Report 99/38

Additional student places and funds 1999-2000: Outcome of bids

Summary

Purpose

1. This document announces the outcome of the bids for additional student places and funds for 1999-2000.

Key points

The competition

2. For the first time, all higher education institutions (HEIs) directly funded by the HEFCE and all colleges directly funded by the FEFC were eligible to bid. These included institutions wishing to offer HE courses for the first time in 1999-2000. We received 534 bids, of which 177 were from HEIs and 357 from FE sector colleges. They sought a total of 79,033 additional places: 19,123 at degree level and above, and 59,910 below degree level. All student numbers in this report are expressed as headcounts.

3. We have allocated a total of 44,928 new places in the competition: 12,898 at degree level or above, and 32,030 below degree level. These are distributed across 89 HEIs and 133 FE sector colleges. FE sector colleges won 521 places at degree level and above, and 16,616 below degree level. Annex B gives details of the successful bids.

In-built growth

4. Outside the competition, FE colleges whose HE provision will be funded directly by us for the first time in 1999-2000 reported in-built growth. They quantified this as 2,223 places needed to support the second year of courses below degree level which they started up in 1998-99. We have additionally funded all these places.

5. The combination of the competition and meeting in-built growth means that the Council will fund 47,151 extra HE places into the sector. This exceeds the Government’s targets for full-time degree places (by 47 per cent), and for places below degree level (by more than 100 per cent). It offers a substantial boost to local HE provision in FE sector colleges.

Action required

6. No action is required.

Introduction

7. In October 1997, following consultation with institutions, we announced the overall framework for allocating additional student places and funds (HEFCE 20/97 and 98/56). This was to enable institutions to:

- respond strategically to changes in student demand and to changes in their environment

- respond to regional needs and develop innovative approaches to delivering HE

- respond to the national priorities of expanding provision below degree level and widening access to HE

- give students the opportunity to undertake high quality study at institutions of their choice.

This framework was set up for three years, subject to annual changes to our specific priorities in response to national and institutional objectives.

8. In October 1998, we invited bids that would address one or more of the following specific priorities:

- rewarding high quality in learning and teaching

- widening access to HE by offering programmes which lead to qualifications below degree level

- widening access to HE by increasing the range of HE options within a region, particularly by focusing the additional provision in FE sector colleges

- widening access to HE by helping to meet the skill shortages for graduates.

9. We emphasised the particular contribution to widening access that FE sector colleges can make. They can, for example, improve local access in geographical areas not served by an HEI, offer particular subject specialisms and courses not well covered by HEIs, and provide what many students perceive as a more supportive learning environment.

10. In addition, we set generic criteria, requiring all proposals to:

- show how the bid fitted with the institution’s mission, strategy, priorities and strengths; and to show how the institution would deal with the impact of the bid on its infrastructure and resources

- explain how the bid would meet student demand and other external demand, such as labour market demand where relevant

- provide information about the institution’s own assessment of the quality of its learning and teaching, and any external assessments it had received.

We also said we would look favourably on bids which provided identified benefits to students through developments in the curriculum or its delivery.

11. We did not set a minimum or maximum level of bid, but encouraged institutions to submit proposals which would have a significant impact upon provision, while still being realistic about their rate of growth.

The Competition

Number of places available

12. All student numbers in this report are expressed as headcounts. We received competitive bids as follows:

13. Last year, the Government announced that it would make available funds to support 36,000 additional student places for 1999-2000, distributed as follows:

14. During 1998-99, a further 5,000 full-time places became available as a result of holdback from HEFCE-funded institutions who had recruited award holders below their target. The advisory group for the initiative agreed that, within the total additional places available, numbers should be transferred from full-time and part-time postgraduate targets and from part-time degree targets to increase the numbers available for places below degree level. Some institutions also asked for places allocated in the 1999-2000 competition to be phased over two years.

15. The final allocation was:

In addition, outside the competition, 2,223 places below degree level were allocated to FE colleges to support the second year of new courses.

The assessment process

16. Bids were assessed by an advisory group, which had the same membership as last year, with the addition of an FEFC observer (see Annex A). The group received additional information from external bodies, including the Quality Assurance Agency, the FEFC, the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service and Edexcel.

17. The group assessed bids primarily on the degree to which they met the generic criteria and specific priorities set out in paragraphs 8 and 10 above. The resulting scores cast bids into a matrix:

18. Members agreed in principle to meet in full the numbers bid for in matrix boxes 1a, 1b and 2a, subject to:

- the resolution of specific queries on some bids

- the distribution of subjects within sub-regions (taking account of gaps and areas of saturation)

- potentially, issues of proportionality across regions

- comments from the Council’s regional consultants on the fit of bids with the institution’s wider strategy

- the scale of the bid in relation to the institution’s current provision and recruitment record.

19. These issues were examined, and the resulting full-time numbers in the three matrix boxes exceeded the numbers available. The full-time numbers sought in boxes 1b and 2a were therefore uniformly scaled to 90 per cent. This process also released some full-time numbers to support bids in box 2b: for example, to reward nuggets of quality, or exceptional fit with employer demand, or to address issues referred to above.

20. Part-time places were also heavily over-subscribed. The advisory group supported in full the part-time bids in matrix boxes 1a, 1b and 2a. However, some bids in these boxes were moderated after taking into account the existing provision available within sub-regions, and the scale of the bid in relation to the institution’s current HE provision. Members also agreed to allocate a limited number of places to part-time bids in box 2b. They decided not to allocate very small numbers of places at first degree level and below where these were unlikely to have a significant impact upon provision.

21. The HEFCE Board endorsed the group’s recommendations at its meeting on 25 February. During March, we sent offers of places to bidders, with details of the other places we were offering in their region. This enabled them to consider issues of recruitment in the light of their own success and that of others. At the same time, we informed unsuccessful bidders of the outcome. We gave both groups general feedback on the exercise and offered further confidential feedback if they wished.

Comments

22. The advisory group made a number of general observations on the content and quality of the bids:

a. The group was reassured to see the mix and balance of subjects for which numbers were sought (see discussion below). But members expressed concern at the low demand from bidders for part-time places at degree level, and wondered whether as a Council we were doing enough to stimulate demand for these places.

b. Members were pleased to see that many institutions had picked up on the steer to bid for numbers which would have ‘a significant impact’ upon provision, while still being realistic about their rate of growth.

c. Despite the advice given in the bidding invitation, many institutions continued to claim to address several or all of the specific priorities; these were less successful than they might have been if they had focused their bids more directly. Only 37 bids nailed their colours to the single mast of ‘high quality’. And members were concerned by the number of bids claiming to address widening participation while giving little attention to student progression, either academically or through transferable skills. Institutions which submitted a raft of bids, each claiming individually to address an institutional priority, generally showed a lack of coherence.

d. Members were mindful of the quality of the student HE experience: some new and small providers proposing start-ups in expensive subject areas set themselves a challenging task.

e. Members were pleased to see evidence of sustained collaborative networking. In contrast, they took a dim view of those geographically close institutions which – far from collaborating – showed no evidence of even talking to each other to rationalise their bids, ensure coherence in the wider pattern of provision, and optimise their chances of success.

Subject mix

23. The most popular subjects across the sector are:

- art, design, communication, film, television

- information and computer sciences

- business and management studies, accounting, finance.

Some way behind come:

- hospitality, leisure, recreation, sports, tourism

- subjects allied to medicine, nursing, midwifery, community care

- bioscience, including forestry, agriculture and food science.

24. Over 24 subject centres, the relative rates of growth in particular subjects does not vary between degree and below degree level provision. Only in two subject centres are degree and below degree provision on different trajectories:

- mathematics, statistics, operational research (buoyant at degree level)

- performing arts, including drama, dance, music (rising at sub-degree level).

25. Annex C shows the distribution of allocations by subject and level, including the subject mix in detail for each region. Apart from the popular subjects discussed in paragraph 23, engineering places are well-represented in the East and West Midlands and Eastern regions, languages in London, physical sciences and environmental studies in the South East, education studies and engineering in the South West.

Controls

26. Our aim is to ensure that the additional student places allocated for 1999-2000 and thereafter generate the planned increases in places below degree level. There will be little gained from allocating new places below degree level if at the same time institutions convert existing places below degree into degree places. From 1999-2000, we will expect institutions which secure additional places below degree level to deliver a minimum number of such places. This will be calculated as the full-time equivalent provided in the previous year plus the additional numbers secured.

27. The allocation of funds for teaching is informed by the data we collect annually from institutions. We will continue to audit these data selectively in this and future funding exercises. The funds and student places allocated to successful bids will be subject to the conditions of grant set down in the funding agreement between the Council and each institution.

Annex A

Membership of the advisory group

Annex B

Allocations of additional student places and funds

The tables show, for each region, the allocations made for the academic year 1999-2000 and those phased into 2000-2001.

The tables are not shown in the electronic version of this document. Please contact HEFCE Publications for a full version of the tables.