1. Welcome slide

2. Future arrangements for the Destination of Leavers from Higher Education Survey Manchester 20 August 2013 Davina Madden – HEFCE Regional Consultant and Interim Head of Provision of Information Policy

3. Provide an update on the process for 2014 Hear from an institution that manages the survey Hear from us about what a potential contractor could offer Discuss the pros and cons of each of our options and feed back to us Aims of the event

4. Rationale White Paper’s commitment to develop a ‘level playing field’ between all types of HE provider English FECs would be required to fund and administer the DLHE survey for themselves Changes to DLHE survey 2014-15 Circular letter outlining options for FECs (April 13) To ‘go it alone’ - fund and administer the DLHE survey for themselves HEFCE to tender on behalf of FECs to establish a framework supplier To collaborate with other FECs/HEIs to run the survey as a consortium

5. Support to manage procurement and data quality. HEFCE to appoint a supplier through OJEU open tender process. First tranche of the survey (April 2014) for English FECs to become optional HEFCE supplier in place to support second tranche (January 2015) After 2015, FECs expected to use framework supplier if data does not meet requirements. Update on the process Expected Timeline Aug 2013 Informal consultation events Sep 2013 Circular Letter outlining full process. Feb2014 Complete OJEU competitive tender Feb 2014 Supplier appointed Mar 2014 Training events for FECs Apr 2014 Tranche one survey returns (optional) Apr 2014 FECs complete preparedness checklist May 2014 Feedback on checklist from HEFCE Oct 2014 Survey activity starts

6. We want to explore with you... What our proposals would mean for your institution What considerations should we build into the Invitation to Tender for approved supplier. How we can further support you through these changes What this will mean for your institution.

7. Association of Colleges (AoC) Manchester 20 August 2013 Nick Davy – AoC HE Policy Manager

8. Data Quality Manchester University 20 August 2013 Richard Puttock – HEFCE Head of data and management information

9. Important because: Comparable and publishable data – used to inform student choice Quality assurance and enhancement Informs public policy - the social, cultural and economic benefit of Higher Education Why good DLHE data is important High response rates Target response rate: Full Time – 80% Part Time – 70%

10. Currently a minimum of 23 students Concern of non-publishable data Round table discussions about data thresholds Part of HEFCE’s financial memorandum Data contributes to the wider debate around the value of HE in FE Distinctive contribution of smaller providers HEFCE’s Data Thresholds...

11. Data requirements Complete responses and full data Correct SOC and SIC coding Data submission via HEFCE extranet, linked to ILR (XML format). HEFCE’s requirements Preparedness checklist To help FECs think about the practicalities of running the survey To allow HEFCE to act as a critical friend

12. DLHE Collection In-House Jan Moore Assistant Head of Careers & Employability Manchester Metropolitan University

13.  We are a very big institution – some 9,000 students are surveyed every year across the April and January collections so we can reap economies of scale  Extensive telephone follow up is required - only 12% of our students replied on-line in the 2011/12 collection  Growing interest in destinations due to DLHE being a KPI means that we have to offer MMU staff an expert and professional support service throughout the year  Two members of C&E staff now work full-time on DLHE and related graduate labour market issues DLHE Collection In-House – the MMU context

14.  It’s good PR - continued contact when other university services have ceased  Highlights our ‘after-sales’ service  Increases knowledge of the graduate labour market – emerging trends can be identified quickly  Enables the writing of great case studies and marketing materials  Quality assurance – always has been an informal means of getting honest feedback  Existing students help with the ‘phone survey – great for their skill development and they get paid! The advantages of doing DLHE in-house

15.  Identifying your POPDLHE – need excellent relations with your IT people and they need to be interested in/have time for DLHE too  The evening work! (Overtime and TOIL)  Manual paper sifting vs. electronic processing  Marking up and coding incl. JACS and SOC 2010  Steady flow of HESA circulars that need to be read – and understood! There is an annual re-visiting and revision training of what we need to do - and when The disadvantages of undertaking the DLHE collection in-house

16.  Level of support from your institution as a whole  Level of support that can be called on from IT/Management Information systems  Interest and knowledge of the staff involved  Support network – HEIs have AGCAS and increasingly regional and LinkedIn groups but CFE’s?  Value for Money – what you get back in terms of greater knowledge, alumni contacts etc must justify the cost DLHE Collection In-House: Key Issues

17. What a contractor would offer Manchester 20 August 2013 Matthew Barrow – HEFCE HE Policy Adviser

18. Running the DLHE survey through a contractor HEFCE to run a tender exercise to establish a preferred supplier. This should: Ensure economies of scale Reduce the burden for FECs to run competitive tender exercises Support FECs to provide good quality data

19. Current Contractor Current contractor for the collection of DLHE data for FECs covers: 116 colleges 22,438 graduates College populations range from 4 to 1590 Response target of 80% (high) Means contacting over 17,950 graduates

20. College’s Responsibility Provide the contractor with a contact list of the survey sample Communicate with the contractor

21. Contracted to run the survey on your behalf Set up data systems Advertise and market the survey Digital copy of the survey sent out via e-mail Specialist online survey software with unique access codes Adapted for smart phones Text messages Letters Fully trained call team Diagnostics Producing the data and analysing What the contractor will provide

22. Costs Currently, the survey runs at a cost of ≈ £ 10 per student Dependent on the bids that we receive from our Invitation to Tender There may be an annual set up cost There may be a cost per student Costs involved

23. Staff and student awareness of the survey running Quality of the alumni contact records Set up costs for institutions Practicalities of using a contractor

24. Benefits End to end service Reduced risk Fixed costs Expertise and experience Soc and Sic coding The rules and any changes No need to recruit temporary staff Economies of scale Brand awareness Benefits to using a contractor

25. Group Discussion Manchester 20 August 2013 Davina Madden – HEFCE Regional Consultant and Interim Head of Provision of Information Policy

26. Feedback on HEFCE’s process Timing Options available Preparedness checklist What would be the implications for your institution How can HEFCE support FECs through these changes Discuss in groups