- Section A Summary of changes
- Section B Indicative funding summaries
- Section C Funding data reconciliations
- Annex A List of abbreviations
- Appendix 1 HEIFES09 re-creation algorithms
- Appendix 2 Troubleshooting the differences between HEIFES09 and the HEIFES09 re-creation
- Appendix 3 Problems of fit with the HEIFES09 re-creation algorithms
- Appendix 4 CFEE09 re-creation algorithms
- Appendix 5 Troubleshooting the differences between CFEE09 and the CFEE09 re-creation
- Appendix 6 Problems of fit with the CFEE09 re-creation algorithms
- Appendix 7 Derived statistics that may inform the 2011-12 WP allocations algorithms
- Appendix 8 Derived statistics that may inform the 2011-12 TESS allocation algorithms
- Appendix 9 Derived statistics that may inform the 2011-12 partial completion weighting
1. This document describes:
- how we used 2009-10 Data Service learner data to inform 2011-12 funding allocations
- how we used 2009-10 learner data to monitor returns made to HEFCE
- the responses required from colleges to these monitoring processes.
2. This document, with its accompanying appendices, consists of the following information:
- how we used individualised learner record (ILR) data to inform the 2011-12 widening participation (WP) allocations
- how we used ILR data to inform the 2011-12 teaching enhancement and student success (TESS) allocations
- how we used ILR data to inform the 2011-12 partial completion weighting
- the comparison of Higher Education in Further Education: Students Survey 2009-10 (HEIFES09) with 2009-10 ILR F05 data
- the comparison of the aggregate return to monitor 2009-10 co-funded employer engagement student numbers (CFEE09) with 2009-10 ILR F05 data.
3. Our recurrent grants to colleges are almost entirely allocated by formula and informed by data provided by colleges.
4. We use individualised student data submitted to the Data Service to inform some elements of our teaching grant: funding for WP and TESS and the weighting factor for student partial completions. This document explains how we expect to do so for our 2011-12 funding allocations. Alongside this, we are releasing data to colleges, via our extranet, showing indicative outcomes for these elements of teaching grant derived from their 2009-10 ILR data.
5. We also use the ILR data to reconcile against aggregate data returns that institutions have previously submitted directly to us: the HEIFES and CFEE student data returns. This involves reconstructing for all institutions what the original student data returns for the college would have looked like if they had been based on their ILR data: we are releasing these outputs to all colleges via our extranet. Where differences between the original and re-created returns result in significant funding discrepancies, we will select the college to go through a reconciliation process (the 'derived statistics exercise'), which involves explaining the reasons for data differences and, if necessary, submitting amendments to their ILR data. At the end of the process, we will treat the final (amended) ILR data as superseding the original HEIFES or CFEE returns and will implement any consequential funding adjustments for all relevant years (subject to an appeals process where appropriate). This document explains the algorithms we use to reconstruct the HEIFES student data from the ILR return and the processes involved where a college is required to respond to the reconciliation exercise.
6. If we find, either through reconciliations with ILR data, or any data audit, that data do not reflect the outturn position for the year, and that this has resulted in colleges receiving incorrect funding or student number allocations, then we will adjust these accordingly. This is subject, where appropriate, to an appeals process and the availability of our funds.
7. We are confident that this exercise continues to improve the data quality of returns to both the Data Service and HEFCE. It also increases our understanding of data quality issues that relate to these returns.
Sections and appendices
8. Sections A to C describe how we will use ILR data for this exercise. The technical appendices describe the algorithms we will use.
9. We expect colleges to review all the outputs that we have derived from their ILR data, with a view to understanding how their data are used for funding purposes and identifying any possible discrepancies in their ILR or HEIFES data.
Institutions wishing to correct ILR data that affect 2011-12 funding
10. We use 2009-10 ILR data to inform some elements of our teaching grant calculations for 2011-12. If errors are identified in ILR data, colleges may inform us of these errors by submitting an action plan. The timetable for submission of an action plan and sign-off for amendments may be found in paragraph 14.
Institutions required to respond to a reconciliation of 2009-10 student data
11. We will write to heads of colleges, copied to HEIFES contacts specifying whether a response is required to any part of this exercise. Notwithstanding the selection thresholds, we may also ask for further information from any college about their data, including in respect of any of the comparisons between their ILR and other data returns. This may result ultimately in adjustments to grant, where appropriate.
12. Where a response is required, action plans must be returned by Friday 20 May 2011.
13. The final deadline for receipt of amendments to ILR data and overrides to primary derived fields detailed in the action plans is Friday 3 June 2011.
14. The following timetable shows the critical deadlines for the exercise.
|11 May 2011||Deadline for receipt of action plans for colleges wishing to make amendments for their WP and TESS allocations|
|20 May 2011||Deadline for receipt of final action plans produced by each college required to respond|
|25 May 2011||Deadline for sign-off for colleges wishing to make amendments for their WP and TESS allocations|
|3 June 2011||Deadline for submitting amendments and overrides to primary derived fields for each college required to respond|
|17 June 2011||Final deadline for sign-off for 2009-10 ILR data amendments and overrides to primary derived fields as detailed in action plans for each college required to respond|