Frost Malster


Published on

Presenation at Auril conference 2007 by Alice Frost

Published in: Business, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Frost Malster

  1. 1. KT / HEIF update Alice Frost, HEFCE Ashley Malster, DIUS
  2. 2. First up: Hello from a brand new Department !
  3. 3. Organisation • DIUS includes: – From DTI • Science and Innovation Group (with the Science Budget) • Technology Strategy Board • Government Chief Scientific Advisor & his staff • Design Council • UK Intellectual Property Office (ex Patent Office) – From DfES • Higher Education Directorate • Further Education and Skills from age 19 onwards – From DCMS • NESTA
  4. 4. DIUS Strategic Objectives • Accelerate the commercial exploitation of creativity and knowledge, through innovation and research, to create wealth, grow the economy, build successful businesses and improve quality of life. • Improve the skills of the population throughout their working lives to create a workforce capable of sustaining economic competitiveness, and enable individuals to thrive in the global economy. • Build social and community cohesion through improved social justice, civic participation and economic opportunity by raising aspirations and broadening participation, progression and achievement in learning and skills. • Pursue global excellence in research and knowledge, promote the benefits of science in society, and deliver science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills in line with employer demand. • Strengthen the capacity, quality and reputation of the Further and Higher Education systems and institutions to support national economic and social needs. • Encourage better use of science in Government, foster public service innovation, and support other Government objectives which depend on the DIUS expertise and remit.
  5. 5. England Only Higher Education Policy - Teaching - Recurrent Research (QR) - Widening Participation - Knowledge Transfer ital ap C h arc ese R UK - wide Science and Innovation Policy Research Council Funding Technology Strategy Board
  6. 6. HEIF – the next funding round
  7. 7. What we could say a week ago.. HEIF outcome depends on: - Sainsbury Review - CSR Budget Allocations But… A week is a long time in Knowledge Transfer
  8. 8. Fundamental starting point: Ten Year Science and Innovation Investment Framework “The Government confirms its support for the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) as a permanent third stream of funding for universities in England to further build capacity in the university sector for knowledge transfer “
  9. 9. Evolution LAST TIME • Major informal / formal consultation exercise • Set in place a modular formula that could be adjusted NOW • Very much building on previous formula • Moving to 100% formulaic, as per Sainsbury • Good news: predictability, flexibility, esteem
  10. 10. LAST TIME previous announcements trailed that: • that ‘capacity building’ component would reduce over time, ‘performance’ component to increase • 3rd component to be reviewed POST-SAINSBURY • adjustments consistent with this
  11. 11. But the big news from earlier this week: Budget increases to £150m per year • Delivering Lambert Review recommendation • From a formulaic funding perspective: >80% increase
  12. 12. A word about “business-facing” • referred to in Sainsbury review • phrase can be ambiguous • all institutions should be more business-facing – or should that be business-friendly? • DIUS/HEFCE not intending to categorise / pigeon-hole institutions • formula doesn’t contain a binary variable • thrust: benefits of HEIF spread-more widely, not just to large research-led institutions
  13. 13. “We have devised and discussed with DIUS and HEFCE a formula that gives less weight to the size of the university and more to income received from SMEs. This should result in the large research universities getting slightly more money in HEIF4, and many other universities getting larger sums, with an incentive for all to do more work with SMEs. We recommend that this formula be adopted for HEIF4.” Result: • Benefit of HEIF spread more widely • Funding increases for most institutions, substantial increases for many
  14. 14. HEIF 4: The Sainsbury model • Fully formulaic and gives continuity with the formula developed in HEIF round 3 • Supporting a wide range of KT activity that results in economic/social benefit • Formula will be refined and simplified: – higher weight to the pot reflecting performance (external income) – rather than separate third pot, a weighting for SME income in performance pot – pot calculated on academic staff numbers - potential and capacity building - retained
  15. 15. HEIF 4: The Sainsbury model • As with HEIF 3, the formula will include: – a cap (absolute cap) on the maximum income that can be allocated per HEI – floor of the minimum allocation – a limit on the minimum transition from last award – but will additionally include for HEIF 4 a limit on the max increase for an HEI in its allocation from its past award (a relative cap) • Absolute cap to be raised from that set in HEIF 3 but by a lower proportion than the increase in the overall HEIF budget – achieve Sainsbury aim of spread funding to a wider range of HEIs whilst sustaining important, built capacity
  16. 16. Summary of Model Formula Element HEIF3 HEIF4 Final year budget £110M (2007-08) £150M (2010-11) Formula / competition Ratio 75% formula 100% formula 25% competition Pot ratio (staff, income, non-financial) 45:45:10 40:60:0 Extra SME weighting in income pot n/a 2x Minimum allocation £100k £100k Max allocation (absolute cap)/ Maximum Absolute £1.5M To be determined in increase from last award (relative Relative n/a context of total HEIF cap) budget Minimum transition from last award 75% 80% (all figures per annum)
  17. 17. What happens next? • Government announced HEIF rise to £150M in 2010-11 (totals for 2008-09 and 2009-10 tbc) • HEFCE Board in November: – Agree HEFCE (HE budget) element of funding – Set absolute and relative caps in line with Sainsbury aims and available funding – Finalise data issues – indication of (or indicative) allocations – Format of strategies to release funds – CKEs • Notification to sector following HEFCE Board • Aim to sign off by May
  18. 18. Some important messages • Coming of age of third stream as permanent allocation alongside T and R • Reaching Lambert £150M • Importance of KT in innovation, and public support for knowledge base and KT • More formula HEIF with reduction in burden • Diverse contributions of HE (and FE) to meet diverse demands • SME agenda
  19. 19. HEIF Evaluation HEFCE lead on evaluation, working closely with DIUS Assisted by Advisory Panel: AURIL, UNICO, CIHE, HEI Head from HEFCE Business & Community Committee Headline requirement: “to evaluate what has been achieved by HEFCE/OSI 3rd stream funding to achieve culture change and embed capacity toward optimising the direct and indirect economic impact of HEquot; Focus is on HEROBAC and HEIF (all rounds), but also touches on eg University Challenge / Science Enterprise Challenge Two key aspects: – internal: culture change within an institution – external impact it has on organisations HEI works with (likely to be more of former than latter)
  20. 20. HEIF Evaluation 2 Sizeable project so required full OJEC tender procedure (took 6+ months) 17 bids received; narrowed down to 5 for interview Winners: Consortium of PACEC and Centre for Business Research (Cambridge University) Module 1: A top down ‘macro’ analysis of existing survey-based data (all institutions) Module 2: Case study research of individual HE institutions (~ 30 institutions) NB: case study participants would receive free individual institutional feedback as an incentive to participate Timetable: Project start September 2007; Draft report April; Final report June; Feedback/workshop July; Publish September 2008
  21. 21. HEFCE perspective on Sainsbury Report Not just about the methodology for HEIF 4 • Business-related element in our QR research funding. • Support to HEIs seeking to address the Cox Review on creativity and innovation • HEFCE strategic subjects advisory group looking at flows of STEM personnel • HEIF as an infrastructure grant to HEIs outside BSSP. HEFCE funds not provided for business support; HEIs work positively with the business support infrastructure (sector organisations like AURIL can help with technical issues) • TTOs still described as ‘patchy’. HEROBC/HEIF evaluation evidence next year. Value of sector bodies, IKT etc, to help with development of KT.
  22. 22. A final word from her: HEBCI 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Collaborative research income (£ million) 541 530 595 Consultancy income (£ million) 211 219 236 Equipment and facilities income (£ million) 80 76 89 Regeneration and development income (£ million) 216 206 224 Disclosures 3,029 3,027 3,268 Spin-offs with some HEI ownership older than 3 years 521 592 669 Plus: longer term -- moving to HESA
  23. 23. A final word from him: “Streamlining University / Business Collaborative Research Negotiations” Report Independent report to Funders Forum – published August CONCLUSION: “..while in the main the system is working well, there are some important problems. Addressing these could improve collaborative research negotiations, increasing the number of successful deals and the speed with which they are made.” • Overemphasis on IP Both universities and businesses guilty on occasions.. • Unclear messages From Government and public funders – eg income generation vs economic benefit • Need for good practice in negotiating process Sensible practice not always followed (Available on DIUS website)
  24. 24. Alice Frost Ashley Malster 0117 931 7107 020 7215 3866