Transparency Review: Outcomes and Implications - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

Transparency Review: Outcomes and Implications

Description:

SCOP. U Scotland. HHEW. Role of JCPSG. To advise universities and colleges on the development of good practice in Costing and Pricing. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:39
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: vicechance3
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Transparency Review: Outcomes and Implications


1
Transparency Review Outcomes and Implications
Professor David Westbury Vice Principal,
University of Birmingham. Chair, Joint Costing
and Pricing Steering Group.
2
Joint Costing Pricing Steering Group
  • HEFCE
  • SHEFC
  • HEFCW
  • DENI
  • U Uk
  • SCOP
  • U Scotland
  • HHEW

3
Role of JCPSG
  • To advise universities and colleges on the
    development of good practice in Costing and
    Pricing.
  • To encourage the integration of Financial and
    Academic decision making.

4
JCPSG Web-site
http//www.jcpsg.ac.uk
5
Transparency ReviewObjectives of Review
  • to ensure transparency of costs of publicly
    funded research
  • to ensure coherence of the dual support funding
    streams, mutually reinforcing
  • to ensure that public funds are being spent cost
    effectively
  • to improve clarity over respective
    responsibilities of FC RCs

6
The Transparency ReviewUnderstanding the Problem
  • In the past, focused on allocation of income to
    activities, not the distribution of costs.
  • Not able to answer the value for money
    question, particularly for research.
  • Can we manage ourselves effectively?
  • Confidence of stakeholders?

7
(No Transcript)
8
Transparency Review Reporting in July 2001
Hefce 95 of institutions Shefc
100 of institutions HefcW 92 of
institutions NI 100 of institutions
9
Results by ActivityAggregate of 9 Institutions
PF T NPF T PF R NPF R O Income 457 115
391 157 323 Costs 478 72 521
211 238 (Deficit/surplus (21) 43 (130)
(56) 85 (Deficit)/surplus (5) 37 (33)
(36) 26 As of income 1998-99 informal
data
10
Qualitative Messages
  • PF and NPF research in deficit, i.e. full costs
    exceed income that can be attributed to them
  • PF teaching is in deficit, though this is not
    large
  • No evidence that public funds being used to
    subsidise non publicly funded activities
  • Other activities making contribution to funding
    publicly funded activities

11
Core Management Processes
Institutional Plan Targets Finance etc.
Academic Capital Plans
Costing Pricing
Procurement
Marketing
Administration
Sales
Facilities Management
Management Information
Monitoring
12
Where are we now?
Transparency Review
13
(No Transcript)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com