You are in :
  HEFCE

 

Report 00/36

Better accountability for higher education

Summary of a review for the HEFCE

by PA Consulting

Foreword

Universities and colleges have to be accountable for their use of funds from a range of public and private sources. However, there are increasing concerns that the demands of accountability are placing too great a burden on the higher education sector. In the light of those concerns, the HEFCE commissioned this review from PA Consulting. It aims to assess and measure the extent of the accountability burden experienced by universities and colleges; to identify the factors generating that burden; and to recommend possible improvements.

From fieldwork with institutions and stakeholder organisations, the report concludes that:

  • institutions’ perceptions of significant and growing accountability demands are substantiated, although the associated burden (that is, costs that would not otherwise be incurred) varies greatly according to institutions’ internal management systems and priorities
  • stakeholders feel that current accountability arrangements often fail to deliver the appropriate levels of assurance and confidence, which has led to pressures for additional information requirements and checks on institutional performance
  • failures of communication between stakeholder organisations and with institutions have led to duplicated accountability requirements and activities, and to misunderstandings over stakeholders’ intentions and expectations, all of which have generated avoidable costs.

The emergent picture is of accountability arrangements that have accumulated over many years, and which in many ways now fail to meet modern needs or circumstances. In their report, the consultants propose a model for more effective and positive accountability relationships, and identify specific ways for stakeholders and institutions to work together to develop more cost-effective arrangements.

I greatly welcome these proposals, which build on the work already begun to reduce accountability demands. For example, my understanding is that the Quality Assurance Agency will be developing the “lighter touch” in its new methodology for quality assurance in universities and colleges.

The thrust of this report has been well received by all the major funding agencies for higher education and their Government stakeholders, and also by the sector’s representative bodies, CVCP and SCOP. All these stakeholders have joined together in a Higher Education Forum and have committed to work towards streamlined and more positive accountability relationships, built upon good institutional management practices and systems.

The HE Forum held an inaugural meeting in July, at which five development projects were commissioned as first steps towards better accountability relationships. The projects are to advise upon:

  • common formats for communicating stakeholders’ policy objectives and accountability requirements within different funding relationships
  • opportunities for streamlining and securing better value from student data reports
  • more efficient and effective methods for assuring the probity of institutions’ management of public funding
  • cost-effective methods for assessing the costs and impacts of accountability requirements for institutions and stakeholders
  • opportunities for aligning different stakeholders’ interests in student-related policy objectives – such as improving access, progression, and employment prospects.

The HE Forum will meet again in the autumn to review progress on these projects. Meanwhile, our priority is to engage the whole sector in shaping the vision for better accountability. We will be working with CVCP and SCOP to consult with the universities and colleges as the programme moves forward, both on the specific projects and on the wider issues identified here. Meanwhile, we would welcome views from institutions and other stakeholders on the report and its proposals.

 

Sir Brian Fender
Chief Executive, HEFCE

Download

Better accountability for higher education
August 2000
© PA Consulting Group 2000
ISBN 1-902369-07-6