Tagged / Innovate UK

Funding Development Briefing 01/02/23 Spotlight on: KTPs – with Business Engagement and Knowledge Exchange Managers_re-scheduled!

What are Funding Development Briefings?

Each session will cover the latest major funding opportunities, followed by a brief Q&A session. Sessions will also include a spotlight on a particular funding opportunity of strategic importance to BU. Sessions will be on Wednesdays, from 12 pm for half-an-hour. The same link can be used each week to join here.
Next Weds 01 February 12:00-12:30, we will cover the Knowledge Exchange Partnerships (KTP) and we will have the pleasure of having the Business Engagement and Knowledge Exchange Managers along to talk to us about the KTP process and tips about getting partnerships together.
Sessions will be recorded and made available after the session for those who cannot attend.

Share your Views on Impact in Research Applications

UKRI are reviewing their systems to better understand the effectiveness of approaches to supporting impact across the Research Councils.

In order to achieve this they have launched a consultation to gather feedback on how impact development activities are being embedded into proposals by applicants. The aim is also to determine the levels of stakeholder involvement, and how impact development activities within proposals are reviewed and assessed. The results from this consultation will be used to make improvements to UKRI’s processes and will be central to the development of a new reference guide on the topic of ‘maximising impact’ within applications, as well as being used as an evidence base for continuous improvement, cross UKRI policy and other UKRI programmes.

They are asking for input from:

  • academics
  • university research office staff
  • users of research
  • project partners (such as social enterprises, charities, non-governmental organisations, business)
  • other stakeholders.

You can access the survey until 4 February 2022 here.

UK Government policy week on the Blog: UK Innovation Strategy

Innovation is central to the largest challenges the world faces, from climate change and an ageing society to global pandemics.

Universities work closely with businesses, charities and others to support research and facilitate commercialisation. The interaction between universities and business is therefore vitally important for innovation.

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has published its Innovation Strategy, setting out its long-term plan for delivering innovation-led growth.

Innovate UK and UKRI are supporting the strategy while universities and other research organisations are expected to play a key role in embedding and implementing its objectives.

The four Pillars

The strategy has four key objectives – referred to as ‘Pillars’ – to support the development of the UK as a global hub for innovation by 2035:

  • Pillar 1: Unleashing business – We will fuel businesses who want to innovate.
  • Pillar 2: People – We will make the UK the most exciting place for innovation talent.
  • Pillar 3: Institutions & Places – We will ensure our research, development & innovation institutions serve the needs of businesses and places across the UK.
  • Pillar 4: Missions & Technologies – We will stimulate innovation to tackle major challenges faced by the UK and the world and drive capability in key technologies

Some key takeaways from the strategy include:

Commercialisation of research

There is a real focus on commercialisation and using the UK’s research base to take new ideas and technologies to market.

The strategy outlines how the government plans to support commercialisation activities – both in the early stages and in the acceleration of deployment and scaling up. As part of this, UKRI will establish a UKRI-wide Commercialisation Funding Framework, which will include offering long-term, stage-gated funding to commercialise new and improved technologies, products, processes or services.

Navigating university-business relationships:

Business-research partnerships play an important role in driving innovation activity at a local and national level. The strategy outlines ways in which the interactions between universities and business can be more easily navigated, opening up opportunities for collaboration.

As well as the creation of ARIA (see yesterday’s blog post!) there are plans for UKRI (via Innovate UK) to develop a simpler way for businesses to access and understand opportunities and support.

Levelling-up  

The government’s ‘levelling up’ agenda also plays a key role, targeting R&D interventions to the needs and strengths of specific regions.

The strategy discusses enabling places with emerging research and innovation strengths to deliver greater local economic benefits, linking this to local sector strengths as appropriate.

This includes helping places to develop effective investment strategies and an R&D prospectus, aligned to local and regional opportunities and national priorities.

Tackling major challenges

The government plans to direct innovation through a suite of ‘Innovation Missions’ focused on some of its most pressing national priorities and global challenges – such as the climate and biodiversity crises, demographic change, and pandemics.

Innovation Missions will translate these challenges into tangible problems, and bring together the insights and resources of government, industry, civil society, and academia to tackle them.

Find out more about the Innovation Strategy on the Government website

NEW: Innovate UK delivery plan 2019

Today sees the launch of Innovate UK’s delivery plan for 2019.

Innovate UK will take a thought-leadership role around business-led innovation, providing leadership through their expertise, being recognized as a trusted voice, and setting the direction for innovation in the UK and beyond. They have already introduced new ways of working with innovative businesses through world-class programmes and processes. These include building up the UK’s innovation infrastructure with the Catapult network and introducing new forms of innovation finance such as Innovation Loans and their Investment Accelerator. But they now need to move further and faster to make the most of public funding, ensuring maximum impact as an investor in business innovation, and not just as a funder.

 

Technical assistance for grant applications – workshop places available!

In the UK, £4.7 billion is being expected to be invested in R&D over the next 4 years. Will you be ready to apply?

Much of this funding will be available to academia, in partnership with business, through Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund competitive grants. Writing these grants is an art in itself, because word counts are tight and the demand for detail high. And then there is the human factor – convincing five under-pressure assessors that your idea is novel, experimental, leading edge, etc. These are the people who will score you and ultimately decide whether you make it to the fundable zone…

BU’s Research & Knowledge Exchange Office is hosting a technical writing workshop, where the art of writing these grants will be unpacked by a successful bid writer, who has won them, spoken with the assessors to learn how to win even more of them, and is almost in daily contact with the funder, Innovate UK.

The workshop, on 10th December 2018, will include discussions on:

• Knowing your funder – vital background on what makes Innovate UK tick…
• Knowing your assessors – vital tips to improve your score…
• Unpacking the application questions – what you must write and how you must write…

After the workshop attendees will have the opportunity to have a one-to-one session with the bid writer to discuss project ideas and to explore suitable grants.

This workshop directly supports and is targeted towards those academics proactively working within the context of BU2025 Actions: 28, 29 and 30.

To attend, please see further information available on the BU staff pages and review the calendar of events for further opportunities.

Funding opportunities from Innovate UK

1. SBRI: intelligent data to transform local council service delivery

This Small Business Research Initiative (SBRI) competition is funded by the GovTech Catalyst and is sponsored by Durham County Council and Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council.

This competition looks at 2 specific data-gathering techniques in local council services:

1.‘Boots on the ground’: enabling residents to collect and report accurate data about public assets, such as potholes and street lighting, to the local council.

2.‘Eyes on the street’: using local council vehicles to collect and report data as they travel around the borough.

Summary :

Call opens : 24 September 2018

Call closes : 31 October 2018

Available funding : up to £50,000 (including VAT)

Project start date : by 7 Feb 2019

Please see this link for more information about this call.

2. Call for Carbon Capture and Utilisation Demonstration

As part of the government’s Clean Growth Strategy BEIS has allocated up to £20 million to design and construct carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) demonstration projects. This programme is designed to encourage industrial sites to capture carbon dioxide which could then be used in industrial applications, while enabling learning and development of capture technologies at an intermediate scale, so reducing costs and risks.

The overall aims of the CCU demonstration programme are:

  • to demonstrate carbon capture and utilisation at a number of key industrial sites in the UK
  • to demonstrate and accelerate cost reductions in carbon capture technology in the order of 20 to 45%, i.e. £10-20/MWh
  • to encourage a project pipeline of follow-on CCU projects that will help less mature, but more novel technology to be demonstrated at scale; and
  • to improve understanding of the cost and performance of carbon capture technology
  • to de-risk the capture technology.

The programme is in 3 phases:

  • Phase 1 focuses on initial scoping study for an engineering supplier to work on BEIS’ behalf with potential host sites, carbon dioxide users and technology suppliers to produce site-specific cost estimates for deploying CCU at UK industrial sites. Wood.Plc successfully bid for Phase 1
  • Phase 2 will fund projects to conduct design studies for constructing CCUequipment at UK host sites
  • Phase 3 will fund projects to construct and demonstrate CCU

Summary :

Call closes : 11 November 2018 (Applicants must complete the application forms on this link and submit by email to Industry.Innovation@beis.gov.uk by Sunday 11 November 2018.)

Available funding : up to £5million

Project duration : up to 24 months

Project dates : finish by 31 March 2021

Please see this link for more information about this call.

3. Open grant funding competition: round 3

Up to £20million investment will be made by Innovate UK in the best cutting-edge or disruptive ideas with a view to commercialisation.

All proposals must be business focused, and can come from any area of technology, science or engineering, including arts, design, media or creative industries.

Summary : 

Call opens : 24 September 2018

Call closes : 14 November 2018

Available funding : between £25,000 and £500,000

Project duration : Between 19 and 36 months

Project dates : start by 1 April 2019 and end by 1 April 2022

Please see this link for more information about this call.

4. UK Aerospace Research and Technology Programme: fast-track collaborative R&D EoI

UK organisations can apply for a share of up to £8 million to carry out collaborative R&D, collaborative fast-track and feasibility projects that enhance the UK’s position in civil aerospace.

To be eligible for funding you must:

  • be a UK based business, academic organisation, charity, public sector organisation or research and technology organisation (RTO)
  • plan to carry out an aerospace research or technology development project in the UK
  • address the specific requirements of the UK Aerospace Technology Strategy, ‘Raising Ambition’
  • sign up to the Aerospace Technology Institute (ATI) framework agreement
  • work in collaboration with other organisations to develop proposals and deliver projects

To lead a project you must:

To collaborate you must be a:

  • business
  • research organisation
  • public sector organisation
  • charity

Summary : 

Call opens : 24 September 2018

Call closes : 5 December 2018

Available funding : between £425,000 to £1million

Project duration : Between 12 and 24 months

Project dates : start by August 2019 and end by August 2021

Please see this link for more information about this call.

5. IDP 15: the road to zero emission vehicles, large R&D

Up to £4million is available for UK businesses to apply for to research and develop technologies that accelerate the transition to zero emmision vehicles.

To be eligible you must:

  • be a UK based business, academic organisation, charity, public sector organisation or research and technology organisation (RTO)
  • carry out your project work in the UK
  • intend to exploit the results from or in the UK
  • work in collaboration with other businesses, research organisations or third-sector organisations

To lead a project you must be a UK based business, of any size.

A separate £2 million is available for feasibility study projects and a further £16 million to support proportionality smaller collaborative R&D projects.

Summary : 

Call closes : 6 December 2018

Available funding : up to £4million

Project duration : Between 12 and 36 months

Project dates : start by June 2019 and end by June 2022

Please see this link for more information about this call.

 

Innovate UK funding to support regional economic growth – coming soon!!

Image from startups.co.uk

Innovate UK has announced a new competitive scheme that takes a place-based approach to research and innovation funding, to support significant regional economic growth.

To be successful, applications must build on existing research and innovation capability and present a valid plan of new research and innovation activities. These should have a demonstrable impact on local economic growth.

Project consortia must be based within the project’s geographical area and have the support of a local civic leadership.

Projects can be led by either a UK based business or a UK publicly funded research organisation.

This first competition stage is an expression of interest (EOI). Consortia will set out plans for large collaborative proposals. Following assessment, successful EOIs will be selected to receive up to £50,000 in ‘seedcorn funding’ to further develop a proposal for a gull stage project.

Please see summary below:

Competition opens: Monday, 28th May 2018

Competition closes: Wednesday, 25th July 2018 (noon)

Funding available: up to £50,000 seedcorn funding for successful EOIs; full stage proposals between £10million  and £50million

Project dates: June 2019 – April 2024

For more information, please see this link.

 

Spaces still available: Innovate UK visit- Health & Care at Innovate UK and Mini-STEAMLab 30/5/18

The M3 Network welcomes Chris Sawyer, Innovation Lead for Health & Care at Innovate UK, to speak at Bournemouth University on the 30th of May, 2018, 12:00-14:00. This event is an opportunity to gain not only information about Innovate UK and funding opportunities but to discuss the challenges facing health and care technology innovation.
Following the presentation there will be lunch and a facilitated workshop designed to bring forward ideas from academic and industry collaboration.
Academics from the M3 network and those from industry working with health and care technology are encouraged to attend. To book onto this session please e-mail RKEDevFramework@bournemouth.ac.uk with your name and organisation.

Innovate UK funding – precision medicine technologies

Image from insidermonkey.com

Innovate UK will invest up to £5 million in innovation projects to support the development of precision medicine (PM) technologies.

Applications can be for either feasibility study projects or industrial research and experimental development projects, although projects may have work packages in different research categories if necessary.

You must explain clearly how your proposed technology will advance precision medicine.

All projects must involve at least one UK based business.

Feasibility study projects must be led by a UK based business either:

  • working alone or
  • working with other businesses or research organisations

Research and development projects must:

  • be collaborative and led by a UK based business of any size or research and technology organisation (RTO)
  • include at least one other grant-claiming organisation, such as an NHS organisation, another healthcare provider, a business, a Catapult or other research technology organisation, a research base or a third-sector organisation

Please see below a summary of this funding opportunity:

Funding type : Grant

Project size : Feasibility study projects – up to £100,000/ Industrial research and experimental development – up to £2 million

Project dates : 1 November 2018 and up to 24 months 

Deadline : 11 July 2018, 12noon

Please see this link for more information on how to apply.

Innovate UK funding – commercialising quantum devices

Image from warontherocks.com

Innovate UK will invest £20 million in innovation projects to develop prototype quantum technology devices that address one or more of these important industrial challenges which are explained further in the scope of this competition:

  1. Situational awareness.
  2. Infrastructure productivity.
  3. Seeing the invisible.
  4. Trusted peer to peer communication

Your proposal must:

  • demonstrate how the device can be brought to market, with manufacture or assembly in the UK
  • fulfil an end user need through the technological advances in quantum technology

A business must lead the project. You must work in collaboration with others.

Please see below a summary of this funding opportunity:

Funding type : Grant

Project size : Between £3 million and £10 million

Project dates : 1 November 2018 and up to 29 months (must be completed by March 2021)

Deadline : 13 June 2018, 12noon

Please see this link for more information on how to apply.

Innovate UK visit- Health & Care at Innovate UK and Mini-STEAMLab 30/5/18

The M3 Network welcomes Chris Sawyer, Innovation Lead for Health & Care at Innovate UK, to speak at Bournemouth University on the 30th of May, 2018, 12:00-14:00. This event is an opportunity to gain not only information about Innovate UK and funding opportunities but to discuss the challenges facing health and care technology innovation.
Following the presentation there will be lunch and a facilitated workshop designed to bring forward ideas from academic and industry collaboration.
Academics from the M3 network and those from industry working with health and care technology are encouraged to attend. To book onto this session please e-mail RKEDevFramework@bournemouth.ac.uk with your name and organisation.

Innovate UK announce £33m fund to exploit immersive technology and £20m for Quantum technologies

Innovate UK have announced that £33m will be invested in exploiting the new immersive technologies as part of the Audiences of the Future and £20m for Quantum technologies.  When more information becomes available, more details will be posted here.  As this fund forms part of the Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, please be advised that the applications may need to involve a UK company.  For further advice on preparing for these funds, please contact Ehren Milner (emilner@bournemouth.ac.uk)

 

HE policy update for the w/e 29th March 2018

Industrial Strategy

The Creative Industries Sector Deal has been announced.  You can read the document here.

The press release says:

  • As part of a Creative Industries Sector Deal, to be announced today by the Digital and Culture Secretary Matt Hancock, Business Secretary Greg Clark and Co-Chair of the CIC, Nicola Mendelsohn, more than £150 million is being jointly invested by government and industry to help cultural and creative businesses across Britain thrive.
  • A Cultural Development Fund will also be launched for cities and towns to bid for a share of £20 million to invest in creative and cultural initiatives. The power of culture and creative industries to boost economic growth is evident across the country…[NB Bournemouth is identified as high growth]
  • The Sector Deal aims to double Britain’s share of the global creative immersive content market by 2025, which is expected to be worth over £30 billion by 2025. To seize on the opportunity of this expanding market, government is investing over £33 million in immersive technologies such as virtual reality video games, interactive art shows and augmented reality experiences in tourism.
  • Britain is already leading the way in developing immersive technologies. PWC has predicted that the UK’s virtual reality industry will grow at a faster rate than any other entertainment and media industry between 2016 to 2021, reaching £801 million in value, and that by 2021 there will be 16 million virtual reality headsets in use in the UK.
  • Improving the nations skills is at the heart of the government’s modern Industrial Strategy and to ensure the industry has the skilled workers it needs to deliver this, up to £2 million will be made available to kickstart an industry-led skills package, including a creative careers programme which will reach at least 2,000 schools and 600,000 pupils in 2 years. A new London Screen Academy, with places for up to 1000 students, will also open in 2019.

New Quality Code published

After a consultation proposing changes to the UK Quality Code for HE, (you can read BU’s response here) the QAA have published the new, very short Code. There’s some commentary on Wonkhe here.   It really is short – in a 7 page document there is only one real page of content – but there is more guidance to come.

HE Review

To inform our BU response to the HE Review all staff and students are invited to consider the issues in this (anonymous) 5-minute survey. Please take a look at the survey questions as we’d like to hear from as many staff and students as possible. You don’t have to answer all the questions! The major review of HE will shape the HE system, including how universities are funded for years to come. The survey will be available to staff and students until Friday 20th April.

The Department for Education also published a research report by Youthsight on the influence of finance on higher education decision making

Amongst its findings:

  • University was the only option considered by the majority of applicants (75 per cent), especially those applying to the higher-tariff universities (78 per cent). This was consistent across socio-economic backgrounds. Getting a job and travelling were the main alternatives considered by applicants
  • Financial factors were not the biggest influence on the final decision to apply to university. The most important factors were the desires to be more employable, to achieve the qualification and to pursue an interest in a subject. This was the case for applicants from both the higher and the lower socio-economic groups.
    • Lower socio-economic group applicants placed a higher importance on grants, bursaries and living costs than applicants from higher socio-economic groups, although finance still remained a secondary influence on their decision to apply to university.
    • The course offered (82 per cent of applicants), university reputation (58 per cent), and potential for high future earnings (41 per cent) were the most commonly cited major influences on applicants’ choices about where to study.
    • Differences in bursaries offered, tuition fees charged and the ability to continue living at home were secondary factors when choosing where to study. These factors accounted for three of the bottom four of eleven factors tested that might influence which university to choose. However, they were more important for lower socio-economic group applicants.
  • The maintenance loan, repayment threshold and particularly maintenance grants and university assistance were more important to members of the lower socio-economic group than the higher socio-economic group in alleviating cost concerns.

And the government have published the outcomes of their 2014/15 student income and expenditure survey.  There is a lot of data and there are lots of interesting charts, including figure 2.6 (the influence of financial support on my decisions), table 3.7 (what support English domiciled students received by mode of study), figure 4.3 (breakdown of total student expenditure (this one excludes the tuition fee but there is also a chart that includes it),  figure 4.4 (total expenditure and housing costs).

The data from both these reports will be pored over to support responses to the HE review.

Freedom of speech

The Joint Committee on Human Rights has published its report into free speech in universities. The Committee has also published its own guidance for universities and students:

Charity Commission Response: Charity Commission responds to Joint Committee on Human Rights

The Committee don’t identify many actual cases of free speech having been prevented but note a “chilling effect” (it’s hard to prove a negative, of course). The report identifies factors that potentially limit free speech in universities:

  • regulatory complexity
  • intolerant attitudes, often incorrectly using the banner of “no-platforming” and “safe-space” policies
  • incidents of unacceptable intimidating behaviour by protestors intent on preventing free speech and debate
  • student Unions being overly cautious for fear of breaking the rules
  • unnecessary bureaucracy imposed on those organising events
  • fear and confusion over what the Prevent Duty entails
  • unduly complicated and cautious guidance from the Charity Commission.

Recommendations

  • That an independent review of the Prevent policy is necessary to assess what impact it is having on students and free speech, after evidence the Committee took demonstrated an adverse effect on events with student faith groups
  • That the Charity Commission, which regulates student unions as registered charities, review its approach and guidance, and that its actions are proportionate and are adequately explained to student unions and don’t unnecessarily limit free speech
  • That the Office for Students should ensure university policies proactively secure lawful free speech and are not overly burdensome
  • That student societies should not stop other student societies from holding their meetings.  They have the right to protest but must not seek to stop events entirely
  • That while there must be opportunities for genuinely sensitive discussions, and that the whole of the university cannot be a “safe space.” Universities must be places where open debate can take place so that students can develop their own opinions on unpopular, controversial or provocative ideas
  • Groups or individuals holding unpopular opinions which are within the law should not be shut down nor be subject to undue additional scrutiny by student unions or universities.

Chair of the Committee, Harriet Harman MP, said:

  • “Freedom of speech within the law should mean just that – and it is vital in universities. Evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights showed that there is a problem of inhibition of free speech in universities. While media reporting has focussed on students inhibiting free speech – and in our report we urge universities to take action to prevent that – free speech is also inhibited by university bureaucracy and restrictive guidance from the Charity Commission. We want students themselves to know their rights to free speech and that’s why we’ve issued a guide for students today.”

Some particular points to note:

  • 41 The imposition of unreasonable conditions is an interference on free speech rights. We do not, for example, consider it a reasonable condition that, if a speaker gives an assurance that their speech will be lawful, they be required to submit a copy or outline of their speech in advance.
  • 42 In our view, freedom of expression is unduly interfered with:
    • when protests become so disruptive that they prevent the speakers from speaking or intimidate those attending;
    • if student groups are unable to invite speakers purely because other groups protest and oppose their appearance; and
    • if students are deterred from inviting speakers by complicated processes and bureaucratic procedures.
      It is clear that, although not widespread, all these problems do occur and they should not be tolerated.
  • 60 Whilst there must be opportunities for genuinely sensitive and confidential discussions in university settings, and whilst the original intention behind safe space policies may have been to ensure that minority or vulnerable groups can feel secure, in practice the concept of safe spaces has proved problematic, often marginalising the views of minority groups. They need to co-exist with and respect free speech. They cannot cover the whole of the university or university life without impinging on rights to free speech under Article 10. When that happens, people are moving from the need to have a “safe space” to seeking to prevent the free speech of those whose views they disagree with. Minority groups or individuals holding unpopular opinions which are within the law should not be shut down nor be subject to undue additional scrutiny by student unions or universities.
  • 91 Universities must strike a balance to ensure they respect both their legal duty to protect free speech and their other legal duties to ensure that speech is lawful, to comply with equalities legislation and to safeguard students. It is clearly easier to achieve this if debate is carried out in a respectful and open way. But the right to free speech goes beyond this, and universities need to give it proper emphasis. Indeed, unless it is clearly understood that those exercising their rights to free speech within the law will not be shut down, there will be no incentive for their opponents to engage them in the debate and therefore to bring the challenge that is needed to develop mutual understanding and maybe even to change attitudes.
  • 93 It is reasonable for there to be some basic processes in place so that student unions and universities know about external speakers. Codes of practice on freedom of speech should facilitate freedom of speech, as was their original purpose, and not unduly restrict it. Universities should not surround requests for external speaker meetings with undue bureaucracy. Nor should unreasonable conditions be imposed by universities or student unions on external speakers, such as a requirement to submit their speeches in advance, if they give an assurance these will be lawful.

Migration Advisory Committee report on EEA and non EEA workers

The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has published its interim update on the impact of EEA and non-EEA workers in UK labour market. This is the first MAC inquiry of two – the second one is the one about students, this was more general and about workers across all sectors.

The update sets out a summary of the views expressed by employers and of the regional issues raised. They add that “these themes seem the best way of summarising the views expressed to us but should not be taken to imply that the MAC endorses a sectoral and/or regional approach to post-Brexit migration policy.” The MAC has also published the responses to their call for evidence, broken down by sector.

The report includes the following findings:

  • The vast majority of employers do not deliberately seek to fill vacancies with migrant workers. They seek the best available candidate.
  • Employers often reported skill shortages as one reason for employing EEA migrants.
  • Many EEA workers are in jobs requiring a high level of skill that take years to acquire. But, some of the claims about necessary skill levels seemed exaggerated.
  • Within occupations, EEA migrants are better educated than their UK-born counterparts.
  • The MAC view is that, from the economic perspective this does amount to saying that it is sometimes possible to hire a given quality of worker for lower wages if they are an EEA migrant than if they are UK-born.
  • To the extent that EEA migrants are paid lower wages than the UK-born this may result in lower prices, benefitting UK consumers. Our final report will also consider these possible impacts.
  • Many responses argued that a more restrictive migration policy would lead to large numbers of unfilled vacancies. The MAC view is that this is unlikely in anything other than the short-term.
  • The MAC view is that it is important to be clear about what the consequences of restricting migration would be.

Research bodies update

This week is the launch of UKRI – it is worth looking at their objectives.

.The Council for Innovate UK has been announced. The members are:

  • Sir Harpal Kumar, who will serve as Senior Independent Member through his role as UK Research and Innovation’s Innovation Champion and work closely with the board
  • Dr Arnab Basu MBE, Chief Executive, Kromek Group plc
  • Baroness Brown of Cambridge DBE FREng FRS (Julia King)
  • Professor Juliet Davenport OBE, Chief Executive, Good Energy
  • Dr John Fingleton, Chief Executive, Fingleton Associates
  • Priya Guha, Ecosystem General Manager, RocketSpace UK
  • Dr Elaine Jones, Vice President, Pfizer Ventures
  • Professor John Latham, Vice-Chancellor of Coventry University
  • Sir William Sargent, Chief Executive, Framestore
  • Stephen Welton, Chief Executive, Business Growth Fund

The REF panels have also been announced – follow this link to see the lists.

Parliamentary Questions

Q Andrew Percy MP

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether his Department is taking steps to ensure that prospective undergraduates understand the potential effect of their choice of course on their prospects post-graduation.

  • A Sam Gyimah MP The department is working to make destinations and outcomes data more accessible to prospective students, to help them compare opportunities and make informed choices about where and what to study.
  • On the 12 March 2018, I announced an Open Data Competition. It will use government data on higher education providers so that tech companies and coders can create websites to help prospective students decide where to apply. This competition will build on the government’s Longitudinal Educational Outcomes (LEO) dataset, which gives information on employment and salaries after graduation.
  • Alongside this, my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State has requested that the Office for Students include LEO data on the Unistats website as soon as possible.

Q Angela Rayner MP To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what estimate his Department has made of the value of plan 1 student loans that will not be repaid.

  • A: Sam Gyimah MP: It is estimated that the value of the plan 1 student loan book that will not be repaid was £13.1 billion as at 31 March 2017, when future repayments are valued in present terms. The face value of the plan 1 student loan book was £42.8 billion at this time. This information is in the public domain and published on page 155 of the Department for Education’s 2016-17 Annual Report and Accounts which can be found at:
  • https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dfe-consolidated-annual-report-and-accounts-2016-to-2017.

Q Angela Rayner MP: To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the written ministerial statement of 31 October 2017 on government asset sale, HCWS205, what methodology his Department used to decide which loans from the plan 1 loan book would be sold.

  • A Sam Gyimah MP: The loans sold in December 2017 were a selection of loans from the plan 1 loan book issued by English Local Authorities that entered repayment between 2002 and 2006.
  • These loans had the longest history of repayments, the longest servicing history and the most accurate data on borrowers’ historic earnings. This information allowed the government to most accurately value these loans for sale.
  • The government’s objective when issuing loans to students is to allow them to pursue their education regardless of their personal financial situation. Once this objective has been met, however, retaining the loans on the government’s balance sheet serves no policy purpose. These loans could be sold precisely because they have achieved their original policy objective of supporting students to access higher education.
  • Pursuant to Section 4 of the Sale of Student Loans Act 2008, a report on the sale arrangements was deposited in the House libraries on 7 December 2017 (deposit reference DEP2017-0778): https://www.parliament.uk/depositedpapers.

Q: Angela Rayner MP: To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the written statement of 6 December 2017 on Government Asset Sake, HCWS317, what assessment he has made of the net fiscal effect of the sale of the student loan book after accounting for reduced income arising from lost repayments.

  • A: Sam Gyimah MP: The government only sells assets when it can secure value for money for taxpayers from doing so. In assessing the value for money of the sale, the government took into account repayments foregone on the loans sold. In executing the sale, we achieved a price that exceeded the retention value of the loans sold, calculated in line with standard HM Treasury green book methodology.
  • Selling financial assets, like student loans, where there is no policy reason to retain them, where value for money can be secured and where borrowers are not impacted is sound asset management. The sale ensures government resources are being put to best use and is an important part of our plan to repair public finances.
  • Pursuant to Section 4 of the Sale of Student Loans Act 2008, a report on the sale arrangements was deposited in the House libraries on 7 December 2017 (deposit reference DEP2017-0778): https://www.parliament.uk/depositedpapers.

Subscribe!

To subscribe to the weekly policy update simply email policy@bournemouth.ac.uk

JANE FORSTER                                            |                       SARAH CARTER

Policy Advisor                                                                     Policy & Public Affairs Officer

Follow: @PolicyBU on Twitter                   |                       policy@bournemouth.ac.uk

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) officially opens 1 April

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) officially opens on 1 April. RCUK will no longer exist. UKRI will incorporate all seven research councils, Innovate UK and a new organisation, Research England (which will manage the REF and HEIF).

Science Magazine explores UK Research and Innovation, and what it means for the UK scientific community. Looking into the details of the re-organisation, Science Magazine focuses on what impact UKRI will have and what it is aiming to achieve as an organisation.

In addition, HEFCE will no longer exist from 1 April.  The Office of Fair Access (OFFA) will also cease to exist and the two will merge to form the new Office for Students (OfS).