Request 02/13

HESA 2000-01 derived statistics for funding allocations and monitoring

Executive summary (read on-line)

Order HEFCE 02/13

This document may be difficult to view on some computers, and the files may take a long time to print out. Printed copies of the document have been distributed to higher education institutions, and are available free from HEFCE publications.

Download

Request 02/13
[ MS Word 804K | Zipped Word 148K | Adobe PDF 1,014K | Zipped PDF 981K ]

Executive summary

Purpose

1.   This document describes the monitoring process we will use when comparing returns made to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) with other returns made to the HEFCE.

2.   This document is divided into four main parts:

• the comparison of the Higher Education Students Early Statistics survey (HESES) and HESA student data
• the comparison of Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) data and HESA staff data
• comparison of subject and cost centre allocations
• verification of data for publication.

Funding premiums

3.   The data included in the re-creation of HESES2000 from the HESA record will form the basis for calculating premiums based on the following:

• full-time mature undergraduate students
• the neighbourhood types of students
• students receiving a disabled students allowance.

4.   These premiums will be used in the funding allocations for 2002-03.

Key points

5.   Where we identify significant differences in any of the comparisons, we will write to the institutions concerned by 21 March 2002 and ask for an explanation. We may audit institutions that are unable to explain adequately the reasons for discrepancies.

6.   If we find, either through reconciliations with HESA data or any data audit, that institutions have received higher allocations than they should have done, then the funding for those institutions will be reduced accordingly. Any funding adjustments following the reconciliation of HESA and HESES data for 2000-01 are likely to affect the funding previously announced for 2000-01, and be consolidated into revised funding levels for all subsequent years. The thresholds we set for determining whether we require a response from institutions should not be interpreted as being the minimum amounts of holdback that we might effect. These are set out in HEFCE 00/31, 'Holdback of HEFCE grant 2000-01'.

Comparison of HESES and HESA student data

7.   Where we require a response, an action plan should be sent to Michelle Woodall detailing how the institution will reconcile the two data sources by 11 April 2002. We will agree details of the action plan, including a timetable for full response, by 26 April 2002. The agreed deadline for response will not be later than 14 June 2002.

8.   Where a response is required, guidance for submitting an action plan will be included in the letter to heads of institutions.

Comparison of RAE and HESA staff data

9.   Where we require a response it should be sent to Anne Southworth no later than 17 May 2002.

Comparison of subject and cost centre allocations

10.   Where we require a response it should be sent to Michelle Woodall no later than 10 May 2002.

Verification of data

11.   If institutions are concerned about the suitability for publication of franchised, campus or institutional profiles data they should contact Lisa Readdy by 18 April 2002. Where a response is not received by this date we will assume institutions are content with their data.

Action required

12.   Where we require a response it should be sent to the individuals named in paragraphs 7, 9, 10