HEIF and the capacity of modern universities Mark Gray (Middlesex University)

The evolution of “third stream” funding ProgrammeFunding period HEIF 42008/09 – 2010/11 HEIF 32006/ /08 HEIF 22004/5-2005/06 HEIF 136 months from award (earliest Dec 2001) Business FellowshipsAug 2001 to July 2005 KTCFAug 2004 to July 2006 HEACF 2Sep 2004 to July 2006 HEACF 1March 2002 to Aug 2004 HEROBC Transitional Funding Aug 2003 to July 2004 HEROBC Round 2Aug 2000 to July 2004 HEROBC Round 1Jan 2000 to July 2003

Business engagement Knowledge transfer Community engagement KT and BCI, 2011

BCI activities include  Collaborative research involving public funding and funding from business (e.g. CASE awards and KTPs)  Contract research for business and non-commercial organisations, where business/non-commercials are commissioners of the work.  Consultancy contracts  CPD, continuing education and other courses  Funded regeneration activities  Granting technology licenses for exclusive or non-exclusive use by business or non-commercial organisations  Income from all other sources of intellectual property  Spin-offs with various degrees of ownership  Graduate business start-ups  Social, community and cultural engagement by means of free and chargeable events

Characteristics of engagement Outputs of third stream work must not include core teaching provision or funded research, but may build upon them Outputs must have an economic impact or community/social impact that goes beyond the existing benefits of meeting the teaching and research expectations Outputs are market-related: they find a price determined by the interaction of largely unfettered forces of supply and demand Outputs from the third stream benefit a wide range of ‘clients’, including business and community agencies.

HEFCE’s (2008) perception of the role of HEIF Source: HEFCE circular October 2008/35, p. 5

Sources of university research and innovation income

HEBCI income by type 2003 to 2009

HEIF outputs: patents, licences and spinouts from UK higher education

Planned Science and Research funding in the UK, Source: BIS Annual Innovation report 2010

New HEIF round (August ) Formula approach maintained from HEIF4 ‘incentivising performance, moving away from the capacity-building element’ in the formula Increasing the maximum level for allocations Setting a threshold allocation (removing HEIF allocation from some institutions entirely) Funding maintained at cash level from end of HEIF4, in each year of the new round

The March-April consultation HEFCE is calling upon institutions to respond to proposals for the future management and disposition of the HEIF (Higher Education Innovation Fund). HEFCE invites comment on the following questions: (i) ‘Is our proposal of a threshold HEIF allocation a satisfactory and appropriate response to the need now to focus HEIF on the most effective KE [knowledge exchange] performers?’ (ii) ‘Are there additional metrics available now that capture the breadth and benefits from KE activity, including activity primarily leading to non-monetised benefits, and that could be used to demonstrate the effectiveness of KE performance and could be collected in a fairly low-burden way?’ (iii) ‘Do you have any other comments on any aspects of the policies, method and funding for HEIF ?’