Issues on Recruitment The new funding formula (revised August 2003) The current size and shape of the University G R Barnes Management Information, August 2005

2 Sources of HE Funding Estimated proportions for system as a whole

3 Division of HE Budget

4 Block Grants Historical proportions, subject to change

5 Earmarked Funds Historical proportions, subject to change

6 Distribution of the Budget 6.5% increase from 2004/05 to 2005/06 (before inflation)

7 Teaching Input Grants Teaching inputs derived from:  FTE enrolled students in year N-2  Adjusted for approved plan for year N  Funding grid of CESM categories, course levels, and mode of tuition Capped for 2006 to 2007 (thus 2009)

8 Proposed Institutional Shares of Teaching Input Unit Totals Actual 2003Capped for 2005/2006Funded totals Cape Peninsula4.52%4.49% Cape Town5.07%5.24% Central1.67%1.64% Durban Institute3.71%3.83% Fort Hare1.19%1.15% Free State4.38%4.45% Johannesburg7.03%6.91% KwaZulu Natal7.88%7.70% Limpopo3.47%3.41% Mangosuthu1.34%1.17% Nelson Mandela3.67%3.80% North West5.28%5.01% Pretoria8.89%9.19% Rhodes1.14%1.18% South Africa9.63%9.96% Stellenbosch4.93%5.09% Tshwane8.45%8.57% Vaal Triangle2.36%2.44% Venda1.55%1.34% Walter Sisulu3.38%3.04% Western Cape2.87%2.86% Witwatersrand6.07%6.09% Zululand1.54%1.45% 11 of the 23 (48%) have decreased in shares

9 Funding Groups Funding groups: 2004/05 and 2005/06 GroupCESM categories included in funding group 107 education, 13 law, 14 librarianship, 20 psychology, 21 social services/public administration 204 business/commerce, 05 communication, 06 computer science, 12 languages, 18 philosophy/religion, 22 social sciences 302 architecture/planning, 08 engineering, 10 home economics, 11 industrial arts, 16 mathematical sciences, 19 physical education 401 agriculture, 03 fine and performing arts, 09 health sciences, 15 life and physical sciences

10 Weightings per Course Level

11 Weighting factors Note: distance funded at 50% Weighting factors for teaching inputs: 2004/05 and 2005/06 Funding group Undergraduate & equivalent Honours & equivalent Masters & equivalent Doctoral & equivalent ContactDistanceContactDistanceContactDistanceContactDistance

12 Migration Strategy The new formula is to be phased in over three years In 2004, both the old formula and the new are used Formulae are applied to flatten out peaks and valleys in the grant to institutions

13 Size & Shape Race Gender Delivery mode Under & Post Grads DOE benchmarks

14 Race Distribution

15 Gender Distribution

16 Delivery Mode

17 Under & Post Grads Mode of Study Occ/UG/PGContactDistanceTotal UG Occassional1.8%0.0%1.6% Undergraduate76.8%28.2%71.8% PG Occassional0.2%0.0%0.2% Postgraduate21.2%71.7%26.4% Total100.0%

18 Qualification type

19 Grad rates Qualification Type Benchmark UG Cert/Dip23%37% 22.5 UG Bachelor17%16% 22.5 UG Professional15%14%18 PG Dip61%60%54 PG Bachelor46%41% 54 Honours 72%62%54 Masters* 22%15%30 Total22%20% *excludes Masters by Research DOE defined as graduates over enrolments for the same qualification type in that year

20 Field of study Note: According to DOE benchmarks, SET and Business & Management should comprise 60% of the total enrolled FTEs

21 Summary The capping of FTEs to 2007 means changes to CESMs will not affect overall subsidy The capping does not affect output Target post graduate enrolments Target throughput

22 DOE documents on MI website … Thank you.

23 Teaching Output Weightings

24 Government Overview

25 Allocation Overview

26 Teaching Output Grants Teaching outputs are derived from:  Total of non-research graduates in N-2 Excludes Research M and D Graduates  Normative total according to national benchmarks Added August 2003  Funding grid of course levels

27 Graduation Benchmarks

28 Teaching Development Grants Where an institution’s actual number of graduates in year N-2 is lower than the normative total, the institution may apply for a three-year teaching development grant  Teaching development grants will be funded from the difference between institutions’ actual and normative totals for graduates

29 Research Output Grants Derived from:  Research masters and doctoral graduates in year N-2  Research publication units in N-2  Normative total according to national benchmarks

30 Research Weightings

31 Research Benchmark Ratio of weighted publication units to permanently appointed instruction/research staff

32 Research Development Grants Where an institution’s actual number of research graduates in year N-2 is lower than the normative total, the institution may apply for a three-year research development grant  Research development grants will be funded from the difference between institutions’ actual and normative totals for research graduates

33 Institutional Factor Grants These factors are for:  Disadvantage  Approved size of institution Approved shape of institution dropped from August 2003 version

34 Disadvantaged Students African and Coloured students  South African citizens  In contact education programmes Calculation is made of the proportion these students constitute of the total unweighted FTE contact student enrolment in year N-2 This factor is added to the teaching input grant of the institution

35 Disadvantaged Students

36 Institutional Size Meant to take account of economies of scale Additional input grants are made to smaller institutions

37 Institutional Size

38 Foundation Programmes Application can be made for funding, for a three-year period Subsequent grants will be dependent on institutional achievements in FPs  The total FTE students to be funded in FPs will be 15% of FTE enrolled first-time entering undergraduates in contact education programmes