HEFCE Report 00/17

Minority subjects: allocation of funding

Awards by the HEFCE 2000

Executive summary

Purpose

1. This document provides information about the outcome of the minority subjects initiative and the allocations to institutions.

   Key points

2. We received a total of 134 submissions for provision in 68 subjects from 36 English institutions and one in Northern Ireland, requesting in total £8,461,457. Following recommendations from the advisory group we have agreed to fund 59 submissions in 34 subjects at 18 English institutions at a total cost of £2,955,891 per annum. The Department for Higher and Further Education Training and Employment (DHFETE) will fund one submission in Northern Ireland at £37,500 per annum.

   Action required

3. No action is required.

   Background

4. The purpose of the initiative is to provide special funding, outside the formula-based funding for teaching and research, to support minority subjects where we are satisfied that continuing provision is in the national interest but might be at risk. This programme is intended to protect minority subjects where there is existing provision; it is not designed to support institutions wishing to establish new provision.
5. The total funding available under the minority subjects initiative was up to £3.5 million per year from 2000-01. (This excludes the special grant to be paid to the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in recognition of its position as a small specialist institution with an exceptional concentration of rare and minority subjects. The review of SOAS is in progress and is expected to be completed before June 2000.)
6. An invitation to apply for special funding for minority subjects was issued in August 1999 (HEFCE 99/47).

   Assessment

7. The submissions were assessed by an expert advisory group, which included representatives from higher education, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department of Trade and Industry. Advisory group members are listed in Annex A.
8. The group assessed each submission against the criteria set out in the invitation to bid for special funding. The criteria are listed at Annex B.
9. In keeping with the criteria, the advisory group did not recommend submissions where the subject was not the principal subject of study, or where the subject was a specialism of a broader umbrella subject. Similarly, the group did not support submissions for subjects known to exceed the threshold of 100 enrolments nationally. In the HESA record, Chinese, Japanese, Celtic Studies and Russian were each found to exceed the threshold of 100 students. Dutch and Sign Language exceeded the maximum student threshold on the basis of student numbers returned in submissions. The advisory group took into account provision in Wales and Scotland. It looked carefully at submissions for provision that was entirely at postgraduate level, and recommended these for funding in only a few exceptional cases.

Awards

10. In total we have funded 34 subjects in 18 institutions, at a total cost of £2,955,891 per annum. The DHFETE has agreed to fund one submission at a cost of £37,500 per annum. Annex C lists all the allocations for minority subjects funding. The grant will be paid from August 2000.

Monitoring

11. In keeping with our usual practice, the grant is subject to satisfactory monitoring. Monitoring will take place annually to establish that funded provision is still in place.

Further information

12. We will evaluate the minority subjects initiative by 2004. The review will assess the programme’s success in protecting provision for minority subjects, to inform future policy.

Annex A

Membership of the advisory panel

HEFCE Secretariat

Annex B

Eligibility criteria

1. Minority subjects are defined for present purposes as those subjects which:
   1. Are isolated academically from other subjects.
   2. Require the provision of significant specialist staffing.
   3. Do not enrol sufficient students nationally to enable them to operate at the ratios of students to staff which can usually be sustained through formula-based funding.
2. With regard to the last point above, we have defined this as no more than 100 students at one time throughout the UK. In many cases provision will be very much less than this: at the extreme there might be only one or two students enrolled in total in a five-year period.
3. Not all minority subjects will be supported by this programme. Institutions that currently receive special funding for minority subjects should not assume that this will continue. Our general policy on special (non-formula) funding continues to be that it should be provided only in cases where:
   1. The broad interests of teaching and research in higher education would in some way be damaged by the absence of the facility being funded.
   2. Alternative sources of funding are not reasonably available.
   3. In the absence of non-formula funding, the institutions would either have to withdraw the facility, or would be faced with diverting an unacceptable amount of teaching or research resource to support it.
4. The criteria for allocating special funding for minority subjects are consistent with this approach and have been drawn from those previously applied in this field. Institutions will have to show that:
   1. The low demand for the subject is an attribute across the UK and not peculiar to one institution. We will consider only subjects which throughout the UK, over the last four years, have on average had less than 100 students, across all years of study, registered in one academic year.
   2. It is unlikely in the foreseeable future that the subject will attract the ratio of students to staff possible in most other subjects.
   3. The continued provision of the subject in the UK will be in doubt without extra support.
   4. It is in the interests of the UK that provision for the subject should be maintained (see paragraph 5 below).
   5. The institution is currently providing the subject. The emphasis is on using the limited resources to safeguard existing provision rather than supporting new or emerging disciplines.
   6. The subject is normally available as the principal subject of study leading to a first degree or equivalent qualification.
   7. The subject is not a specialism under a much larger umbrella subject.
   8. High quality provision will be made in the subject.
5. For this purpose the national interest is defined as any of the following:
   1. The needs of diplomacy. This covers the full range of UK interests, influence and commitments overseas, and requires a supply of independent expertise to respond to the patterns of UK interests as they vary over time.
   2. The needs of industry and commerce. International trade and the development of overseas markets demand knowledge of local languages and cultures. Again, as international trading patterns change, so do the countries and regions about which knowledge is required.
   3. Maintenance of academic diversity. Minority subjects contribute to the diversity of provision by HEIs, and to maintaining the balance and breadth of discipline expertise in the UK. Such subjects by their nature depend upon a very small group of experts, and would quickly become in danger of disappearing if the number of new first degree entrants were allowed to decline too far. Once gone, the reintroduction of a subject would be unlikely.

Annex C

Allocations for minority subjects funding