Report 98/14

Additional student numbers and funds

Outcome of bids for 1998-99

Executive summary

Purpose

1. This report announces the outcome of the competition for additional student numbers and funds for 1998-99.

Key points

2. Seventy per cent of eligible institutions took part in the competition, and we received 184 bids. These sought 14,939 full-time undergraduate places, 7,769 part-time undergraduate places, and 799 postgraduate taught places.

3. We have now offered 5,440 full-time undergraduate places, 335 full-time postgraduate taught, 7,359 part-time undergraduate places, and 442 part-time postgraduate taught. The full-time places include 2,932 at sub-degree level, and just over a third of these have been allocated directly to further education colleges. Seven per cent of places are at postgraduate level. In all, 8,280 of the allocations address widening access to higher education. Annex B gives details of the successful bids.

Action required

4. No action is required.

Background

5. We issued Circular 20/97 in October last year, inviting bids for additional funded places from higher education institutions and further education colleges directly funded by the Council. Our aim was to enable institutions to respond strategically to changes in student demand and to changes in their environment.

6. We said that bids had to achieve threshold - or generic - criteria. These were:

• quality
• student demand
• institutional strategy
• institutional investment.

7. They then had to address at least one of four specific criteria:

• widening access
• innovation
• regional needs
• expanding sub-degree provision.

8. Collaborative bids also had to demonstrate the expected benefits of the collaboration. We did not set a minimum or maximum level of bid, but encouraged institutions to submit bids which would have a significant effect and would impact upon provision regionally or nationally.

The assessment process

9. We formed an advisory group to assess bids and make recommendations. We sought nominations for membership from the Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals, the Standing Conference of Principals, and the Confederation of British Industry. Annex A lists the membership of the group.

10. The group assessed bids primarily on how well they met first the generic criteria and second the specific criteria in the bidding invitation. This process cast bids into a matrix (see below):

Bids which failed to meet a threshold of performance against the generic criteria (3a, 3b, and 3c) were removed from the frame.

11. Institutions bid for over 15,000 full-time places - far more than were available. The group therefore decided to allocate full-time numbers only to bids within boxes 1a, 2a, 1b and 2b. Members decided in principle to meet 1a bids in full, and to make part-offers to those within boxes 1b and 2a. They treated 2b bids more stringently.

12. For part-time places, the group was able to meet all the bids in boxes 1a to 2c in full, provided that they satisfied the other criteria.

13. In considering each case, the group also took into account:

• the relationship between the overall size of the bid and the amount of current HE activity in the institution
• the size of the bid (capping all full-time bids at a maximum of 300)
• the minimum numbers requested by the institution.

14. The HEFCE Board endorsed the group's recommendations at its meeting on 26 February 1998.

15. As a result, we have offered 5,440 full-time undergraduate places, 335 full-time postgraduate taught, 7,359 part-time undergraduate places, and 442 part-time postgraduate taught. The full-time places include 2,932 at sub-degree level, and just over a third of these have been allocated directly to further education colleges. Thirty-four further education colleges won a total of 1,023 full-time and 472 part-time places. In addition, we expect that higher education institutions will franchise to further education colleges up to 50 per cent of the sub-degree places awarded to them. Seven per cent of places are at postgraduate level. In all, 8,280 of the allocations address widening access to higher education. Annex B gives details of the successful bids.

Feedback

16. The group welcomed the wide response to the initiative, and the diversity of new developments proposed. However, institutions' own investment in the developments was not always very clear. Group members were also surprised that institutions made a relatively limited response to the specific criterion of innovation.

17. Overall, the best proposals focused on one or two specific criteria. Many claimed to meet all four specific criteria, and thereby set themselves a challenging task. Good bids distinguished themselves by their focus, conciseness and clarity. The quality of the proposals, in terms of how well they presented their case, varied a great deal: the strongest made clearly substantiated and realistic claims.

18. We intend that the overall framework for allocating funded student numbers will not change significantly for up to three years. However, specific criteria may change annually in response to national and institutional needs, as may the relative importance of specific and generic criteria. We expect to publish a bidding invitation for the 1999-2000 exercise within a few months.

Annex A

Membership of the advisory group

Annex B

Allocation of additional student numbers 1998-99

Key

FTUG = full-time undergraduate places
FTPGT = full-time postgraduate places
PTUG = part-time undergraduate places
PTPGT = part-time postgraduate places