HC 811 - Financial Support for Students at Alternative Higher Education Providers PDF Download

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215081625
Category : Education, Higher
Languages : en
Pages : 24

View

Book Description
Approximately 140 institutions offering higher education are termed 'alternative providers'. These alternative providers comprise a diverse range of organisations ranging from private companies to charitable institutions. They do not receive government grants directly but do access public funding through student loans which are used to pay their fees. Following the announcement of higher education reforms in 2011, and the associated increase in tuition fee loans, there has been substantial and rapid growth in the sector. Between 2010/11 and 2013/14, the number of students claiming support for courses at alternative providers rose from 7,000 to 53,000. Over the same period, the total amount of public money paid to students at alternative providers, through tuition fee loans and maintenance loans and grants, has risen from around £50 million to around £675 million. The Department has overall responsibility for oversight of publicly-funded higher education, including alternative providers with publicly-funded students. The Department did not learn from previous Government experience, furthermore, it has been slow to react to warning signs. The rapid expansion in numbers was concentrated in five colleges that accounted for 50% of the expansion. 20% of students receiving funding were not registered for a qualification and drop-out rates were very high in some institutions. There was also evidence from whistleblowers that proficiency in English language was not tested, that some institutions were recruiting students on the streets, and that students claiming funding were not attending colleges.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215085647
Category : Psychology
Languages : en
Pages : 25

View

Book Description
The Winterbourne View scandal in 2011 exposed the horrific abuse of people with learning difficulties and challenging behaviour in a private mental health hospital. Concerns were also raised about a number of other institutions. As a result, the Government committed to discharging those individuals for whom it was appropriate back into their homes and communities. However, since then, too many children and adults have continued to go into mental health hospitals, and to stay there unnecessarily, because of the lack of community alternatives. The number of people with learning disabilities remaining in hospital has not fallen, and has remained broadly the same at around 3,200. It was refreshing that NHS England took responsibility for this lack of progress and has now committed to develop a closure programme for large NHS mental health hospitals, along with a transition plan for the people with learning disabilities within these hospitals, from 2016-17. Discharges from hospital are being delayed because funding does not follow the individual when they are discharged into the community. This acts as a financial disincentive for local commissioners who have to bear the costs and responsibility for planning and commissioning community services. Delaying discharge has the effect of institutionalising people, making their reintegration into the community more difficult. Some local authorities' reluctance to accept and fund individuals in the community will be exacerbated by current financial constraints. The Department should set out its proposals for 'dowry-type' payments from NHS England to meet the costs of supporting people discharged from hospital.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215085582
Category : Business & Economics
Languages : en
Pages : 21

View

Book Description
Tax and tax reliefs are plainly different and require different accountability arrangements. Put simply tax is where you get money in through taxation and a tax relief is where you make a conscious decision to forgo that income. Some reliefs are structural parts of the system to ensure a more progressive system or avoid double taxation. But other reliefs, costing some £100 billion a year, are designed to deliver a policy objective that could be met instead through spending programmes. HM Treasury and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) do not keep track of those tax reliefs intended to influence behaviour. They do not adequately report to Parliament or the public on whether reliefs are working as intended and what they cost and whether they represent good value for money. While HMRC is accountable for implementing and monitoring all tax reliefs, its statements about the extent of its responsibilities are inconsistent with its actual practices. HMRC accepts it has a role to assess, evaluate and monitor reliefs, but is unable or unwilling to define or to categorise reliefs by their purpose. While HMRC accepts the need for reporting the costs of tax reliefs, it does not see the merit in assessing the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of reliefs, or considering their cost effectiveness alongside that of alternative policy instruments such as spending programmes. HMRC does not generally assess the effectiveness of reliefs with specific objectives although in a few instances it does consider their impact on taxpayer behaviour. HMRC's failure to articulate a set of principles to guide its management and reporting of tax reliefs is a serious omission which it now needs to rectify.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215084489
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 21

View

Book Description
Given financial constraints, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Environment Agency have done a good job in improving the cost effectiveness of their approach to flood risk management. They have adopted rational methods to prioritise spending on both new capital flood defences and maintaining existing ones. However, risks remain to the sustainability of current levels of flood protection. The Agency will need to make difficult decisions about how it prioritises its maintenance budget, including some defences where it will need to reduce or stop maintenance. In these cases, there is a risk that lack of maintenance will mean that capital costs are incurred sooner, when defences require replacement earlier. Since our evidence session, the Agency has published a long term investment strategy, which presents a number of flooding scenarios and outlines how much funding would be needed to protect against these.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215085779
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 41

View

Book Description
This report summarises the key areas of the Committee's work over the past five years. It draws out the areas where progress has been made and where their successors might wish to press in future. The Committee has assiduously followed the taxpayer's pound wherever it was spent. Since 2010 they held 276 evidence sessions and published 244 unanimous reports to hold government to account for its performance. 88% of their recommendations were accepted by departments. In many cases they successfully secured substantial changes, for example with the once secret tax avoidance industry. They secured consensus from government and from industry that private providers of public services do have a duty of care to the taxpayer, and in pushing the protection of whistleblowers further up the agenda of all government departments. By drawing attention to mistakes in the Department for Transport's procurement of the West Coast Mainline, more recent procurements for Crossrail, Thameslink and Intercity Express have all benefited from more expert advice and a more appropriate level of challenge from senior staff. After discovery in 2012-13 that 63% of calls to government call centres were to higher rate telephone numbers, the Government accepted our recommendation that telephone lines serving vulnerable and low income groups never be charged above the geographic rate and that 03 numbers should be available for all government telephone lines. They also secured a commitment to close large mental health hospitals.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 021508425X
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 25

View

Book Description
The taxpayer has been left exposed by the failure of the Hinchingbrooke franchise according to the Public Accounts Committee's report. In February 2012, Circle took operational control of Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust, becoming the first private company to run an NHS hospital. In January 2013, the Committee expressed concerns that Circle's bid to run Hinchingbrooke had not been properly risk assessed and was based on overly optimistic and unachievable savings projections. The Department of Health responded that the NHS Trust Development Authority would monitor progress and take action if the Trust was failing to deliver on its plans to make the hospital financially sustainable. In the event, Circle was not able to make the Trust sustainable and the NHS Trust Development Authority did not take effective action to protect the taxpayer. In January 2015, Circle announced that it intended to withdraw from the contract, just three years into the 10-year franchise. It was clear at the time the franchise was let that the Trust would only survive if it secured substantial savings. The Comptroller and Auditor General's 2012 report highlighted that the savings projected in Circle's bid were unprecedented as a percentage of annual turnover in the NHS.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215083814
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 21

View

Book Description
Since it was created in 2013, Public Health England (PHE) has made a good start in its efforts to protect and improve public health. Good public health is vital to tackling health inequalities and reducing burdens on the NHS. The Committee were impressed by the passion shown by PHE's Chief Executive, and his determination to challenge Government to consider public health in wider policymaking. However, we are concerned that the Department of Health is not getting local authorities to their target funding allocations for public health quickly enough, with nearly one third of 152 local authorities currently receiving funding that is more than 20% above or below what would be their fair share. The Agency decided not to change the grant distribution for 2015/16. Local authorities are also presently constrained by being tied into contracts to which the Department had previously committed, such as for sexual health interventions. It is not clear whether the public health grant to local authorities will remain ring-fenced, and they need more certainty to better plan their public health programmes. If the ring-fence is removed, there is a risk that spending on public health will decline as councils come under increasing financial pressures. There are still unacceptable health inequalities across the country, for example healthy life expectancy for men ranges from 52.5 years to 70 years depending on where they live. These inequalities make PHE's support at a local level particularly important but the Committee are concerned that PHE does not have strong enough ways of influencing local authorities to ensure progress against all of its top public health priorities. Finally, given how important it is to tackle the many wider causes of poor public health, PHE needs to influence departments more effectively and translate its own passion into action across Whitehall.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215083997
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 25

View

Book Description
The Department for Education should set out how it will lead and work with others to improve the outcomes for children by improving the quality of care according to the Committee's report. The Department for Education holds policy responsibility for children in care, and has national oversight of the local authorities who provide the services for these children. Although the Department is clearly best placed to provide the leadership required in many cases, it shows an alarming reluctance to play an active role in securing better services and outcomes for children in care. It chooses to limit its role to passing legislation, publishing guidance and intervening after Ofsted has failed a local authority service. It does far too little to disseminate actively what works and to support authorities to improve before they are failed by Ofsted. It sits on a wealth of information and knowledge which it fails to use in an active way to support better outcomes for this most vulnerable group of children. While 62% of children in care have suffered abuse and neglect, too many still do not get the right placement first time, too many are moved too often, and too few are placed close to their homes.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215084314
Category : History
Languages : en
Pages : 21

View

Book Description
The Committee welcomes the progress made by the Ministry of Defence in getting to grips with its budget and military equipment costs. The affordability of the Department's 10-year plan for buying and supporting equipment is, however, dependent on it: continuing to control cost increases in existing equipment projects; delivering ambitious project cost savings over the next 10 years in order to balance its budget; and having the right skills in place to ensure that the assumptions made in its plans are robust and deliverable. Failure to improve the skills of Defence Equipment and Support (DEandS), which buys and maintains military equipment, will undermine the Department's efforts to improve control over its finances. The Department agrees that DEandS is over-reliant on expensive contractors and DEandS is spending a further £250 million on contractors over the next three and a half years to determine how it will address this and secure the skills needed to deliver the Equipment Plan within the assumed budget and to time. There remain risks to the success of the Department's Army 2020 programme designed to reduce the size of the regular Army and increase the number of trained Army reserves. The Department has not yet addressed the Committee's previous recommendations to develop credible contingency plans in the event that it cannot recruit the number of regular and reserve soldiers it requires. While the Department is reporting progress against its recruitment targets, it does acknowledge that targets beyond 2016 will be challenging and require significant improvements in performance.

Author: Great Britain: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780101812221
Category : Education
Languages : en
Pages : 88

View

Book Description
This White Paper sets out the government's policies for the reform of higher education. The reforms seek to tackle three challenges (i) Putting higher education on a sustainable footing; (ii) Seeking to deliver a better student experience - that is, improvements in teaching, assessment, feedback and preparing the student for the world of work; (iii) Pushing for higher education institutions to take more responsibility for increasing social mobility. The Paper is divided into six chapters, with an annex. Chapter 1: Sustainable and fair funding; Chapter 2: Well-informed students driving teaching excellence; Chapter 3: A better student experience and better-qualified graduates; Chapter 4: A diverse and responsive sector; Chapter 5: Improved social mobility through fairer access; Chapter 6: A new, fit-for-purpose regulatory framework. By shifting public spending away from teaching grants and towards repayable tuition loans, the government believes higher education will receive the funding it needs whilst making savings on public expenditure. The reforms aim to deliver a more responsive higher education sector in which funding follows the decisions of learners and successful institutions are freed to thrive. Also, creating an environment in which there is a new focus on the student experience and the quality of teaching and in which further education colleges and other alternative providers are encouraged to offer a diverse range of higher education provision. The Government, through the Office for Fair Access (OFFA), will be introducing a National Scholarship Programme and will also increase maintenance grants and loans for nearly all students. New Technology Innovation Centres will also be rolled out followed by publication of an innovation and research strategy, exploring the roles of knowledge creation, business investment, skills and training.