Individualised Learner Record (ILR) training

• Definitions of key fields:
  • Learner reference number
  • Family name
  • Given names
  • Date of birth
  • Domicile
  • Sex
  • DLA
  • LLDDHealthProb
  • LLDDCat
  • PrimaryLLDD
  • Ethnicity
  • UCASAppID and UCASPerID
  • SSN
  • SOC2000 and SEC
  • QUALENT3
• What we use these for
• What we expect from providers in determining these
• Evidence that should be kept
• Common issues found
• Examples
• Improving data quality.

The requirement is that providers can evidence that the names and date of birth returned match official identification. A record that this has been checked can be kept in whatever way the provider chooses.

A signature on a form or a checkbox in a student record system would both be fine as they would allow verification that the checks have taken place.

Whichever way providers choose to record that the necessary checks have been done, it’s worth ensuring that there is a way for the staff member conducting the check to add a note.

For example, a note to explain the difference would be useful if the student has used a shortened version of their name on their enrolment form but their full name is recorded in the student record system and the ILR.

This does not need a complicated process. If the checks are recorded on enrolment forms the staff member could just add the full name onto that form.

Providers will have their own policies for the collection and storage of personal data, and these should be followed. We cannot advise on these.

Where providers do choose to take and maintain copies of identification or qualification certificates, then this can allow double checking of ILR field values and improve data quality.

Where providers do not take copies, then alternative approaches to evidencing that the necessary checks have been conducted should be implemented.

We expect names returned to match official identification and middle names should be included. Names are used to link across different data sets, and we may be unable to do this if middle names are not included.

The main problem is with linking the ILR data to other data sources for analysis purposes. When official ID is checked then any middle names can be identified and recorded.

Yes, when this has been provided. We encourage providers to return this field where possible as it reduces reliance on less precise matching techniques.

Providers can check tariff tables on the UCAS website.

Providers need to be able to verify that QUALENT3 is accurate so need to have processes in place to check that information gathered from students is accurate. This should include checking qualification certificates where data from UCAS or the PLR cannot be obtained.

Students may not provide sufficient information on their qualifications to code QUALENT3. We often see that where providers ask students to indicate the level of qualifications they hold on entry, this is not done correctly. Providers should therefore be cautious in their treatment of qualification on entry information obtained from students.

If it proves impossible to check certificates, or other evidence of qualifications, then providers should ensure that an audit trail to the value returned as QUALENT3 is maintained.

Usually, yes. However, if a student leaves a provider having completed a foundation degree then returns sometime later having applied to take a top-up qualification, the top-up would be treated as a new instance.

If the student is essentially continuing with an agreed suspension of study, then we would usually expect this to be treated as the same instance. If the student leaves the provider, takes a break then reapplies then we would expect this to be treated as a new instance.

Yes. Study towards both learning aims should be treated as one instance.