issued field. • Claims process returns a DROPOUT result... (harsh?)
Course/Site Identifiers Allocated to one or more students with the same: • Year of study • Course (qualification code) • Site (identified by a separately registered Site Id) • Delivery method They may be allocated by DEC or by the RTO via the APL page, depending on the funding arrangements. Added to the end of the NAT00120 record in NSW. Booking Id is a related but different identifier.
The “training plan completed” flag Another NSW specific addition to the NAT00120 records. Indicates if a training plan has been fully developed. Only required for apprenticeships/traineeship courses. Can be “Y” or “N” in the initial claim. Should be “Y” by the mid-way claim. ...but is anybody checking?
Future funding models Fee-Help for VET at Cert III level coming... but when and how? (Uses the HEIMS reporting system) NWDF employer / ISC channelled funding models. (Use adhoc monthly reporting systems on spreadsheets) The controversial student-entitlement model now ratified by the NSSC. Debate over how to implement in each state. The Victorian “adjustment” - seriously reduce funding hourly rate for some (down to $1.50/hour) and increase others, but let the providers set the actual price. TAFEs are doubleplusunhappy!
New students listed until the initial claim Specify the units for a funded qualification Course/Site Id self-creation and download Correcting of student name (once only) New up-to-date Fact Sheets and FAQs
Not happening in NSW (neither ASQA or NSW DEC require it this year) Annually in ACT Quarterly in SA Monthly in QLD (some funding schemes require reporting of all activity) Monthly CQR in SA and WA It won’t happen overnight, but...
Removal of redundant statistical fields Additional fields XML format put on hold – too much change? New conventions for unit code updates Cracks in the competency identifiers?
Removal of redundant statistical fields ASGC location codes officially ignored in AVETMISS 6.1 but most state funding bodies systems still expect it. Many are already ignored due to accuracy issues... and they can be derived from reference data anyway. Candidates for removal: ASGC location code (already gone in theory) ANZSCO occupation code Field of Education Qualification Names & Unit/Module Names (the codes should be enough)
Additional fields Employer details Existing worker flag State student number (LUI, VSN) Internal provider course code Qualification start and end dates Software name and version
XML format put on hold – too much change? XML is the (relatively) new format for storing data in text files. Widely used because it allows for forward and backward compatibility of data and exchange of files across countries, sectors, platforms and applications. Even Office 2007 and 2010 use it (under the bonnet). The change from fixed width text to XML may be too much of a technical challenge. It has now been ruled out for AVETMISS 7 but may be considered again for future releases.
New conventions for unit code updates NSSC decided that there were too many superficial changes causing new competency codes after complaints from providers. ISCs directed to retain existing codes unless there is a functional change to a unit. Newly created codes will not have the letter suffix at all. Some ISCs are doing this but others are not. There is some confusion about the change because it has not been clearly and widely explained. Practitioners producing mapping documents not happy with the loss of document version control.
Cracks in the competency identifiers? The Certificate III in Plumbing horror story. One unit was removed and another unit changed code (but not content) to the code of the removed unit! Is this the start of a break-down or just an isolated incident?
Student numbering is the new reality show (the bureaucrats just can’t get enough of them) NSI officially part of AQTF 2007 The NSI will cover the VET area only Perpetually deferred VSN experience revealed a few challenges The NSI is the key enabling mechanism for reform of the national VET records system
CQR systems operate in WA and SA (all RTOs report monthly the essential data for all certificates and statements issued) NCVER now talking about extending MySkills (to a national parchment register like CQR) A national register would have many benefits Fixes the “30-year retention” problem Fixes the “forged parchment” problem Fixes the “lost parchment” problem Fixes the “missing statistical data” problem Lower data collection burden than AVETMISS
Change is the only constant My tips for keeping up to date... Linked-In “The social network for grown-ups” Subscribe to newsletters DEC Workshops HTAN: Your local RTO network ACPET and VELG seminars & conferences
Please visit us at the Enquiry Mate for Trainers display in the marketplace