1. Southern Universities Network WP practitioners conference 2016 Sarah Howls Head of Student Opportunity Winchester 07 January 2016

3. Over a decade of investment WP allocation since 1999-2000 Mainstream allocation for disabled students – 2000-2001 Improving retention introduced in 2003-04 P4P in 2003-04 Aimhigher 2004-2011 Lifelong Learning Networks 2004-11 NNCO 2014-16 Funding widening participation

4. Young participation above and beyond trends in GCSE attainment

5. Improving retention Full-time first degree non-completion rates

6. Participation gaps: trends Young cohort entry rates (aged 18 or 19 on entry) by background (UCAS, 2014) Q1 (disadvantaged) Q5 (advantaged) Q2 Q3 Q4

7. Gaps in young participation: Liverpool Young participation: Liverpool

8. Trends: Part-time and full-time entrants, undergraduate and postgraduate

9. National Networks for Collaborative Outreach Funding from January 2015 to December 2016 35 local networks achieve coverage of 4,600 schools and colleges across England 3 national networks created: NNECL Open University Oxford and Cambridge Eight NNCO projects including access in rural and coastal contexts Seven projects exploring GCSE attainment gaps, BME IAG needs, and local skill strategies Brighton

10. Apprenticeships Proportion of starts on higher apprenticeships increased from 2.1% in 2013-14 to 3.9% in 2014-15 Source: FE data library Apprenticeship starts by framework and level Apprentice starts by level

11. Green paper expectations Double the proportion from disadvantaged backgrounds in HE by 2020 13.6% in 2009 to 27.2% in 2020 Increase BME access by 20% by 2020 Progression of white males Access to the most selective institutions remains a priority Government priorities and targets

12. How the TEF will support social mobility TEF should recognise institutions’ track record – eligibility contingent on access and success Metrics broken down by student groups Outcomes of HE and gains by different student groups Use of retention as key metric Ways in which provision reflects diversity of needs Students helping to shape study Social Mobility

13. Director for Fair Access (DFA) to focus on progression and success for groups where evidence of more needing to be done UUK to set up social mobility advisory group UCAS to consult on name blind admissions Close links to TEF The new architecture to bring activity together in one body Possibly expand role of DFA – setting targets? Data Degree apprenticeships OfS to increase onus on providers Social mobility proposed actions The Green Paper outlines a number of steps to be taken

14. Outcomes of the spending review £120m reduction to teaching funds announced Actual reduction is larger BIS statement requires up to 50 percent reduction to SOF Requires SOF to be retargeted and focused on institutions with the most effective outcomes Will ask DFA to ensure institutions take more responsibility for social mobility Investment to secure social mobility

15. BME A-level Analysis 2013-14 graduates by ethnicity, entry qualification and degree classification Source: HEFCE September 2015, Differences in degree outcomes: The effect of subject and student characteristics

16. HE outcomes by POLAR3 quintile Percentage point difference of the outcome from the sector-adjusted average for the four outcomes, by POLAR3 quintile

17. Postgraduate progression 53.9% of quintile 1 students intending to study were doing so six months after graduation compared to 65.5% of quintile 5 students

18. Curricula, learning and teaching practices Staff-student relationships (belonging) Differences in social, cultural and economic capital (hidden curriculum) Psychological and identity factors Differential outcomes: Explanatory factors

19. Government announced changes to DSA support from 2016-17 Institutions to provide NMH in bands 1 and 2 (except sighted guides) Institutions to provide specialist transcription services Institutions to cover cost of their own or their agent’s specialist accommodation Standard computer peripherals only funded by exception (follows 2015-16 change to funding of entry level computers) Support for disabled students

20. DSA changes require further investment by HEPs Removal of most NMH support at bands 1 and 2 BIS estimate this as 8 percent of total NMH support = £6.5m approx. (Total NMH spend = £81.9m) Impact will be varied across sector Students with SpLDs most affected Sector average = 4.6% SpLD students Some institutions considerably higher Disabled students

21. Institutions with highest proportions of students with SpLD (sector average = 4.6) InstitutionPercentage of students with SpLDs Leeds College of Art25 Falmouth University23 The Liverpool Institute of Performing Arts 21 Royal Agricultural University20 University for the Creative Arts16 Norwich University of the Arts16 Royal College of Art15 Rose Bruford College15 Central School of Speech and Drama15 University of the Arts, London15

22. Number of students with mental health problems

23. increasing demand for services proposed changes to the way in which funding is delivered to support disabled students moving to a social model of support working with external agencies increased pressure on resources. Provision and support for disabled students: challenges facing institutions

24. HEFCE receives its grant letter from Government Funding decisions made by HEFCE Board Funding decisions communicated to sector What happens next?

25. Thank you for listening s.howls@hefce.ac.uk

26. How to find out more e-mail hefce@hefce.ac.uk Twitter http://twitter.com/hefce web-site www.hefce.ac.uk governance-hefce e-mail distribution list HEFCE update, our monthly e-newsletter

27. Copyright The copyright in this presentation is held either by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) or by the originating authors. Please contact customerservices@hefce.ac.uk for further information and re-use requests.customerservices@hefce.ac.uk