« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER THREE APPLYING FOR ILA SCOTLAND FUNDING
3.1 This chapter examines respondents' experiences of ILA Scotland from the time of first hearing about the scheme, through application, selecting a course and administering the learning token.
Sources of information
3.2 The questions that were asked about sources of information differed between the two offers 24, but it was clear that TV and radio were common sources of information and were also influential in encouraging people to apply. For ILA100, the ILA website and the individual learning provider were also seen as effective sources of information, while for ILA200 word of mouth was particularly influential when it was used.
ILA helpline and advice about ILA
3.3 There were high levels of satisfaction with the ILA helpline among those on both offers (90% of ILA200 respondents and 87% of ILA100 respondents were satisfied), and in each offer around three in four respondents felt that there was sufficient information and guidance available to them to help select a course that was most suited to their needs. In both offers, the majority of people had not used any other source of information other than the ILA helpline during the ILA application process (83% for ILA200, 84% for ILA100).
Application process
3.4 The vast majority of respondents found the ILA application process straightforward (96% in ILA200, 93% in ILA100), and said that the documentation received during the application process was helpful (96% in ILA200, 93% in ILA100).
3.5 The minority of respondents who did not find the application process straightforward said this was because of what was perceived to be a lack of or contradictory information, the size or complexity of the form or guidance, or the length of time the application took. Where documentation was not seen as helpful (again this applied to only a minority of respondents), this was because of a perception that there was not enough - or conflicting - information on which courses the funding could be used for, or because of the late arrival of forms or the learning token.
3.6 In both offers, around one in five respondents had to be contacted again before they applied for funds, but the majority of these said that they would still have applied for funds without the follow-up telephone call (82% in ILA200, 76% in ILA100).
3.7 In the survey of unconverted enquiries, the most common reasons for not returning the application form were a general change of mind (13% for ILA200, 16% for ILA100), the respondent being too busy (13% and 16% respectively), and the respondent not being eligible for funding (12% and 18% respectively).
3.8 Reflecting the views of successful applicants that the application process was straightforward, nearly all of the unconverted enquirers interviewed said that the application form was easy to understand (92% enquiring about ILA200 agreed and 95% ILA100), and the majority thought the form was about the right length (80% and 85% respectively). Six in ten remembered receiving additional guidance with their application form (59% for ILA200, 57% for ILA100), and almost all found this guidance easy to understand (94% ILA200, 95% ILA100) and useful (88% and 89% respectively).
3.9 Slightly more problematic was the income assessment section of the form: although the majority (83%) of those enquiring about ILA200 found, or thought they would find, the income assessment section of the form easy to complete, 18% felt they would have had difficulties providing the supporting documents 25. When asked why they thought they would find providing the documentation difficult, the most commonly mentioned reason was a lack of documents - either that they did not have them or could not find them (37% of those who thought they would find providing the documentation difficult). Two in ten (19%) respondents who thought they would have difficulties said this was because they were self employed. Other reasons included that the respondent had no job (8%), or no income (7%).
Learning tokens and payment
3.10 Of those who had started an ILA funded course, the majority said they were asked for their learning token by the learning provider (87% in ILA200, 80% in ILA100), and similar proportions understood that they had to hand in their learning token when they began their course (84% in ILA200, 82% in ILA100). In ILA200, those aged over 50 were less likely to understand that they had to hand in their learning token (77%), but this difference did not apply to ILA100.
« Previous | Contents | Next »