An Roinn Oideaehais agus Scileanna Ardoideachais Beartas agus Taighde, Sraid Maoilbhride Baile Atha Cliath 1 Row? Dublin 1 RC96 . 1?01 RC96 Department of Education and Skills Higher Education Policy and Research Marlborough Street 31 July 2018 Ken Foxe mailto: Re: FOI Request 2018/295 Dear Ken, I refer to your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2014 for records held by this Department ?Dear Sir/Madam, Under the 01 Act 2014, I am seeking the following: - copies of all internal emails and records relating to the preparation of the following two documents: a copy of the brief on the latest set of Q5 rankings, the speech given at IIEA conference on Higher Education Funding in Ireland. For avoidance of doubt, these are the two documents referenced in email sent to me by Donna Maguire on July 3. I would prefer to receive this information electronically, ideally in its original electronic format? 1, Donna Maguire, have now made a final decision to partially grant your request on July and a copy of the relevant records is attached along with this letter, together with a schedule of records. The purpose of this letter is to explain that decision. This explanation has the following parts: 1. a schedule of all of the records covered by your request; 2. an explanation of the relevant findings concerning the records to which access is denied, and 3. a statement of how you can appeal this decision should you wish to do so. This letter addresses each of these three parts in turn. 1. Schedule of records A schedule is enclosed with this letter, it shows the documents that this body considers relevant to your request. It describes each document and refers to the sections of the FOI Act which apply to prevent release. The schedule also refers you to sections of the detailed explanation given under 9 +353- (1) 889 6400 An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna Ardoideachais Beartas agus aighde, Sraid Maoilbhride I I Baile Atha Cliath Dublin 1 Department of Education and Skills Higher Education Policy and Research Marlborough Street heading 2 below, which are relevant to the document in question. It also gives you a summary and overview of the decision as a whole. 2. Findings, particulars and reasons for decisions to deny access The sections of the Act which can apply to deny access to documents are known as its exemption provisions. The Freedom of Information Act 2014 protects information that relates to the deliberative process. This is outlined in Section 29(1(a) of the Act: Section 29(1)(a) Subject to this section, a head shall refuse to grant an FOI request if, in the opinion of the head, the record concerned contains matter relating to the deliberative processes of an 01 body (including Opinions, advice, recommendations, and the results of consultations, considered by the body, the head of the body, or a member of the body or of the staff of the body for the purpose of those processes). Information relating to the deliberative process has been redacted in the records you seek. You will note that these sections have been marked out by a black marker. 3. Right of appeal You may appeal this decision. In the event that you need to make such an appeal, you can do so by writing to the Freedom of Information Unit, Department of Education and Skills, Marlborough Street, D01 RC96. Your correspondence should include a fee of ?30 for processing the appeal. Payment should be made by way of personal cheque or postal money order made payable to the accountant in the Department of Education and Skills. Please note the Department of Education and Skills no longer accept cheque payments from business users. For further information regarding payment methods for business users, please email foi@education.gov.ie You should make your appeal within 4 weeks from the date of this notification, where a day is defined as a working day excluding, the weekend and public holidays. However, the making of a late appeal may be permitted in appropriate circumstances. The appeal will involve a complete reconsideration of the matter by a more senior member of the staff of this body. 3 +353- (1) 889 6400 An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna Ardoideachais Beartas agus ?l'aighde, Sraid Maoilbhride Marlborough Street Balle Atha Dublin 1 1 OIDEACHAIS EDUCATION AGUS SCILEANNA A I Department of Education and Skills Higher Education Policy and Research Publication All non?personal FOI requests will be recorded on an FOI disclosure log which will be published on the Department of Education and Skills website in due course. Should you wish to discuss the above, please contact me by telephone at 01 889 2204 Yours sincerely, Donna Maguire Administrative Officer Higher Education Policy and Research a assimiaoi 6266" Freedom of Information Schedule of Records - Summary of Decision Making FOI Request Reference 2018/295 Rec. No. No. of pages Date of Record Brief description of record Decision 1 1 07.06.1 8 Email re: Rankings Grant 2 6 07.06.1 8 Email chain re: IIEA Conference Grant 3 2 07.06.1 8 Email re: IIEA Conference Grant Basis for refusal Exempt under FOI Act Other Part Grant 4 17 08.06.1 8 Email with attachment: 7.6.18 IIEA HE Funding Breifing Material 29(1)(a) Deliberations of FOI bodies opinions, advice, recommendation s and the results of consultations Grant 5 1 11.06.1 8 Email re: Rankings 6 10 11.06.1 8 Email with attachment: IIEA Conference - The Funding of HE Grant 7 2 12.06.1 8 Email chain Grant 8 19 12.06.1 8 Email with attachment: 12.6.18 IIEA HE Funding… Part Grant 29(1)(a) Deliberations of FOI bodies - opinions, advice, recommendation s and the results of consultations Grant 9 16 12.06.1 8 Email with attachment: Draft MOS Script… 10 1 12.06.1 8 Email 11 16 12.06.1 8 Email with attachment: Draft MOS Script… Grant 12 20 13.06.1 8 Email with attachment: MOS Script IIEA… Grant 13 8 14.06.1 8 Email with attachment: QS University Rankings 2019_Note… Grant Grant Maguire, Donna From: Gaynor, Tony Sent: 08 June 2018 16:57 To: Beausang, William Cc: McQuaid, Lynda; OGorman, Diane; Hope, Caoirnhe Subject: draft speaking points and brief for Minister 0 Connor Attachments: 7.6.18 IIEA HE Funding Briefing Material for MMOCdocx William, Please find attached draft speaking points, as well as briefing material, for Minister 0 Connor?s address at the IIEA next week. You may want additional material added but I just wanted to get this document to you and we can plug any gaps next week. I?m copying Lynda in as weil as the Minister?s office were enquiring as to the status of the speaking points brief. Can discuss further on Monday if you want further work undertaken. Just to note that the current draft assumes we get the response issued to the Joint Committee re Cassells hopefully we can get that signed on Monday to incorporate the changes from both Ministers but if not we will need to amend that passage. Thanks Tony Gaynor Principal Officer Higher Education Finance, Governance and Qualifications Unit Department of Education 8L Skills I Mariborough Street, Dublin RC96 Direct: _l Briefing Material for Minister Mitchell O?Connor THEA Colloquium May 2018 KEY SPEAKING POINTS: Cassells: - The Expert Group?s Report (Cassells Report), clearly outlined the funding challenges in the higher education sector in light of demographic increases and the impact of the economic downturn. - The report was clear in its conclusion that our current funding model is not sustainable. It called for the development of a clear funding strategy for the sector that will deliver a robust and steady base of funding to sustain the system into the future. a The report highlight three main policy options for consideration in order to provide a more sustainable future funding model. 0 As committed to in the Programme for Government Minister Bruton referred the report to the Oireachtas Joint Committee for Education and Skills as part of the process for building consensus on the most appropriate funding model for the sector. a In January 2018, 18 months after publication of the Report, my Department received a request from the Oireachtas Committee for the Department to carry out a comprehensive economic evaluation of each of the recommendations put forward in the Report. have agreed to this request. 0 My Department and have considered the most appropriate means of undertaking the economic examination of each of the proposed policy options presented in the Report to assist the Committee. I have written to the Joint Committee this week to update them on our consideration of this issue. a After careful consideration of the Committee's request, our officials looked at the options available to undertake such a significant economic assessment. Officials in our Department are currently liaising with the Structural Reform Support Service (SRSS) of the European Commission to explore the possibility of having the evaluation carried out as part of the Commission?s Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP). - Together the SRSS and SRSP provide technical and administrative supports to Member States for institutional, structural and administrative reforms. The SRSS invites applications for technical support from Member States, and provides the necessary technical assistance in cooperation with other Commission services, other Member States and/or international organisations. 0 We consider that undertaking the proposed economic evaluation via this route will facilitate the type of comprehensive examination of the Cassells funding options that the Joint Committee have requested. It will also provide an invaluable opportunity to engage the involvement of a much wider range of international organisations and expertise than would ordinarily be available for a project of this nature. Other Government Departments have benefited from accessing this support in other policy areas. 0 The next round of applications to the SRSP will open in October 2018. If successful, this would mean that the economic evaluation could be commissioned and commence early in 2019. In carrying out the economic examination which has been requested by the Committee, the following will also be considered: - How the additional funding which has been called for by the Expert Group can positively impact on learners - What is the appropriate mix of apprenticeship programmes and upskilling programmes for those in work and how that impacts on demand and funding models - How responsiveness to skills gaps can best be secured Given the commitment in the Programme for Government, which committed to referring the expert review to the Joint Oireachtas Committee, so that the Committee could review its recommendations and outline a proposed funding plan for this sector, the economic evaluation will be forwarded to the committee once it has been completed. Measures taken since Cassells - In response to the funding challenges identified by Cassells, myself and Minister Bruton have successfully initiated and implemented a number of positive measures to address the funding challenges in higher education. Budget 2017 2018 a We have been working to secure additional funding for higher education. Through increases in the past two budgets, we will be investing more than ?100m in higher education in 2018 than in 2016. This additional funding has allowed for targeted initiatives in higher education including technological university development, skills programmes, performance and innovation funding as part of the RFAM, promoting access to higher education, and apprenticeship costs in the sector. It will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional students in 2018. 0 We will look to build on this investment in 2019 and beyond. National Training Fund a As part of Budget 2018, the Government decided to raise the National Training Fund levy by 0.1% in 2018 to and by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020. The increases scheduled for 2019 and 2020 are subject to the reform of the NTF to make it more transparent and to afford employers greater opportunity to inform the NTF expenditure priorities. For example, a comprehensive independent review of the NTF is currently being finalised. - The increase in funding from the National Training Fund is a key strategic element of the overall funding increase for higher and further education. Reform of the Funding Model (RFAM review): a In January of this year I published the report of the independent Expert Panel on review the current allocation model for funding higher education. The report provides a roadmap for transitioning towards a reformed funding model that is more transparent, consistent across higher education institutions including Technological Universities that incentivises actions in key strategic areas, and supports improved accountability while also respecting institutional autonomy. The implementation group has been established and comprises representatives from DES, HEA, DPER, THEA IUA. A significant level of progress has been made to date on the recommendations which were prioritised for 2018. Key immediate priorities being considered by the Group include: a financial penalty system for serious governance breaches the design of the new innovation fund for individual and collaborative proposals, which can include prospective This will provide funding for new and innovative proposals that can contribute to promoting efficiencies and more positive student outcomes. 0 A new performance fund to reward institutions that excel in key priority areas. 0 The development of criteria for additional funding for multi-campus provision to assist in meeting the additional overhead costs associated with operating a regional campus. The RFAM recommendations will support and complement the new System Performance Framework for higher education which plays a key role in establishing the goals and objectives of the system up to 2020 across priority areas such as access, research and developing our pipeline of human capital. This comprehensive approach is being taken in order to contribute to the development of a long-term sustainable funding model forthe sector. As such, it will be important to build broad political and societal consensus on achieving the most appropriate future funding model and my Department will continue to work to that end. Capital investment - The Cassells report identified the need for capital investment in Higher Education. As a Government we have responded very positively in this area. a We have initiated a significant programme for the Institute of Technology sector. I recently announced key progress on the appointment of design teams for the government's Public Private Partnership programme for the higher education sector. A capital envelope of ?200rn was provided for in the 2016-21 Capital Plan for this programme. 0 This Programme is being rolled?out alongside ?367 million in funding from the Department of Education and Skills for investment in higher education over the period 2018?2021. 0 Project Ireland 2040 provides for a significant ramping up in Exchequer funding to support infrastructure priorities in the higher education sector. ?22 billion will be made available over the coming decade to support refurbishment, new buildings and equipment renewal in the sector. 0 Capital investment is essential to enhancing the capacity and quality of the higher education system, and to delivering on the vision forfuture Technological Universities. Eight of the eleven projects in the capital programme are in Institutes of Technology that are currently part of TU consortia. Future Funding in Higher Education - Briefing Material Cassells report The report makes findings in relation to the amount of funding required and the ways in which this funding can be delivered. The Group has articulated the need for an immediate and sustained increase in investment in higher education across current, capital and student support budgets (see Appendix for further detail): 0 Core Funding: Higher Education Institutions require an additional ?600 million by 2021 and ?1 billion by 20301. This will be targeted at: (1) improving the quality of student experience and outcomes and (2) providing for increased demographics. 0 Capital Funding: A capital investment programme of ?5.5 billion is needed over the next 10?15 years to sufficiently cater for increased student numbers, capital upgrades, health and safety issues, equipment renewal and ongoing maintenance. 0 Student Support: The report calls for an increase in the value of support and an extension of grants to postgraduate and part time students and potentially students in private HEls, with a potential cost of in the region of ?100 million. The Group puts forward three broad funding strategies for the future. These centre on the balance of cost sharing between the state and the student: 0 A predominately state funded system: Significant increase in investment by the State and an unwinding of the current student contribution Continuation of current system: Significant increase in investment by the State, continuation of ?3,000 upfront student contribution with fee waivers for students from lower income households 0 New system of deferred fees supported by student loans: Moderate increase in both state funding and the student contribution. Fees would be charged to all students, but payment would be deferred and supported by a student loan scheme 0 The final major recommendation is the introduction of a new employer contribution to higher education through an increase in the National Training Fund levy. The Expert Group's Report (Cassells Report) clearly outlines the funding challenges in the higher education sector and offers a number of approaches and recommendations for consideration. The report was referred to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education as part of the process for formulating a plan for the future of the sector. In January 2018, 18 months after publication of the Report, my Department received a request from the Oireachtas Committee for the Department to carry out a comprehensive economic evaluation of each of the recommendations put forward in the Report. I have agreed to this request. - Officials in my Department are currently liaising with the EurOpean Commission's Structural Reform Support Service (SRSS) to determine if the economic evaluation could be supported through the Structural Reform Support Programme. - No policy decisions will be taken in advance of the Committee?s recommendations. RFAM - Review of the Funding Model for Higher Education a The Report of the international panel on the Review of the Allocation Model for Funding Higher Education Institutions. was published on 15th January 2018. The reforms which will link funding of higher education institutions to the delivery of key national priorities including better alignment to skill needs of the economy, higher levels of performance and innovation, expansion of research; particularly with enterprise partners, the promotion of STEM provision, wider skills needs, and promoting access and lifelong learning. The recommendations are intended to transition towards a reformed funding model that has the potential to: 0 embed lifelong learning at the heart of Irish higher education provision; - recognise and respond to the demographic challenges and changing patterns of student demand; - make access and innovation central to all institutional missions; - ensure that funding can be channeled effectively to support research and skills development; and a reward institutions for delivering outcomes and impact. Important reforms that will be implemented based on the recommendations include: Revised Funding Model 0 The new funding model will move away from the current 'two pot? funding approach and towards a universal approach to supporting all higher education institutions including TU's. 0 Financial Penalties The Review of the Allocation Model for Funding Higher Education Institutions clearly acknowledged the importance of good governance and accountability across institutions and proposes a penalty system for serious breaches of governance compliance. 0 The proposed new financial penalty will complement and support the existing measures and initiatives which have been implemented to strengthen governance procedures and practices across the higher Education sector. Multi-campus provision The provision within the funding model of an additional ?250,000 per annum for higher education institutions with multiple campuses, in recognition of the additional costs that this involves. Performance Fund 0 The introduction of a new performance fund to reward institutions that excel in key areas, and also a means by which institutions could be rewarded for working together in pursuit of shared strategic goals. While the intention is that the new Performance Fund will be linked closely to the System Performance Framework, and that funding could be awarded based on information, data and reports generated from the compacts of the new Systems Performance Framework. This process will be possible from 2019 Innovation Fund The report recommends that there is scope within the funding model for institutions to come forward with innovative and transformative proposals with a potential application and impact across the system that cannot be funded within the current parameters of the model. In 2018 ?5million has been allocated for the innovation Fund. The implementation Group is currently finalising a competitive call for institutions or collective groups of institutions (TU's etc.) to present innovative or transformative proposals based on set criteria and specific themes. Please note that the implementation group will continue to work toward the implementation of all the recommendations set out in the report to establish a universal and transparent system for all institutions. National Training Fund 1. As part of Budget 2018, the Government decided to raise the National Training Fund levy by 0.1% in 2018 to and by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020 (subject to the reform of the NTF to make it more transparent and to afford employers greater opportunity to inform the NTF expenditure priorities). The increase in funding from the National Training Fund is a key strategic element of the overall funding increase for higher and further education. Following issues raised by employers during a consultation process with them a number of key reforms to the NTF are being introduced to make it more responsive to employer needs and to give employers a greater say in informing priorities for the Fund. Some of the key reforms include: A Comprehensive Review of the NTF - A comprehensive and independent review of the National Training Fund will be undertaken to guide strategic decisions on its structure and future direction in order to inform Budget 2019. This review is being conducted by lndecon and will be completed by end of June 2018. The terms of reference for this review are as follows: - Examine the effectiveness and efficiency of the fund to date in meeting its objectives; - Assess the targets and performance criteria associated with programmes supported through the Fund; - Examine the adequacy of the evidence base and performance criteria on which expenditure decisions are taken; - Assess the monitoring and evaluation arrangements in place; - Assess the responsiveness of the Fund to the needs of the economy and wider society in terms of the type and method of programme delivery; Assess, the continued relevance of the core objectives of the fund and the future strategic direction of the fund; - Identify the most appropriate governance and oversight structure of the NTF in optimising employer engagement and input into priorities strategic pnon?es - Considerthe role of the fund, alongside the Exchequer and student sources, in future funding arrangements of the HE and FET sectors. Make recommendations on how to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance and impact of expenditure from the NTF fund and responsiveness of the Fund to the needs of the economy. - Undertake an analysis of trends in NTF expenditure and make proposals around how expenditure can be aligned with employer needs. This will require consultation with a number of stakeholders. 2. Additional and refocused expenditure on programmes relevant to employers Additional funding and refocused expenditure will be deployed on programmes and initiatives directly relevant to employers. Responding to calls for greater support for the development of skills in the existing workforce, apprenticeship will continue to expand, traineeship will be opened up to people in employment and support for Skillnets will increase. There has been a fundamental shift in the labour market over the last 5 years with unemployment falling from a 16% high in 2012 to 6% in January 2018. Therefore there has been a need to change/rebalance a suite of programmes to reflect the changing needs of the labour market and skills gaps. 3. An NTF more aligned with employer needs - The 2018 NTF allocations represent a major shift in the focus of expenditure from the Fund. Programmes will be focused on labour market skill needs across higher education, further education and training and other partners. Funding for 5. programmes that are focused on social inclusion (albeit often with a strong labour market element) will transfer from the Fund to the Exchequer. This has started in 2018 with the move of the Specialist Training Provider Programme (training for people with disabilities) to the Exchequer and the movement of skills-focused higher education programmes to the NTF. A greater say for employers, more transparency and stronger evaluation - The annual prioritisation of skill needs by the National Skills Council will be used to inform spending priorities on NTF programmes. A formal evaluation of at least one NTF-supported programme will be undertaken each year. Information collected on regional skills needs will be used to inform prioritisation of spend at local and regional level. A new strategic dialogue model, incorporating strategic performance agreements clearly aligning local/regional and national targets, will be put in place in FET from 2018. This will enable a much clearer understanding for stakeholders, including employers, of the targets, outcomes and impact of FET. as World University Rankings 2016/2017 While there is a decline in the Rankings of some Irish Institutions, Ireland performs ahead of most European countries relative to our population size and has the 3id highest level of tertiary attainment rate (52.3% in 2015) for 30 34 year olds in the EU28. We are still significantly ahead of the EU28 average which rests at 38.7% in 2015. This strong performance is confirmed in the recent OECD publication Education at a Glance which was published on 15 September 2016 and which placed Ireland 6th in the OECD in terms of its Tertiary Attainment Rate amongst 25-34 year olds. We do have to be cautious about how we interpret the results of these commercial global rankings. It is clear that performance in rankings are often highly reliant on surveys of opinion and of citations in journals which do not adequately capture the full range of activities taking place in our third level institutions. There are a number of university ranking systems seeking to benchmark institutions internationally. The robustness and reliability of the various methodologies utilised to generate international league tables comparing different institutions across different countries is the subject of active debate. An important issue in seeking to assess the performance of Higher Education Institutions in comparative terms is the relevance of input measures such as staff?student ratios and funding levels as opposed to key output and outcome indicators that are likely to be more directly related to the quality of any particular institution. I want a strong Higher Education system that serves the needs of all students, enterprise and other stakeholders through high quality teaching and learning, upskilling and reskilling, research and innovation as well as supporting the most disadvantaged to participate in higher education. It is important that we ourselves choose the goals and objectives and then benchmark ourselves against best international practice. I have acknowledged that funding is a key concern. I have also outlined the many positive measures that have been adopted to address this challenge, including additional investment of ?100m in higher education in 2018 compared to when the Cassells report was published in 2016. This additional funding has allowed fortargeted initiatives in higher education including technological university development, skills programmes, performance and innovation funding as part of the RFAM, and apprenticeship costs in the sector. It will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional students in 2018. I will look to build on this investment in 2019 and beyond. Higher education outcomes Our Higher Education System is undergoing a programme of unprecedented modernisation and reform. Through implementation of the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, the aim is to develop the higher education system to equip people with the knowledge and skills necessary to live fulfilled and rewarding lives, and to meet the social and economic challenges facing Ireland. The implementation ofthe System Performance Framework (SPF), including Strategic Dialogue and the agreement of compacts with the Higher Education Institutions (HEls) underpins a changed relationship between the State and the higher education system, and this provides for a new level of accountability for public funding against national objectives. The Higher Education Authority (HEA) published the Third Higher Education System Performance 2014?201 7 Report in December 2017. This report reviewed the performance of the higher education system for the years 2014 to 2017 in critical areas such as access and its responsiveness to skills needs of the economy. This Department published the new Higher Education System Performance Framework for the period 2018 to 2020 in January of this year, in conjunction with the HEA. It sets out the ambition, goals and objectives for higher education for this three-year period. Far-reaching restructuring of the higher education landscape is already in progress as can be evidenced through the process for reforming initial teacher education and the passing of the Technological Universities Bill, 2018 in March 2018. This will allow the loTs to progress their applications for Technological University status. Higher Education outputs (incorporating the HEA Higher Education Systems Performance Review 2014-2017) The higher education system continues to expand and enrol more students. Overall, student numbers in the sector increased from 196,000 in 2011/12 to about 225,000 in 2016/17, an increase of some 13%. Third level education attainment (age 30-34) in Ireland was at 53.3% in 2017, up from 52.6% in 2013. The equivalent EU average stood at 39.7%, up from 37.1% in 2013. Ireland?s attainment exceeds the EU average by 13.6 percentage points. The number and share of students from disadvantaged backgrounds and of students with a disability attending third level grew between 2012/13 and 2016/17. In that 4 year period:? 0 Students from disadvantaged backgrounds rose by 24% from 9,150 to 11,318 0 Students with a disability rose by 72% from 2,561 to 4,417. The Irish higher education system has continued to create more and stronger international linkages, while also attracting a greater number of students to study in Ireland. The most recent HEA data (2016/17) demonstrates that 11.6% of full- time students (20,972) were international. This is an increase of 7% on 2012/13. Ireland continues to have the highest level of maths, science and computing graduates aged 20-29 per 1,000 of the pOpulation of the EU. However the male- female mix requires attention with a below EU28?average of 12.3 females per 1,000 graduates in these areas. Ireland ranks in 14th place in the World Talent Report for 2017 and 21 st in the World Competitiveness Yearbook 2017 In 2017, Ireland, in the European Innovation Scoreboard, was deemed a strong innovator, with innovation in SMEs and employment impacts of innovation highlighted as a key strength. The number of full?time new entrants to undergraduate higher education now exceeds 43,500, a figure that is 5% higher than five years ago, thus reflecting a continuing demand for higher education in Ireland. There are 9,800 students engaged in full~time and part-time postgraduate research in HEA-funded institutions, a figure which has increased by 6% since 2013/14 following four years of decline. There were almost 70,000 graduates of HEls in 2016, of which 49,000 were undergraduates and 21,000 were postgraduates. This represents an increase of 8% on the previous year. The increase in graduate numbers may, in part, be due to changes to Teacher Training Programmes. At undergraduate level, the 3-year Bachelor of Education for Primary Level Teaching changed to 4 years in 2012/13. Furthermore, at postgraduate level, the 1-year Professional Diploma in Education was replaced by a 2-year Professional Master of Education in 2014/15. Higher Education System Performance Framework 2018-2020 The Higher Education System Performance Framework 2018-2020 represents the second phase of evolution of the changed relationship between the State and HEls, which has been developed with the implementation of the first System Performance Framework for Higher Education, published in 2013. The purposes of the framework were articulated in 2013 and remain valid: - To hold the system accountable for performance for the delivery of national priorities and monitor performance of the system as a whole; 0 To articulate all the expectations of the system from different areas of government/agencies across the various dimensions of higher education activity; a To increase the visibility of performance of the system to Government and the wider public; 0 To contribute to system and policy development by highlighting structural and other deficits including data capacity; 0 To allow HEls to identify their strategic niche and mission and agree a performance compact aligned with funding with the HEA. As with the first framework, the HEA will use this new framework as the context for conducting a process of strategic dialogue with individual institutions. This will lead to the agreement of performance compacts with the HEA, with institution Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) reflecting their contribution to overall system objectives and building on their own individual missions, capacities and Key System Objectives 2018-2020 1. Providing a strong talent pipeline combining knowledge, skills and employability which responds effectively to the needs of our enterprise, public service and community sectors, both nationally and regionally, and maintains Irish leadership in Europe for skill availability. 2. Creating rich opportunities for national and international engagement which enhances the learning environment and delivers a strong bridge to enterprise and the wider community. 3. Excellent research, development and innovation that has relevance, growing engagement with external partners and impact for the economy and society and strengthens our standing to become an innovation Leader in Europe. 4. Significantly improves the equality of opportunity through Education and Training and recruits a student body that reflects the diversity and social mix of lreland?s population. 5. Demonstrates consistent improvement in the quality of the learning environment with a close to international best practice through a strong focus on quality and academic excellence. 6. Demonstrates consistent improvement in governance, leadership and operational excellence. These objectives, taken together, clearly indicate the key priorities of Government for the higher education system over the period ahead and will serve as a foundation for developing the system and for making investment decisions. They will also provide the basis on which to build greater transparency and accountability for the future. Future Challenges and Focus In 2016, two major political developments occurred which have created ongoing uncertainty for Ireland: the Brexit decision and the changing policy priorities and approaches in the United States. The Brexit decision raises particular concerns for higher education around people, access to networking and funding and changes to regulation and the broader economic environment. It also provides Ireland with opportunities: Ireland will be the only English speaking country in the EU and may become a much sought-after partner for European consortia with continental European universities and research organisations. lreland may also win foreign direct investment which will be attracted by its continuing membership of the EU and the availability of well-educated, flexible and international workforce. Ireland will need to ensure that the existing arrangements for staff, students and researchers with the UK will be maintained in any final agreement. In the broader context, the Brexit decision has already led to a strengthening and prioritisation of policy to further diversify export markets as reflected in the new Enterprise Ireland strategy: Build, Scale, Expand, Reach. In the context of political change in the US, the availability of talent, the responsiveness of education and training and the quality of our research and innovation will continue to be central to Ireland?s value proposition for attracting foreign direct investment. The Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Amendment) Bill, 2018 once enacted will bring extra measures to protect and enhance the student experience of International students studying in Ireland. The implementation of the International Education Mark will provide a strong quality assurance mark to enhance confidence in Irish education internationally. Overall, enterprise policy aims to deliver growth that is sustainable, led by strong export performance, to build resilience into our economy by taking a portfolio approach to sectoral deveiopment that is underpinned by innovation, productivity and competitiveness across all sectors, and to ensure that employment opportunities are created in all the regions. Higher education has a key role to play in supporting the achievement of this ambition. Technological Universities The Technological Universities Bill completed all stages in both houses of the Oireachtas on 8 March 2018 was signed into law by the President on 19 March 2018. A commencement order for the relevant Sections of the Act relating to TUs (as opposed to related provisions) was made on 24 April 2018. The legislation now underpins the development of a new type of higher education institution, building on the and mission of institutes of technology to develop world class technological universities. The Chairs and Presidents of all 4 consortia attended an information summit in the Higher Education Authority on the TU application process on 18 April 2018, which was hosted by the Minister of State for Higher Education. The Minister of State for Higher Education has also met individually, or has scheduled meetings with, the Presidents and Chairs of the institutions in the relevant TU consortia to discuss progress on and timelines for application submission. The first application for TU designation on behalf of Dublin Institute of Technology, Institute of Technology Blanchardstown and Institute of Technology Tallaght, was submitted to the Minister for Education and Skills on 27 April 2018. On 16 May 2018 the Minister appointed the following persons from the HEA and QQI nominations to the advisory panel to consider the application: Panel Appointments Mr. Lucien Bollaert Professor Tim McTiernan Dr. Mary Ellen Petrisko Dr. Andree Sursock There are currently four consortia of Institutes of Technology engaged with the developmental process seeking to become designated as technological universities: TU4Dub in - Dublin Institute of Technology a Institute of Technology Blanchardstown Institute of Technology Tallaght Application submitted on 27 April 2018. Funding to date: c. ?5m Connacht Ulster Alliance (CUA) Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Sligo - Letterkenny Institute of Technology Application anticipated in 2020. Funding to date: c. ?2m Munster Technological University (MTU) Cork Institute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Tralee Application anticipated in 2019. Funding to date: c. ?2m Technological University for the South?East (TUSE) - Waterford Institute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Carlow Application anticipated by end 2018. Funding to date: ?1m Higher Education Division 8th June 2018 Maguire, Donna From: Beausang, William Sent: 12 June 2018 13:49 To: Hope, Caoimhe Cc: Gaynor, Tony Subject: RE: Draft MOS script IIEA 12 06 Caoimhe, In following up on this please ignore the statistical annex. We can see whether Lynda wants to use any of the data and if so we can double check the relevant nos. i think they are all on the Eurostat online database with the ire figures adjusted back to wb Wiiliam Beausang Head of Higher and Further Education and - of Education and Skills i Marlborough Street i Dublin 1 {301 R096 An Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna Department of Education and Skills i am a Designated Public Official under the Regulation of Lobbying Act, 20% From: Beausang, William Sent: 12 June 2018 13:43 To: Hope, Caoimhe Cc: Gaynor, Tony 002mm920 << ?53 :5an M04 Page 2 of 7 Ladies and gentlemen, previous Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn, University Presidents, Danny McCoy (IBEC). Jim Miley Peter Cassells, and international guests. I am delighted that have been given this opportunity to address you on the Future Funding of Our Higher Education System. The Expert Group?s Report (Cassells Report), clearly outlined the funding challenges in the higher education sector in light of demographic increases and the impact of the economic downturn. The report was clear in its conclusion that our current funding model is not sustainable. It called for the development of a clear funding strategy for the sector that will deliver a robust and steady base of funding to sustain the system into the future. The report highlight three main policy options for consideration in order to provide a more sustainable future funding model. As committed to in the Programme for Government Minister Bruton referred the report to the Oireachtas Joint Committee for Education and Skills as part of the process for building consensus on the most appropriate funding model for the sector. In January 2018, 18 months after publication of the Report, my Department received a request from the Oireachtas Committee for the Department to carry out a comprehensive economic evaluation of each of the recommendations put forward in the Report. have agreed to this request. My Department and have considered the most appropriate means of undertaking the economic examination of each of the proposed policy options presented in the Report Page 3 of 7 to assist the Committee. have written to the Joint Committee this week to update them on our consideration of this issue. After careful consideration of the Committee?s request, our officials looked at the options available to undertake such a significant economic assessment. Officials in our Department are currently liaising with the Structural Reform Support Service (SRSS) of the European Commission to explore the possibility of having the evaluation carried out as part of the Commission?s Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP). Together the SRSS and SRSP provide technical and administrative supports to Member States for institutional, structural and administrative reforms. The SRSS invites applications for technical support from Member States, and provides the necessary technical assistance in cooperation with other Commission services, other Member States and/or international organisations. We consider that undertaking the proposed economic evaluation via this route will facilitate the type of comprehensive examination of the Cassells funding options that the Joint Committee have requested. It will also provide an invaluable opportunity to engage the involvement of a much wider range of international organisations and expertise than would ordinarily be available for a project of this nature. Other Government Departments have benefited from accessing this support in other policy areas. The next round of applications to the SRSP will open in October 2018. If successful, this would mean that the economic evaluation could be commissioned and commence eadyin 2019. in carrying out the economic examination which has been requested by the Committee, the following will also be considered: How the additional funding which has been called for by the Expert Group can positively impact on learners Page 4 of 7 What is the appropriate mix of apprenticeship programmes and upskilling programmes for those in work and how that impacts on demand and funding models How responsiveness to skills gaps can best be secured Given the commitment in the Programme for Government, which committed to referring the expert review to the Joint Oireachtas Committee, so that the Committee could review its recommendations and outline a proposed funding plan for this sector, the economic evaluation will be forwarded to the committee once it has been completed. FROM THE SPEECH AT THEA COLLIQUIM IN GMIT The new funding model being developed is linked to the delivery of key national priorities, including better alignment to the skills needs of the economy, higher levels of performance and innovation, expansion of research and strengthened governance. These various requirements will be monitored through the system performance framework 2018 ~2020, the strategic dialogue and performance compacts processes. Of course, future funding is a vital issue for all Higher Education Institutions going forward. We are all of us, both policy makers and professionals at the coal face, aware of the challenges facing the Higher Education sector currently, and over the next number of years, in terms of student demographic growth. Actually, i tend to view this situation in a more positive light than others. For me, it shows that young people and, indeed, more mature students and lifelong learners, are hungry for the types of high quality higher education and PET provision that Ireland is producing, not least in your sector. We should be proud to have such a sought after system. The challenge is to be able to continue to support the system financially, practically, legislatively and in policy terms. Of course, the Government is already working proactively to increase funding. Budget 2018 saw investment in Higher and Further Education increasing ?100 million above 2016 levels. This will allow for an additional 2,100 student pieces to be provided this year. Page 5 of 7 The total investment sits at ?2.36 bn. There is also a significant ramping up of Government investment on the capital side of the Higher Education sector. Over a 10 year period, investment of some ?22 billion is envisaged. This investment recognises that fit for purpose infrastructure is essential to cater for increasing numbers of students, new ways of teaching and learning and a skills development focus that is fully relevant and responsive. Higher Education is at the core of Project Ireland 2014. There will be an implementation group overseeing its success. I believe as Minister that the HE sector should be involved from the outset and be proactive rather than reactive. It is also key to delivering on a core objective of Project Ireland 2040, which is to stimulate a more balanced growth of population and employment across ireland?s regions. Last October, i was very pleased to announce a ?200m investment in the technological sector. 11 projects will deliver some 8,000 new student places and boost capacity in a range of key skills areas, including engineering, ICT, life sciences, creative technoiogies and culinary arts. All regions ofthe country will benefit. Here in GMT, for example, they are looking forward to the development of a new STEM building. In the interim, significant progress has been made and we will shortly be moving to design and planning. Also, on 30 April, I was delighted to turn the sod on two new buildings for at Grangegorman. The buildings will together provide some 52,000 square metres of space and cater for 10,000 students on what will be a state of the art campus at the center of a new urban quarter. Page 6 of? The ramp up in capital investment in the Higher Education sector will need to be carefully planned to ensure appropriate prioritisation and alignment with objectives for the system as a whole. The Department and the Higher Education Authority will be taking forward work on this over the coming period and look forward to engagement with THEA and the wider sector. As your Minister at the cabinet table, I will be the voice ensuring additional funding for the Higher Education sector, in upcoming budgets. In terms of engagement with enterprise and industry i know that hugely important work continues to be done by institutes of technology locally and regionally and this is something that we anticipate will be ramped up even further in the context of Project Ireland 2040. My Department and that of Minister Paschal Donohoe are currently working to reform the National Training Fund in response to issues raised by employers and, indeed, education providers, in last year?s consultation process. The fund levy was increased by 0.1% to 0.8% in Budget 2018 and by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020. This measure will allow for an additional expenditure of ?475 million this year as part of the Exchequer-Employer Funding Mechanism, bringing the fund to 435m for 2017 and 553m for 2018. It is estimated that this fund increases by a further ?104m in 2019 and ?165m in 2020. Our aim is to make the Fund more transparent, to better align it to employer needs and to develop a range of upskilling and reskilling initiatives which will respond to regional and national skills needs. With regards to apprenticeships, the action plan to expand apprenticeship and traineeship wili see 31,000 new enrolments on apprenticeship programmes, representing a more than doubling of activity by 2020. The Government has increased the Budget 2018 allocation for apprenticeship by almost 24% to ?122 million to support this activity. While there is plenty of evidence of this currently, I look forward to these deep and collaborative approaches going from strength to strength, in what is a very exciting time for this sector and for Higher Education as a whole. Page 7 of 7 AS IRRELEVANT TO THE TOPIC IN Thank you. Buffy, Trudy From: Duffy, Trudy Sent: 12 June 2018 11:26 To: Maguire, Donna Subject: FW: QS rankings From: 0 Foghiu, Sean Sent: 11 June 2018 07:49 To: Duffy, Trudy Cc: Beausang, William rosb Philip Gavin, Kathleen ujec: Trudy, Philip was discussing these with Pat O?Shea, UCC President on Friday in Cork and his understanding is that the bulk of the fall in rankings this year is due to perceptions of employers which with both felt was strange. Can you please follow- up on this and let me and William know. it may be helpful to discuss with the IUA as well Thanks Sean From: 0 Foghiu, Sean Sent: 07 June 2018 07:50 To: Duffy, mav? crosbi, Cc: Beausang, William Subject: Q5 rankings Philip, Trudy The updated (15 rankings are out this morning. There are comments in the press from our press side that you may have already fed into Would be helpful to update the note for the Ministers on rankings generally particularly what elements feed into the rankings. In particular, the year of funding for which the (15 announcement relates to would be important as funding has increased in recent years. This material will also be relevant for the conference next week Thanks Sean Sean 0 Fogth Ard Ranai/ Secretary General E1 Roinn Oldeachais agus Scileanna Department of Education and Skills Sreiid Maoilbhride, Baiie Atha Cliath, aces. Marlborough Street, Dublin. 001 RCQG. Efigeach Poiin Sainithe faoin Acht um a Rial?? 2015. F?ach meobbyingJe Designated Public Official under Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 Maguire, Donna From: Beausang, William Sent: 12 June 2018 13:43 To: Hope, Caoimhe Cc: Gaynor, Tony Subject: Draft MOS script IIEA 12 O6 Attachments: Draft MOS script IIEA 12 O6.docx Caoimhe, Please see revised version attached in which I?ve slotted in some further speaking points and some of the statistical data (in an annex). I would appreciate if you could review/ proof read and make any drafting changes you believe are desirable. Please feel free to tidy up any of the drafting of the material I put in as some of it is a bit clunkey. Subject to Tony being happy with the revised draft, could you send it direct to Lynda as early as you can in the pm cc?ing me. Thanks William MINISTER MITCHELL ADDRESSING IIEA CONFERENCE WEDNESDAY 13th JUNE 2018. TITLE: THE FUNDING OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN IRELAND I am delighted that I have been given this opportunity to address you to close this event on the critical issue of the Future Funding of Our Higher Education System. I would like to acknowledge the contribution of today's speakers to higher education provision and reform and welcome this forum which has engaged political and public perspectives on future funding approaches for the sector. We are all of us, both policy makers and professionals at the coal face, aware of the challenges facing the Higher Education sector currently. However the development of talent through higher education is a central part of our plan as a Government to support a strong economy and deliver a fair society. Each of the contributions and broader discussion confirms the importance and value of work of the Institute in bringing together a diverse group of expert and deeply experienced speakers, each of which has demonstrated the ability to communicate key insights into how we might work to put in place a long-term sustainable model for Higher Education Funding. I particularly value the contributions made today which identify both the challenge and the opportunity involved in doing so. As Peter Cassell's excellent contribution made clear, as much as any significant and complex public policy issue particularly one requiring substantial Increased investment - there is not a simple or straightforward solution. The hard lesson learned from the unsustainable boorn in advance of the economic and fiscal bust from 2008 onwards, increased resources alone are never the solution to securing world-class public services. The case for increased investment in any sector for any purpose must be built up step- by?step in a strongly evidenced based way. It must demonstrate clearly at every point in the process the significant positive outcomes to be achieved and why they are worth pursuing or indeed essential to achieve. As far as investment in Higher Education is concerned, this is the work commenced under Peter Cassell?s wise stewardship culminating in the publication of the Expert Group?s Report on Future Funding. In 2016 the Expert Group?s Report (?Cassells Report"), clearly outlined the funding challenges facing in the higher education sector in light of projected demographic increases with student numbers expected to be almost 30% higher and the impact of the economic downturn. The report was clear in its conclusion that our current funding model is not sustainable. It called for the development of a clear funding strategy for the sector that will deliver a robust and steady base of funding to sustain the system into the future. My Department and have been working tirelessly since to achieve the goal of making progress on building the future funding model for Higher Education. It's important to be clear that that this new model is already under construction. The reduction of approximately one?fifth in Higher Education Expenditure during the crisis years from 2008 to 2014 has been followed by a cumulative 9% increase subsequen?y. Increased Funding for Higher Education Government have already commenced a significant programme of investment in Higher Education. In total we are investing ?100m more in higher education this year than when the Cassells report was published. This additional funding has allowed fortargeted initiatives in higher education including technological university development, skills programmes, performance and innovation funding as part of the reform of the funding model, promoting access to higher education, and apprenticeship costs in the sector. This will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional full-time students in 2018. As your Minister at the Cabinet table, I will be the voice ensuring additional funding for the Higher Education sector, in upcoming budgets. My Department and that of Minister Paschal Donohoe are currently working to reform the National Training Fund in response to issues raised by employers and, indeed, education providers, in last year's consultation process. The fund levy was increased by 0.1% to 0.8% in Budget 2018 and - subject to the delivery of agreed reforms in order to ensure that the National Training Fund is more closely aligned to and responsive to the needs of the economy and employers by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020. This measure will allow for an additional expenditure of ?475 million this year as part of the Exchequer-Employer Funding Mechanism, bringing the fund to 435m for 2017 and 553m for 2018. It is estimated that this fund increases by a further ?104m in 2019 and ?165m in 2020. Our aim is to make the Fund more transparent, to better align it to employer needs and to develop a range of upskilling and reskilling initiatives which will respond to regional and national skills needs. With regards to apprenticeships, the action plan to expand apprenticeship and traineeship will see 31,000 new enrolments on apprenticeship programmes, representing a more than doubling of activity by 2020. Investing in National Ambition i want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Expert Group?s achievement in highlighting the huge opportunity to be realised by putting in place a new funding model. This is clearly captured by the title of the report ?Investing in National Ambition?. As is clear from Peter?s contribution here today, the Expert Group?s Report was a lot more than a bid for resources. In moving forward on the future funding agenda, I believe it is critical that we don?t go down that particular cul?de~sac. I acknowledge the role of the Cassells report in also identifying the need for capital investment in Higher Education. I would like to reiterate some of the central themes of the Expert Group?s report other than relating to funding themes which Peter has also referenced in his contribution here today and indeed consistently since the report was first published. It is these themes and the opportunities that they point to that provide the bedrock for the investment case in Higher Education in the coming years. The Expert Group's report highlights the case for investment in a reformed system of Higher Education The report could not be clearer that reform, innovation and change is essential to creating a virtuous circle of investment, quality and verification through, for example:- A Higher Education system which achieves significantly greater access participation and progression among all socio-economic groups. a A Higher Education system which builds the knowledge and capabilities of graduates to meet the changing needs of economy and society. - A Higher Education system with an enhanced focus on improving the quality of programmes, engagement with students and learning outcomes. 0 A Higher Education system which is more responsive and flexible to the changing needs of learners across their lives and the need, working alongside the Further Education sector to reconfigure the Post-Secondary Landscape. In my role as Minister for Higher Education I have seen best practice examples of all of these objectives. But it is also very clear to me from my work as Minister for Higher Education that these objectives do not comprise the mainstream experience within our HE institutions. Neither will turning back the clock to 2008 funding levels inevitably or in itself lead to the achievement of these outcomes. It is essential we retain a sharp focus on the broad and deep range of actions and initiatives that, taken together, will drive the Higher Education system forward to the achievement of the ambitious goals set for it in the Expert Group report. This is a prerequisite to making continued progress on building the future funding model. In an environment of intense competition between different sectors of the economy for what will always be a level of fiscal resources falling well short of demands, the Higher Education sector must make the strongest possible case for future investment meeting the ambition of the Expert Group's objectives. Since all sectors of the society and the economy suffered hugely from the impact of the crisis, no sector can expect to be successful in making the case for increased investment simply and exclusively on the basis of the reversal of previous funding reductions. The Higher Education sector has certainly demonstrated through that period of retrenchment its capacity to deliver significant productivity and efficiency gains. It must now demonstrate in any era of increased investment how it will continue to deliver these benefits in order to reach the high level of ambition set for it in the first instance in the Expert Group's report and subsequently as reflected strongly in the Action Plan for Education's objective to provide the best education and training system in Ireland overthe next decade. We do also need to look at the future funding issue for Higher Education within the broader context for fiscal policy. Minister Donohoe will be publishing the Summer Economic Statement later this month which will set out the fiscal parameters for Budget 2019 identifying the scope for expenditure increases consistent with the broader requirements of ensuring the economy remains on a sustainable trajectory and meeting government priorities not only in education, but in areas like housing, social projection and health. The strength of the case made for spending in one area can never be assessed in its own terms but must be set against the cases made in all other areas within the framework of what can be accommodated within the overall budgetary numbers and consistent with what is considered appropriate given overall macroeconomic conditions and the risks facing the economy. The recent Fiscal Assessment Report published by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council highlights that notwithstanding the very strong performance of the economy and the prudent approach the Government have adopted to spending and taxation, Ireland's debt levels remain high. Given the risks that the Council identify from sources such as Brexit, a shift in international trade policy, a steep fall in lreland's corporation tax regime, we must 6 continue to prioritise the requirement to manage overall fiscal policy in a manner consistent with continued and sustained reductions in our debt. It is the best insurance policy against finding ourselves again in a situation where unexpected economic and fiscal developments lead to sharp unplanned reductions in spending. In light of the impact on the Higher Education sector during the period of severe fiscal consolidation from 2008 to 2014, this is certainly an experience that we don?t and can't let happen again. Capital Expenditure Responding to the substantial need identified in the Expert Group Report and in recognition of the pivotal role of the Higher Education sector to the realisation of key objectives of Project Ireland 2040 the National Development Plan allocated ?2.2bn. in additional Exchequer funding to support infrastructure priorities in the Higher Education Sector have recently highlighted to the Higher Education sector the importance of working collaboratively and with other regional partners in order that the Higher Education sector benefits from the very substantial Funds amounting to ?4bn. over. the period of plan created to drive the achievement of such objectives as urban regeneration and rural regeneration in the NDP. That level of planed investment demonstrates the high level of the Government?s commitment to the development and growth of the Higher Education sector and to meeting the significant demographic growth in the next decade. As a Government we have responded very positively in this area. Capital investment in Higher Education is certainly [lot a case of ?jam tomorrow?. The Government have already initiated a significant programme for the Institute of Technology sector. i recently announced key progress on the appointment of design teams for the government?s Public Private Partnership programme for the 7 higher education sector. A capital envelope of ?200m was provided for in the 2016-21 Capital Plan for this programme. This Programme is being rolled-out alongside ?367 million in funding from the Department of Education and Skills for investment in higher education over the period 2018?2021. Eight of the eleven projects in the capital programme are in Institutes of Technology that are currently part of TU consortia. In this regard the establishment and development of Technological Universities is expected to play a crucial role in driving regional growth and deveIOpment under Project Ireland 2040. University Rankings As much as there is a broader public awareness of the funding challenge for Higher Education it arises from the media coverage following the periodic release of University rankings as took place on the basis of the most recent Q8 league table last week. The press coverage attributed the entire fall in rankings for Irish Universities to the funding challenges notwithstanding that the results again reflected a strong performance overall by Ireland?s Higher Education System. As everyone here knows, we do have to be cautious in how we interpret the results in light of the significant methodological issues that can be highlighted in terms of how the rankings are compiled. In the case of the recent 08 rankings these include that theyw Don?t consider the quality of teaching or the quality of learning. - Don?t consider how Universities support access or tackle educational disadvantage a key national objective. - Rely on global surveys of academics and employers who may have had no interaction with the institution in question - Measure the impact of research by the number of times a paper is cited and don?t consider the quality of the journal in which the research appears. Of course, notwithstanding this, there is no avoiding the fact that rankings can impact both positively and negatively on international perceptions of our national university system. For that reason, I believe it is important that working together with the university sector - we develop a deeper understanding of the key drivers of Ireland's rankings so that we can better explain the factors driving performance, highlighting where we believe the approach could be improved and indeed also seeking to ensure that we do not miss opportunities through appropriate actions to improve our standing. Of course at all times ensuring that we avoid the risk where some other countries or universities may have been tempted of taking measures not for their own benefit or value but simply to try to the rankings system. Conclusion This comprehensive and holistic approach across current and capital higher education funding and reform is being taken in order to contribute to the development of a long? term sustainable funding model for the sector. While there is plenty of evidence of this currently, I look forward to these deep and collaborative approaches going from strength to strength, in what is a very exciting time for this sector and for Higher Education as a whole. Annex: Draft Speaking Points on Public Spending The case is sometimes made that given that the level of public spending as a share of national output falls far below, the average forthe EU as a whole, there is ample scope to increase expenditure across all government priorities including in Higher Education. As is often the case this conventional wisdom is based on a misconception. Eurostat tells us that in 2016 General Government Expenditure for the EU 28 was 46.3% of GDP in 2016 with the corresponding figure for Ireland was 27.1%. Despite this large gap over 19 percentage points, the headline figures are quite misleading. Measurement of GDP for Ireland is widely regarded as substantially overstating Ireland?s National Output on account of the distorting impact of the activities of the foreign multinationals. Using the recommended measure of national output raises Ireland?s expenditure share to 39.5% still falling below the EU average. But this isn't the end of the story. The main reason for the remaining gap is the difference in spending on social protection with lreland spending 14.4% of in 2016 as compared to the EU average of 19%. The difference is accounted for by the fact that Ireland has a relatively young population by EU standards The old?age dependency ratio population aged 65+ pOpulation aged 15-64) for lreland at 20.9 (2016) is significant lowerthan the corresponding old-age dependency ratio for the EU 27 at 29.9 As a result old-age payments in lreland are 5.1% in 2016 compared to 10.2% for the EU as a whole. 10 Adjusting for this factor gives rise to an expenditure share for Ireland exceeding the EU average within which all major areas of public spending at a level which is aligned with the average level of spending with the EU as a whole. In terms of Education spending overall Ireland stands at 4.8% of which is higher than the EU average of Spending on Tertiary Education in Ireland at an estimated 0.7% of is the same as the EU as a whole and while lower than best?in-class in the EU is broadly in line with some developed EU MS. Of course on account of Ireland's young age structure, we will as highlighted in the Expert Group's Report need to expand spending in this area in the years ahead significantly in line with demographic developments Our spending on health at an estimated 7.6% of exceeds the GDP share of health spending for the EU as a whole. Of course, in looking at other EU Member States at which spending levels, including in Higher Education are significantly higher than in Ireland, it is important to factor in the political choices made in those countries to sustain much higher levels of taxation For example Denmark which is estimated to spend 1.8% of its national income on Tertiary Education has a tax share of 47.1% of GDP, the Netherlands which spends 1.4% of GDP on tertiary education has a tax share of 39.3% and Sweden with an expenditure share of 1.1% of GDP on tertiary education maintains a tax share at 44.6% of GDP. The corresponding figure for Ireland is significantly lower estimated at 34.7 of The message is clear, substantial increased levels of spending is certainly an option but only in circumstances where there are significantly higher levels of taxation. 11 Note: lreland's spending on Tertiary Education in 2016 at 0.7% of is the same as that for the EU as a whole (GDP) and is somewhat lower than Austria and Germany (both Belgium but is higher than the figure estimated for both France, Spain and Portugal (all and Italy Denmark is best?in-olass at 1.8% with the Netherlands following at 12 13 14 Maguire, Donna From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Lynda, Gaynor, Tony 12 June 2018 14:52 McQuaid, Lynda Beausang, William; Hope, Caoimhe; Dooney, Roy Minister?s speech Draft MOS script IIEA 12 06 18.doc>< Please find attached speech for Minister 0 Connor. Regards, Tony Tony Gaynor Principal Officer Higher Education - Finance, Governance and Qualifications Unit Department of Education Skills I Marlborough Street, Dublin 001 RC96 ?l MINISTER MITCHELL ADDRESSING IIEA CONFERENCE WEDNESDAY 13th JUNE 2018. TITLE: THE FUNDING OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN IRELAND I am delighted that I have been given this opportunity to address you to close this event on the critical issue of the Future Funding of Our Higher Education System. I would like to acknowledge the contribution of today?s speakers to higher education provision and reform and welcome this forum which has engaged political and public perspectives on future funding approaches for the sector. We are all of us, both policy makers and professionals at the coal face, aware of the challenges facing the Higher Education sector currently. However the deveIOpment of talent through higher education is a central part of our plan as a Government to support a strong economy and deliver a fair society. Each of the contributions and broader discussion confirms the importance and value of work of the Institute in bringing together a diverse group of expert and deeply experienced speakers, each of which has demonstrated the ability to communicate key insights into how we might work to put in place a long?term sustainable model for Higher Education Funding. I particularly value the contributions made today which identify both the challenge and the opportunity involved in doing so. As Peter Cassell?s excellent contribution made clear, as much as any significant and complex public policy issue particularly one requiring substantial Increased investment - there is not a simple or straightforward solution. The hard lesson learned from the unsustainable boom in advance of the economic and fiscal bust from 2008 onwards, increased resources alone are never the solution to securing world-class public services. The case for increased investment in any sector for any purpose must be built up step- by?step in a strongly evidenced based way. It must demonstrate clearly at every point in the process the significant positive outcomes to be achieved and why they are worth pursuing or indeed essential to achieve. As far as investment in Higher Education is concerned, this is the work commenced under Peter Cassell's wise stewardship culminating in the publication of the Expert Group?s Report on Future Funding. In 2016 the Expert Group?s Report (?Cassells Report?), clearly outlined the funding challenges facing in the higher education sector in light of projected demographic increases with student numbers expected to be almost 30% higher and the impact of the economic downturn. The report was clear in its conclusion that our current funding model is not sustainable. lt called for the development of a clear funding strategy for the sector that will deliver a robust and steady base of funding to sustain the system into the future. My Department and have been working tirelessly since to achieve the goal of making progress on building the future funding model for Higher Education. It's important to be clear that that this new model is already under construction. The reduction of approximately one-fifth in Higher Education Expenditure during the crisis years from 2008 to 2014 has been followed by a cumulative 9% increase subsequen?y. Increased Funding for Higher Education Government have already commenced a significant programme of investment in Higher Education. In total we are investing ?100m more in higher education this year than when the Cassells report was published. This additional funding has allowed for targeted initiatives in higher education including technological university development, skills programmes, performance and innovation funding as part of the reform of the funding model, promoting access to higher education, and apprenticeship costs in the sector. This will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional full-time students in 2018. As your Minister at the Cabinet table, I will be the voice ensuring additional funding for the Higher Education sector, in upcoming budgets. My Department and that of Minister Paschal Donohoe are currently working to reform the National Training Fund in response to issues raised by employers and, indeed, education providers, in last year's consultation process. The fund levy was increased by 0.1% to 0.8% in Budget 2018 and subject to the delivery of agreed reforms in order to ensure that the National Training Fund is more closely aligned to and responsive to the needs of the economy and employers by a further 0.1 in both 2019 and 2020. This measure will allow for an additional expenditure of ?475 million this year as part of the Exchequer?Employer Funding Mechanism, bringing the fund to 435m for 2017 and 553m for 2018. It is estimated that this fund increases by a further ?104m in 2019 and ?185m in 2020. Our aim is to make the Fund more transparent, to better align it to employer needs and to develop a range of upskilling and reskilling initiatives which will respond to regional and national skills needs. With regards to apprenticeships, the action plan to expand apprenticeship and traineeship will see 31,000 new enrolments on apprenticeship programmes, representing a more than doubling of activity by 2020. Investing in National Ambition I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the Expert Group?s achievement in highlighting the huge opportunity to be realised by putting in place a new funding model. This is clearly captured by the title of the report ?Investing in National Ambition?. As is clear from Peter?s contribution here today, the Expert Group?s Report was a lot more than a bid for resources. In moving forward on the future funding agenda, I believe it is critical that we don?t go down that particular cul-de-sac. acknowledge the role of the Cassells report in also identifying the need for capital investment in Higher Education. i would like to reiterate some of the central themes of the Expert Group?s report - other than relating to funding - themes which Peter has also referenced in his contribution here today and indeed consistently since the report was first published. it is these themes and the opportunities that they point to that provide the bedrock for the investment case in Higher Education in the coming years. The Expert Group?s report highlights the case for investment in a reformed system of Higher Education The report could not be clearer that reform, innovation and change is essential to creating a virtuous circle of investment, quality and verification through, for example:? A Higher Education system which achieves significantly greater access participation and progression among all socio-economic groups. a A Higher Education system which builds the knowledge and capabilities of graduates to meet the changing needs of economy and society. - A Higher Education system with an enhanced focus on improving the quality of programmes, engagement with students and learning outcomes. 0 A Higher Education system which is more responsive and flexible to the changing needs of learners across their lives and the need, working alongside the Further Education sector to reconfigure the Post-Secondary Landscape. In my role as Minister for Higher Education I have seen best practice examples of all of these objectives. But it is also very clear to me from my work as Minister for Higher Education that these objectives do not comprise the mainstream experience within our HE institutions. Neither will turning back the clock to 2008 funding levels inevitably or in itself lead to the achievement of these outcomes. It is essential we retain a sharp focus on the broad and deep range of actions and initiatives that, taken together, will drive the Higher Education system forward to the achievement of the ambitious goals set for it in the Expert Group report. This is a prerequisite to making continued progress on building the future funding model. In an environment of intense competition between different sectors of the economy for what will always be a level of fiscal resources falling well short of demands, the Higher Education sector must make the strongest possible case for future investment meeting the ambition of the Expert Group?s objectives. Since all sectors of the society and the economy suffered hugely from the impact of the crisis, no sector can expect to be successful in making the case for increased investment simply and exclusively on the basis of the reversal of previous funding reductions. The Higher Education sector has certainly demonstrated through that period of retrenchment its capacity to deliver significant productivity and efficiency gains. It must now demonstrate in any era of increased investment how it will continue to deliver these benefits in order to reach the high level of ambition set for it in the first instance in the Expert Group?s report and subsequently as reflected strongly in the Action Plan for Education?s objective to provide the best education and training system in Ireland over the next decade. We do also need to look at the future funding issue for Higher Education within the broader context for fiscal policy. Minister Donohoe will be publishing the Summer Economic Statement later this month which will set out the fiscal parameters for Budget 2019 identifying the scope for expenditure increases consistent with the broader requirements of ensuring the economy remains on a sustainable trajectory and meeting government priorities not only in education, but in areas like housing, social protection and health. The strength of the case made for spending in one area can never be assessed in its own terms but must be set against the cases made in all other areas within the framework of what can be accommodated within the overall budgetary numbers and consistent with what is considered apprOpriate given overall macroeconomic conditions and the risks facing the economy. The recent Fiscal Assessment Report published by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council highlights that notwithstanding the very strong performance of the economy and the prudent approach the Government have adopted to spending and taxation, lreland?s debt ievels remain high. Given the risks that the Council identify from sources such as Brexit, a shift in international trade policy, a steep fall in Ireland?s corporation tax regime, we must 6 continue to prioritise the requirement to manage overall fiscal policy in a manner consistent with continued and sustained reductions in our debt. It is the best insurance policy against finding ourselves again in a situation where unexpected economic and fiscal developments lead to sharp unplanned reductions in spending. in light of the impact on the Higher Education sector during the period of severe fiscal consolidation from 2008 to 2014, this is certainly an experience that we don?t and can?t let happen again. Capital Expenditure Responding to the substantial need identified in the Expert Group Report and in recognition of the pivotal role of the Higher Education sector to the realisation of key objectives of Project Ireland 2040 the National Development Plan allocated ?2.2bn. in additional Exchequer funding to support infrastructure priorities in the Higher Education Sector 1 have recently highlighted to the Higher Education sector the importance of working collaboratively and with other regional partners in order that the Higher Education sector benefits from the very substantial Funds amounting to ?4bn. over the period of the plan created to drive the achievement of such objectives as urban regeneration and rural regeneration in the NDP. That level of planed investment demonstrates the high level of the Government's commitment to the development and growth of the Higher Education sector and to meeting the significant demographic growth in the next decade. As a Government we have responded very positively in this area. Capital investment in Higher Education is certainly 39: a case of ?jam tomorrow?. The Government have already initiated a significant programme for the Institute of Technology sector. I recently announced key progress on the appointment of design teams for the government?s Public Private Partnership programme for the 7 higher education sector. A capital envelope of ?200m was provided for in the 2016-21 Capital Plan forthis programme. This Programme is being rolled-out alongside ?367 million in funding from the Department of Education and Skills for investment in higher education over the period 2018?2021. Eight of the eleven projects in the capital programme are in Institutes of Technology that are currently part of TU consortia. In this regard the establishment and deveIOpment of Technological Universities is expected to play a crucial role in driving regional growth and development under Project Ireland 2040. University Rankings As much as there is a broader public awareness of the funding challenge for Higher Education it arises from the media coverage following the periodic release of University rankings as took place on the basis of the most recent 08 league table last week. The press coverage attributed the entire fall in rankings for Irish Universities to the funding challenges notwithstanding that the results again reflected a strong performance overall by Ireland?s Higher Education System. As everyone here knows, we do have to be cautious in how we interpret the results in light of the significant methodological issues that can be highlighted in terms of how the rankings are compiled. In the case of the recent 08 rankings these include that they:- - Don?t consider the quality of teaching or the quality of learning. - Don?t consider how Universities support access or tackle educational disadvantage a key national objective. - Rely on global surveys of academics and employers who may have had no interaction with the institution in question - Measure the impact of research by the number of times a paper is cited and don?t consider the quality of the journal in which the research appears. Of course, notwithstanding this, there is no avoiding the fact that rankings can impact both positively and negatively on international perceptions of our national university system . For that reason, I believe it is important that - working together with the university sector we develop a deeper understanding of the key drivers of Ireland?s rankings so that we can better explain the factors driving performance, highlighting where we believe the approach could be improved and indeed also seeking to ensure that we do not miss opportunities through appropriate actions to improve our standing. Of course at all times ensuring that we avoid the risk where some other countries or universities may have been tempted - of taking measures not for their own benefit or value but simply to try to ?game' the rankings system. Conclusion This comprehensive and holistic approach across current and capital higher education funding and reform is being taken in order to contribute to the development of a long?? term sustainable funding model forthe sector. While there is plenty of evidence of this currently, I look forward to these deep and collaborative approaches going from strength to strength, in what is a very exciting time for this sector and for Higher Education as a whole. Annex: Draft Speaking Points on Public Spending The case is sometimes made that given that the level of public spending as a share of national output falls far below, the average forthe EU as a whole, there is ample scope to increase expenditure across all government priorities including in Higher Education. As is often the case this conventional wisdom is based on a misconception. Eurostat tells us that in 2016 General Government Expenditure for the EU 28 was 46.3% of GDP in 2016 with the corresponding figure for lreland was 27.1 Despite this large gap over 19 percentage points, the headline figures are quite misleading. Measurement of GDP for Ireland is widely regarded as substantially overstating lreland's National Output on account of the distorting impact of the activities of the foreign multinationals. Using the recommended measure of national output raises lreland?s expenditure share to 39.5% still falling below the EU average. But this isn?t the end of the story. The main reason for the remaining gap is the difference in spending on social protection with lreland spending 14.4% of in 2016 as compared to the EU average of 19%. The difference is accounted for by the fact that lreland has a relatively young population by EU standards The old-age dependency ratio population aged 65+ population aged 15-64) for Ireland at 20.9 (2016) is significant lower than the corresponding old-age dependency ratio for the EU 27 at 29.9 As a result old-age payments in Ireland are 5.1% in 2016 compared to 10.2% for the EU as a whole. 10 Adjusting for this factor gives rise to an expenditure share for Ireland exceeding the EU average within which all major areas of public spending at a level which is aligned with the average level of spending with the EU as a whole. In terms of Education spending overall Ireland stands at 4.8% of which is higher than the EU average of Spending on Tertiary Education in Ireland at an estimated 0.7% of is the same as the EU as a whole and while lower than best-in?class in the EU is broadly in line with some developed EU MS. Of course on account of Ireland?s young age structure, we will as highlighted in the Expert Group's Report - need to expand spending in this area in the years ahead significantly in line with demographic developments Our spending on health at an estimated 7.6% of exceeds the GDP share of health spending for the EU as a whole. Of course, in looking at other EU Member States at which spending levels, including in Higher Education are significantly higher than in lreland, it is important to factor in the political choices made in those countries to sustain much higher levels of taxation For example Denmark which is estimated to spend 1.8% of its national income on Tertiary Education has a tax share of 47.1% of GDP, the Netherlands which spends 1.4% of GDP on tertiary education has a tax share of 39.3% and Sweden with an expenditure share of 1 of GDP on tertiary education maintains a tax share at 44.6% of GDP. The corresponding figure for Ireland is significantly lower estimated at 34.7 of The message is clear, substantial increased levels of spending is certainly an option but only in circumstances where there are significantly higher levels of taxation. 11 Note: Ireland?s spending on Tertiary Education in 2016 at 0.7% of is the same as that forthe EU as a whole (GDP) and is somewhat lowerthan Austria and Germany (both Belgium but is higher than the figure estimated for both France, Spain and Portugal (all and Italy Denmark is best-in-class at 1.8% with the Netherlands following at 12 13 14 Ma uire, Donna From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Caoimhe, McQuaid, Lynda 13 June 2018 11:34 Hope, Caoimhe Beausang, William MINISTER MITCHELL CONNOR IIEA MOS script IIEA 13 06 l8 (LMCQ).docx Many thanks for your email. Very little changes made to the speech see attached. ljust shortened some sentences etc. Will you give me an eta on the Press Release. Think I will release under embargo before the event. Kindest regards, Lynda i! zj m? ltu?t?A?m? A ID 5: I LL: Lynda McQuaid Press Adviser Minister Mary Mitchell O?Connor Department of Education 8: Skilis Marlborough St, Dublin 1 001 RC96 Page 1 of 17 MINISTER MITCHELL ADDRESSING IIEA CONFERENCE WEDNESDAY 13th JUNE 2018. TITLE: THE FUNDING OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN IRELAND WORDS 2622 (20 mins) Page 2 of 17 Ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted that I have been given this opportunity to address you on the critical issue of the Future Funding of Our Higher Education System. I would like to acknowledge the contribution of today?s speakers to Higher Education provision and reform. I greatly welcome this forum which has engaged political and public perspectives on future funding approaches for the sector. Before I continue I would like to remind us all of the most important person in the room. The Student. The student is always top of my agenda - their education, their welfare, their in-class experience, constitutes everything I consider when making any decisions, within my portfolio of Higher Education. I want our education system to be accessible to everyone who wants to attend a Higher Education The socio-economically disadvantaged student, the student with a disability, the mature student, all accommodated and welcomed. I want our institutions to instil a love of life-long learning in everyone who passes through their doors. Page us, both policy makers and professionals at the coal face, aware of the challenges facing the Higher Education sector currently. However the development of talent through higher education is a central part of our plan, as a Government to support a strong economy and deliver a fair society. Each of the contributions and broader discussion confirms the importance and value of bringing together a diverse group of expert and deeply experienced speakers. Each of you has demonstrated the ability to communicate key insights into how we might work to put in place a long-term sustainable model for Higher Education Funding. I particularly value the contributions made today which identify both the challenge and the opportunity involved in doing 50. Any significant and complex public policy issue particularly one requiring substantial increased investment - there is not a simple or straightforward solution. The hard lesson learned from the unsustainable boom in advance of the economic and fiscal bust from 2008 onwards, increased resources alone are never the solution to securing world-class public services. Page 4 of 17 The case for increased investment in any sector for any purpose must be built up step-by?step in a strongly evidenced based way. It must demonstrate clearly at every point in the process the significant positive outcomes to be achieved and why they are worth pursuing or indeed essential to achieve. As far as investment in Higher Education is concerned, this is the work commenced under Peter Cassell?s wise stewardship, culminating in the publication of the Expert Group?s Report on Future Funding. In 2016, the Expert Group?s Report (?Cassells Report?), clearly outlined the funding challenges facing in the Higher Education sector in light of projected demographic increases, with student numbers expected to be almost 30% higher and the impact of the economic downturn. The report was clear in its conclusion that our current funding model is not sustainable. It called for the development of a clear funding strategy for the sector. A funding model that will deliver a robust and steady base of funding to sustain the system into the future. My Department and I have been working tirelessly since to achieve the goal of making progress on building the future funding model for Higher Education. Page 5 of 17 It?s important to be clear that that this new model is already under construction. The reduction of approximately one-fifth in Higher Education Expenditure during the crisis years from 2008 to 2014 has been followed by a cumulative 9% increase subsequently. To move onto the topic, at the cornerstone of today?s event - increased Funding for Higher Education. The Government have already commenced a significant programme of investment in Higher Education. In total we are investing ?100m more in Higher Education this year than when the Cassells report was published. This additional funding has allowed for targeted initiatives in Higher Education including Technological University development, 0 skills programmes, 0 performance 8: innovation funding as part of the reform of the funding model. 0 Promoting access to Higher Education, 0 and apprenticeship costs. This will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional full-time students in 2018. Page 6 of 17 As your Minister at the Cabinet table, I will be the voice for Higher Education in the upcoming budget negotiations. I will be the voice ensuring additional funding for the Higher Education sector. My Department and that of Minister Paschal Donohoe are working to reform the National Training Fund, in response to issues raised by employers and, indeed, education providers, in last year?s consultation process. The fund levy was increased by 0.1% to 0.8% in Budget 2018 and subject to the delivery of agreed reforms in order to ensure that the National Training Fund is more closely aligned to and responsive to the needs of the economy and employers - by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020. This measure will allow for an additional expenditure of ?47.5 million this year as part of the Exchequer-Employer Funding Mechanism, bringing the fund to ?435m for 2017 and ?553m for 2018. It is estimated that this fund increases by a further ?104m in 2019 and ?165m in 2020. Our aim is to make the Fund more transparent, to better align it to employer needs and to develop a range of upskilling and reskilling initiatives which will respond to regional and national skills needs. Page 7 of 17 With regards to apprenticeships, the action plan to expand apprenticeship and traineeship will see 31,000 new enrolments on apprenticeship programmes, representing a more than doubling of activity by 2020. Some of the new apprenticeship programmes include International Finance, Aircraft Maintenance, and in 2019 we are going to roll out Retail Practice. Delegates, as the title of the report clearly captures - We are investing in the ?National Ambition?. It is important that we use the report as a springboard and expand our exploration on how we fund this most essential institution our Higher Education. I acknowledge the role of the Cassells report in identifying the need for capital investment in Higher Education. I would like to reiterate some of the other central themes of the Expert Group?s report other than relating to funding. Themes which Peter has also referenced in his contribution here today and indeed consistently since the report was first published. It is these themes and the opportunities that they point to, that provide the bedrock for the investment case in Higher Education in the coming years. Page 8 of 17 The Expert Group?s report stresses the case for investment in a reformed system of Higher Education The report could not be clearer that reform, innovation and change is essential to creating a virtuous circle of investment, quality and verification through, for example:- 0 A Higher Education system which achieves significantly greater access participation and progression among all socio-- economic groups. 0 A Higher Education system which builds the knowledge and capabilities of graduates to meet the changing needs of economy and society. 0 A Higher Education system with an enhanced focus on improving the quality of programmes, engagement with students and learning outcomes. 0 A Higher Education system which is more responsive and flexible to the changing needs of learners across their lives. 0 A Higher Education system that recognises the need to work alongside the Further Education sector to reconfigure the Post-Secondary Landscape. in my role as Minister for Higher Education, and having visited all the country?s campuses, I have seen best practice examples of all of these objectives. It is essential that we retain a sharp focus on the broad and deep range of actions and initiatives that, taken together, will drive the Higher Education system forward to the achievement of the ambitious goals set for it in the Expert Group report. Page 9 of 17 This is a prerequisite to making continued progress on building the future funding model. In an environment of intense competition between different sectors of the economy for what will always be a level of fiscal resources falling well short of demands, the Higher Education sector must make the strongest possible case for future investment meeting the ambition of the Expert Group?s objectives. Since all sectors of the society and the economy suffered hugely from the impact of the crisis, no sector can expect to be successful in making the case for increased investment simply and exclusively on the basis of the reversal of previous funding reductions. The Higher Education sector has certainly demonstrated through that period of retrenchment, its capacity to deliver significant productivity and efficiency gains. At this juncture I want to publically acknowledge the work and dedication of all the staff of our Higher Education Institutions who unquestionably put their shoulder to the wheel in the challenging times. Page 10 of 17 The sector must now demonstrate in any era of increased . investment how it will continue to deliver similar benefits in order to reach the high level of ambition set for it in the first instance in the Expert Group?s report. Our ambitions for the HE are reflected strongly in the Action Plan for Education?s objective to provide the best education and training system in Ireland over the next decade. Minister Donohoe will be publishing the Summer Economic Statement later this month which will set out the fiscal parameters for Budget 2019. It will identify the scope for expenditure increases consistent with the broader requirements of ensuring the economy remains on a sustainable trajectory. It will meet government priorities not only in education, but in areas like housing, social protection and health. The strength of the case made for spending in one area can never be assessed in its own terms. it must and will be set against the cases made in all other areas within the framework of what can be accommodated within the overall budgetary numbers. Page 11 of 17 It must also be consistent with what is considered appr0priate given overall macroeconomic conditions and the risks facing the economy. The recent Fiscal Assessment Report published by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council highlights, that notwithstanding the very strong performance of the economy, and the prudent approach the Government have adopted to spending and taxation, Ireland?s debt levels remain high. Given the risks that the Council identify from sources such as Brexit, a shift in international trade policy, a steep fall in Ireland?s corporation tax regime, we must continue to prioritise the requirement to manage, overall fiscal policy, in a manner consistent with continued and sustained reductions in our debt. It is the best insurance policy against finding ourselves again in a situation where unexpected economic and fiscal developments lead to sharp unplanned reductions in spending. In light of the impact on the Higher Education sector during the period of severe fiscal consolidation from 2008 to 2014, this is certainly an experience that we don?t and can?t let happen again. With regard to Capital Expenditure We are responding to the substantial need identified in the Expert Group Report. Page 12 of 17 In recognition of the pivotal role of the Higher Education sector to the realisation of key objectives of Project Ireland 2040 the National DeveIOpment Plan allocated ?2.2bn. in additional Exchequer funding to support infrastructure priorities in the Higher Education Sector have recently highlighted to the Higher Education sector the I importance of working collaboratively and with other regional partners, in order that the Higher Education sector benefits from the very substantial Funds amounting to ?4bn. That level of planned investment demonstrates the high level of the Government?s commitment to the development and growth of the Higher Education sector, and to meeting the significant demographic growth in the next decade. As a Government we have responded very positively in this area. Capital investment in Higher Education is certainly n_ot a case of ?jam tomorrow?. The Government have already initiated a significant programme for the Institute of Technology i recently announced key progress on the appointment of design teams for the Government?s Public Private Partnership programme for the Higher Education sector. A capital envelope of ?200m was provided for in the 2016-21 Capital Plan for this programme. Page 13 of 17 This Programme is being rolled-out alongside ?367 million in funding from the Department of Education and Skills for investment in Higher Education over the period 2018?2021. 8 of the 11 projects in the capital programme are in Institutes of Technology that are currently part of Technological Universirty consortia. in this regard the establishment and development of is expected to play a crucial role in driving regional growth and development under Project Ireland 2040. Ladies and gentlemen i now want to address University Rankings. The press coverage attributed the entire fall in rankings for Irish Universities to the funding challenges, notwithstanding that the results again reflected a strong performance overall by Ireland?s Higher Education System. As everyone here knows, we do have to be cautious in how we interpret the results in light of the significant methodological issues in terms of how the rankings are compiled. In the case of the recent QS rankings these include that they:? 0 Don?t consider the quality of teaching or the quality of learning. 0 Don?t consider how Universities support access or tackle educational disadvantage a key national objective. 0 Rely on global surveys of academics and employers who may have had no interaction with the institution in question Page 14 of 17 0 Measure the impact of research by the number of times a paper is cited and don?t consider the quality of the journal in which the research appears. Of course, notwithstanding this, there is no avoiding the fact that rankings can impact both positively and negatively - on international perceptions of our national university system. For that reason, I believe it is important that -- working together with the university sector we develop a deeper understanding of the key drivers of Ireland?s rankings. We need to be able to explain better the factors driving performance, highlighting where we believe the approach could be improved. Indeed also seeking to ensure that we do not miss opportunities through appropriate actions to improve our standing. We currently set our own goals and objectives and benchmark ourselves against best international practice. These finding are reported in the System Performance Framework. At all times we must ensure that we avoid the risk where some other countries or universities may have been tempted - of taking measures not for their own benefit or value but simply to try to ?game? the rankings system. Page 15 of 17 In Conclusion, while this is a very exciting time for the sector and for Higher Education as a whole. The comprehensive and holistic approach taken at today?s conference, examining current and capital Higher Education funding and reform will contribute to the development of a long- term sustainable funding model for the sector. While there is plenty of evidence currently, I look forward to deep and collaborative approaches going from strength to strength. Many thanks. Page 16 of 17 Page 17 of 17 Maguire, Donna From: Duffy, Trudy Sent: 14 june 2018 11:21 To: Ciuskey, Patrick Cc: Hope, Caoimhe: Crosby, Philip; McDermott, John (Skills Development Division); Maguire, Donna; Gaynor, Tony; Beausang, William Subject: RE: LQ: Casseils and university rankings Attachments: QS University Rankings 2019_n0te MB_14062018.docx Patrick, See attached for a short note and a breakdown of the OS scoring for individual HEIs for this year (2019) and last year (2018). There are mixed messages and apparent inconsistencies coming through from the various elements of the rankings when compared to other sets of rankings (even by the same organisation) however we don?t have a complete picture for 2019 ?the take home message is that we are looking at the C15 rankings as an element within the overall feedback which we receive on our HEIs. Rega Trudy Trudy Duffy Assistant Principe! Officer, Higher Education Poticy and Research Unit 1TB Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna Department of Education and Skills Staid Maoiibhride, Baile Atha Cliath, D01 R098. Marlborough Street, Dubiin, E301 R096. From: Cluskey, Patrick Sent: 14 June 2018 07:01 To: Duffy, Trudy Cc: Hope, Caoim he Crosby, Philip McDermott, John (Skills Development Division) aguire, Donna _Gaynor, Beausang, William Subject: Re: LQ: Cassells and university rankings Trudy, Minister Bruton is taking ieaders questions today for the government. Some chance that this could be raised. Has any further work been done on why various institutions went up or down? I understand TCD moved dug? employer surveys. Do we have any more info on this? Is there a breakdown for each college available? Thanks, Pat?ck On 12 Jun 2018, at 11:31, Duffy, Trad?wrote: Patrick, 0k on this side. You may need to be aware that there is a view coming through from the sector that the bulk of the fall in rankings this year is due to perceptions of employers. We are looking into this, but it will not impact on the LQ. Regards Trudy From: Ciuskey, Patrick Sent: 12 June 2018 11:16 To: Ho Caoimhe Crosby, Philip Duffy, Trudy ?VicDermott, John (Skills Development Division) Maguire, Donna Cc: Gaynor, Tony ?Beausang, William Subject: RE: LQ: Casseiis and university rankings Hi folks be sending this across in the next 15 minutes if anyone has any obs. Thanks, Pat?ck From: Hope, Caoimhe Sent: 12 June 2018 10:25 To: Crosby, Philip Duffy, Trudy cDermott, John (Skills Development Division) aguire, Donna Cc: Ciuskey, Patrick Gaynor, Tony Beausanawwiam? Subject: FW: LQ: Casseiis and university rankings Importance: High Hi, Please find attached LQ prepared by Patrick. Can you please take a look at the content in relation to the Uni rankings and advise Patrick if you require any amendments or additions as soon as possible as it is needed for this morning. As per Tony?s email below we have no additions required from our perspective. Many thanks Caoimhe From: Gaynor, Tony Sent: 11 June 2018 18:23 To: Beausang, William Cc: Hope, Caoimhe Subject: FW: LQ: Cassells and university rankings William, I?m not proposing any additions from this side but just to note that issues relating to League Tables tend to be led by Policy and Skills side rather than this side of the house, in case you wanted to forward it to Philip as well in case they want to add anything from the overall policy perspective. Thanks Tony Gaynor Principal Officer Higher Education - Finance, Governance and Qualifications Unit Department of Education Skills Marlborough Street, Dublin I301 RC96 wweducationie From: Cluskey, Patrick Sent: 11 June 2018 18:17 To: Bea usa ng, William Gaynor, Ton Ho e, Caoimhe Cc: O'Neill, Sarah Subject: LQ: Cassells and university rankings Hi folks, l'd say there is a chance that third level funding/ university rankings could be raised in Leaders Questions this week. I?ve drafted the attached. Let me know if you have any comments. I need to send it over to the Taoiseach?s office by 10.30am tomorrow. Thanks Pat?ck Patrick Cluskey Special Adviser to the Minister for Education and Skills K33 Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna Department of Education and Skills Sraid Maoilbhride, Baile Atha Cliath, om aces. Marlborou Sire D01 R096. Efigeach Poibli Sainithe faoin Achf um a 2015. F?ach wwiohbyingie Designated Public Official under Regulation of Lobbying Act. 2015 08 University Rankings 2019 (.15 World rankings are one of a suite of ranking models which are published annually. (QS Rankings; Times Higher Education; U?Multirank). In addition, Q5 itself has 8 sets of rankings including ?Top 50 under 50? and ?Graduate Employability Rankings?. The ?05 World University Rankings 2019? were released on 8th June 2018:- 2019 Ranking 2018 Ranking {released 2017) TCD 104 (down 16) 88 UCD 193 (down 25) 168 Galway 260 (down 17) 243 ucc 338 (down 55) 283 DCU 422 (down 31) 391 UL 511?520 501-550 Maynooth 710?750 710?750 751-800 651-700 in the 2019 Q5 Rankings, Ireland sees two of its eight top institutions featuring in the top 200, or top 1% out of some 15,000 universities worldwide. All seven universities and Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) feature in the top 800 worldwide, however we are seeing a continued downward trend over the past 5 years (with the exception of Galway(15 World University rankings iris}? HEis ranked in the top 500, longitudinal performance 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/21? 2017/18 2018Z19 WTrinity College Dublin MWUniversity Coilege Dublin Gaiway University Coilege Cork City University Each set of rankings consists of a number of components which the Department is currently reviewing. When the actual components of the rankings are investigated we see a more nuanced picture for example Trinity College Dublin ranks 83rd for the level of international faculty. We also see a reduction in ?employer perceptions? across the institutions this year. This is inconsistent with last year?s Graduate Employability Rankings by the same organisation which show that University College Dublin ranked 75th in the world for overall graduate employability and 76th for partnerships with employers; Trinity College Dublin ranking 56th for alumni outcomes and University of Limerick ranking 77th for employer-student connections. Of those Universities and Institutions under 50 years old, the 2018 0.5 ?Top 50 under 50? ranked Dublin City University 515?; University of Limerick 80th and Dublin institute of Technology 103rd for 2018. We must exercise caution in reacting to a single set of results at a point in time in isolation from the feedback on our HEis provided from an overview of all the ranking models. The Department is currently evaluating the trends emerging from the separate models and will feed the results of this work through the general mechanisms for ensuring quality across our Higher Education System (the System Performance Framework and the Revised Funding Allocation Model). Higher Education Policy and Research 14 Jun 2018 (15 University Rankings 2018-2019 including component scores Ranking 2019 (201801 brackets) 193 (1 68) 260 (243) 283 (338) 391 (422) 501-550 (511-520) 701-750 (701-750) 651-700 (751-800) Breakdown of indicators Overall Score 2019 (2018 in brackets) 59.3 (65.7) 44.7 (51.5) 37.1 (42) 31.7 (38.6) Academic Reputation 58.8 (73.8) 42.4 (53.4) 20.5 (28.4) 25.7 (37.8) Employer Reputation 55.6 (68.9) 49 (69.4) 26.2 (45.1) 25.5 (47.7) (33.7) Faculty:Student Ratio 39.9 (30.7) 27.1 (28) 76.2 (73.5) 28.7 Citations per Faculty 63.1 (68.3) 46.2 (48.4) 17.3 30 (36.7) 18.9 international Faculty 98.7 (98.4) 96.2 (95.7) 90.8 (89.8) 95 (94.8) 78.7 (79.4) 46.6 (55.2) international Student Ratio 91.2 (89.5) 65.1 (60.2) 59.1 (66.2) 46.4 (34.9) 21.9 (22.3) 52.3 (52.7) Maguire, Donna From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: William Tony, Hope, Caoimhe 12 June 2018 12:45 Beausang, William; Gaynor, Tony Draft speech for Minister O'Connor - IIEA Conference 12.6.18 IIEA HE Funding Briefing Material for MMOCdocx As requested please find attached draft speech for Minister O?Connor?s closing address at the EIEA conference on Higher Education Funding. I would welcome any observations or amendments which you consider appropriate to this speech. Please let me know if you require any additional information to be included. Kind regards, Caoimhe 9&0 Assistant Principal Officer Higher Education Funding 8: Governance Department of ducatian Skills Tullamare Co Offaly MINISTER MITCHELL ADDRESSING IIEA CONFERENCE WEDNESDAY 13th 2018. TITLE: THE FUNDING OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN IRELAND Ladies and gentlemen, previous Minister for Education Ruairi Quinn, University Presidents, Danny McCoy (IBEC). Jim Miley (IUA), Peter Cassells, and international guests. I am delighted that I have been given this opportunity to address you on the Future Funding of Our Higher Education System. I would like to acknowledge the contribution of today's speakers to higher education provision and reform and welcome this forum which has engaged political and public perspectives on future funding approaches for the sector. We are all of us, both policy makers and professionals at the coal face, aware of the. challenges facing the Higher Education sector currently. However the development of talent through higher education is a central part of our plan as a Government to support a strong economy and deliver a fair society. In order to achieve this my department has undertaken a programme of review and reform measures with the aim of delivering a quality higher education system which can effectively cater for the demographic demands projected in the sector, with numbers expected to be nearly 30% higher by 2030. It is also of vital importance that we have an appropriately educated workforce that can adapt and respond to the economic and societal changes. in 2016 the Expert Group's Report (Cassells Report), clearly outlined the funding challenges facing in the higher education sector in light of projected demographic increases and the impact of the economic downturn. The report was clear in its conclusion that our current funding model is not sustainable. It called for the development of a clear funding strategy for the sector that will deliver a robust and steady base of funding to sustain the system into the future. My Department and I have been working tirelessly since to achieve this goal. The report highlight three main policy options for consideration in order to provide a more sustainable future funding model. 0 As committed to in the Programme for Government nginisteeBruten referred the report to the Oireachtas Joint Committee for Education and Skills as part0. of the process for building consensus on the most appropriate funding model for the sector. 0 in January 2018, 18 months after publication of the Report, my Department received a request from the Oireachtas Committee for the Department to carry out a comprehensive economic evaluation of each of the recommendations put forward in the Report. have agreed to this request. Minister Bruton and I will write to the Joint Committee shortly outlining our considered approach and timeframe for this evaluation. Wemare currently considering the most apprOpriate means of undertaking the economic examination of each of the pr0posed policy options presented in the Report to assist the Committee. .?Officials in my Department are earnestly?gig; liaising with the Structural Reform Support Service (SRSS) of the European Commission to explore the possibility of having the evaluation carried out as part of the Commission's Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP). Together the SRSS and SRSP provide technical and administrative supports to Member States for institutional, structural and administrative reforms. The SRSS invites applications for technical support from Member States, and provides the necessary technical assistance in cooperation'with other Commission services, other Member States and/or international organisations. We consider that undertaking the proposed economic evaluation via this route will facilitate the type of comprehensive examination of the Cassells funding options that the Joint Committee have requested. It will also provide my Department with an invaluable opportunity-to engage the involvement of a much wider range of international organisations and expertise than would ordinarily be available for a project of this nature. It is worth noting that iin carrying out the economic examination which has been requested by the Committee, the following departmental priorities will also be considered: How the additional funding which has been called for by the Expert Group can positively impact on learners - What is the appropriate mix of apprenticeship programmes and upskilling programmes for those in work and how that impacts on demand and funding models a How responsiveness to skills gaps can best be secured Given the commitment in the Programme for Government, which committed to referring the expert review to the Joint Oireachtas Committee, so that the Committee could review its recommendations and outline a proposed funding plan forthis sector, I will submit the economic evaluation will?be?ferwareled?to the committee once it has been completed. liresponse to the funding challenges identified by Cassells, myself and Minister Bruton have successfully initiated and implemented a number of positive measures to address the funding challenges in higher education. In summary my Department is progressing a number of different priorities in higher education, including: The establishment of an inter-departmental working group on future funding to consider issues relevant to the development of a long term sustainable funding model for higher education. 0 Reforming the funding allocation model for higher education institutes to ensure a fair and transparent system for all institutes in line with departmental and national strategies. 0 Targeted initiatives to enhance performance and innovation, . Programme to respond to skills needs across the sector including widespread promotion of access to education initiatives. - Reform of the National Training Fund to more effectively align further and higher education provision with the needs of employers and the economy. - Increased investment in capital infrastructure for higher education. To achieve these goals my Department and I have already commenced a signi?cant programme of investment in Higher Education. in total we are investing ?100m more in higher education this year than when the Cassells report was published. This additional funding has allowed for targeted initiatives in higher education including technological university development, skills programmes, performance and innovation funding as part of the RFAM, promoting access to higher education, and apprenticeship costs in the sector. This will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional full-time students in 2018. As your Minister at the cabinet table, I will be the voice ensuring additional funding for the Higher Education sector, in upcoming budgets. My Department and that of Minister Paschal Donohoe are currently working to reform the National Training Fund in response to issues raised by employers and, indeed, education providers, in last year?s consultation process. The fund levy was increased by 0.1% to 0.8% in Budget 2018 and by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020. This measure will allow for an additional expenditure of ?475 million this year as part of the Exchequer-Employer Funding Mechanism, bringing the fund to 435m for 2017 and 553m for 2018. it is estimated that this fund increases by a further ?104rn in 2019 and ?165m in 2020. Our aim is to make the Fund more transparent, to better align to employer needs and to develop a range of upskilling and reskilling initiatives which will respond to regional and national skills needs. With regards to apprenticeships, the action plan to expand apprenticeship and traineeship will see 31,000 new enrolments on apprenticeship programmes, representing a more than doubling of activity by 2020. The Government has also increased the Budget 2018 allocation for apprenticeship by almost 24% to ?122 million to support this activity. In January of this year I published the report of the independent Expert Panel on review the current allocation model for funding higher education. The report provides a roadmap for transitioning towards a reformed funding model that is more transparent, consistent across higher education institutions including Technological Universities that incentivises actions in key strategic areas, and supports improved accountability while also respecting institutional autonomy. The implementation group has been established and has met regularly to progress the priority recommendations for 2018. The group and comprises of experienced representatives from DES, HEA, DPER, THEA IUA. In line with my Department?s Action Plan for 2018 and national strategies a number of key immediate priorities being considered by the Group include: a financial penalty system for serious governance breaches the design of the new Innovation fund for individual and collaborative proposals, which can include prospective TU's. This will provide funding for new and innovative proposals that can contribute to promoting efficiencies and more positive student outcomes. 0 A new performance fund to reward institutions that excel in key priority areas. 0 The development of criteria for additional funding for multi?campus provision to assist in meeting the additional overhead costs associated with operating a regional campus. The RFAM recommendations will support and complement the new System Performance Framework for higher education which plays a key role in establishing the goals and objectives of the system up to 2020 across priority areas such as access, research and developing our pipeline of human capital. I acknowledge the role of the Cassells report in also identifying the need for capital investment in Higher Education. As a Government we have responded very positively in this area. We have initiated a significant programme for the Institute of Technology sector. I recently announced key progress on the appointment of design teams for the government?s Public Private Partnership programme for the higher education sector. A capital envelope of ?200m was provided for in the 2016?21 Capital Plan for this programme. This Programme is being rolled-out alongside ?367 million in funding from the Department of Education and Skills for investment in higher education over the period 2018-2021. Project Ireland 2040 provides for a significant ramping up in Exchequer funding to support infrastructure priorities in the higher education sector. ?22 billion will be made available over the coming decade to support refurbishment, new buildings and equipment renewal in the sector. Capital investment is essential to enhancing the capacity and quality of the higher education system, and to delivering on the vision forfuture Technological Universities. Eight of the eleven projects in the capital programme are in Institutes of Technology that are currently part of TU consortia. This comprehensive and holistic approach across current and capital higher education funding and reform is being taken in order to contribute to the development of a long- term sustainable funding model for the sector. While there is plenty of evidence of this currently, I look forward to these deep and collaborative approaches going from strength to strength, in what is a very exciting time for this sector and for Higher Education as a whole. The end Additional Briefing Background note Future Funding in Higher Education - Briefinq Material Cassells regort The report makes findings in relation to the amount of funding required and the ways in which this funding can be delivered. The Group has articulated the need for an immediate and sustained increase in investment in higher education across current, capital and student support budgets (see Appendix for further detail): 0 Core Funding: Higher Education Institutions require an additional ?600 million by 2021 and billion by 20301. This will be targeted at: (1) improving the quality of student experience and outcomes and (2) providing for increased demographics. 0 Capital Funding: A capital investment programme of ?55 billion is needed over the next 10-15 years to sufficiently cater for increased student numbers, capital upgrades, health and safety issues, equipment renewal and ongoing maintenance. 0 Student Support: The report calls for an increase in the value of support and an extension of grants to postgraduate and part time students and potentially students in private HEls, with a potential cost of in the region of ?100 million. a The Group puts forward three broad funding strategies for the future. These centre on the balance of cost sharing between the state and the student: 0 A predominately state funded system: Significant increase in investment by the State and an unwinding of the current student contribution Continuation of current system: Significant increase in investment by the State, continuation of ?3,000 upfront student contribution with fee waivers for students from lower income households 0 New system of deferred fees supported by student loans: Moderate increase in both state funding and the student contribution. Fees would be charged to all students, but payment would be deferred and supported by a student loan scheme 0 The final major recommendation is the introduction of a new employer contribution to higher education through an increase in the National Training Fund levy. - The Expert Group?s Report (Cassells Report) clearly outlines the funding challenges in the higher education sector and offers a number of approaches and recommendations for consideration. a The report was referred to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education as part of the process for formulating a plan for the future of the sector. In January 2018, 18 months after publication of the Report, my Department received a request from the Oireachtas Committee for the Department to carry out a comprehensive economic evaluation of each of the recommendations put forward in the Report. have agreed to this request. - Officials in my Department are currently liaising with the European Commission?s Structural Reform Support Service (SRSS) to determine if the economic evaluation could be supported through the Structural Reform Support Programme. No policy decisions will be taken in advance of the Committee?s recommendations. RFAM - Review of the Funding Model for Higher Education 0 The Report of the international panel on the Review of the Allocation Model for Funding Higher Education institutions, was published on 15?h January 2018. The reforms which will link funding of higher education institutions to the delivery of key national priorities including better alignment to skill needs of the economy, higher levels of performance and innovation, expansion of research; particularly with enterprise partners, the promotion of STEM provision, wider skills needs, and promoting access and lifelong learning. The recommendations are intended to transition towards a reformed funding model that has the potential to: 0 embed lifelong learning at the heart of Irish higher education provision; - recognise and respond to the demographic challenges and changing patterns of student demand; make access and innovation central to all institutional missions; ensure that funding can be channeled effectively to support research and skills development; and - reward institutions for delivering outcomes and impact. Important reforms that will be implemented based on the recommendations include: Revised Funding Model 0 The new funding model will move away from the current ?two pot' funding approach and towards a universal approach to supporting all higher education institutions including 0 Financial Penalties - The Review of the Allocation Model for Funding Higher Education institutions clearly acknowledged the importance of good governance and accountability across institutions and proposes a penalty system for serious breaches of governance compliance. 0 The proposed new financial penalty will complement and support the existing measures and initiatives which have been implemented to strengthen governance procedures and practices across the higher Education sector. Multi-campus provision The provision within the funding model of an additional ?250,000 per annum for higher education institutions with multiple campuses, in recognition of the additional costs that this involves. Performance Fund The introduction of a new performance fund to reward institutions that excel in key areas, and also a means by which institutions could be rewarded for working together- in pursuit of shared strategic goals. While the intention is that the new Performance Fund will be linked closely to the System Performance Framework, and that funding could be awarded based on information, data and reports generated from the compacts of the new Systems Performance Framework. This process will be possible from 2019 onwards. Innovation Fund The report recommends that there is scope within the funding model for institutions to come forward with innovative and transformative proposals with a potential application and impact across the system that cannot be funded within the current parameters of the model. In 2018 ?5million has been allocated for the innovation Fund. The implementation Group is currently ?nalising a competitive call for institutions or collective groups of institutions (TU's etc.) to present innovative or transformative proposals based on set criteria and specific themes. Please note that the implementation group will continue to work toward the implementation of all the recommendations set out in the report to establish a universal and transparent system for all institutions. National Training Fund 1. As part of Budget 2018, the Government decided to raise the National Training Fund levy by 0.1% in 2018 to and by a further 0.1% in both 2019 and 2020 (subject to the reform of the NTF to make it more transparent and to afford employers greater opportunity to inform the NTF expenditure priorities). The increase in funding from the National Training Fund is a key strategic element of the overall funding increase for higher and further education. Following issues raised by employers during a consultation process with them a number of key reforms to the NTF are being introduced to make it more responsive to employer needs and to give employers a greater say in informing priorities forthe Fund. Some of the key reforms include: A Comprehensive Review of the NTF - A comprehensive and independent review of the National Training Fund will be undertaken to guide strategic decisions on its structure and future direction in order to inform Budget 2019. This review is being conducted by lndecon and will be completed by end of June 2018. The terms of reference for this review are as follows: Examine the effectiveness and ef?ciency of the fund to date in meeting its objectives; Assess the targets and performance criteria associated with programmes supported through the Fund; Examine the adequacy of the evidence base and performance criteria on which expenditure decisions are taken; Assess the monitoring and evaluation arrangements in place; Assess the responsiveness of the Fund to the needs of the economy and wider society in terms of the type and method of programme delivery; Assess, the continued relevance of the core objectives of the fund and the future strategic direction of the fund; ldentify the most appropriate governance and oversight structure of the NTF in optimising employer engagement and input into priorities strategic pnon?es Consider the role of the fund, alongside the Exchequer and student sources, in future funding arrangements of the HE and FET sectors. Make recommendations on how to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance and impact of expenditure from the NTF fund and responsiveness of the Fund to the needs of the economy. Undertake an analysis of trends in NTF expenditure and make proposals around how expenditure can be aligned with employer needs. This will require consultation with a number of stakeholders. 2. Additional and refocused expenditure on programmes relevant to employers - Additional funding and refocused expenditure will be deployed on programmes and initiatives directly relevant to employers. Responding to calls for greater support for the development of skills in the existing workforce, apprenticeship will continue to expand, traineeship will be opened up to people in employment and support for Skillnets will increase. There has been a fundamental shift in the labour market over the last 5 years with unemployment falling from a 16% high in 2012 to 6% in January 2018. Therefore there has been a need. to change/rebalance a suite of programmes to reflect the changing needs of the labour market and skills gaps. 3. An NTF more aligned with employer needs - The 2018 NTF allocations represent a major shift in the focus of expenditure from the Fund. Programmes will be focused on labour market skill needs across higher education, further education and training and other partners. Funding for SOLASIETB programmes that are focused on social inclusion (albeit often with a strong labour market element) will transfer from the Fund to the Exchequer. This has started in 2018 with the move of the Specialist Training Provider Programme (training for people with disabilities) to the Exchequer and the movement of skills-focused higher education programmes to the NTF. 4. A greater say for employers, more transparency and stronger evaluation - The annual prioritisation of skill needs by the National Skills Council will be used to inform spending priorities on NTF programmes. A formal evaluation of at least one NTF-supported programme will be undertaken each year. Information collected on regional skills needs will be used to inform prioritisation of spend at local and regional level. 5. A new strategic dialogue model, incorporating strategic performance agreements clearly aligning local/regional and national targets, will be put in place in FET from 2018. This will enable a much clearer understanding for stakeholders, including employers, of the targets, outcomes and impact of FET. 08 World University Rankings 2016/2017 - While there is a decline in the Rankings of some Irish Institutions, lreland performs ahead of most European countries relative to our population size and has the 3rd highest level of tertiary attainment rate (52.3% in 2015) for 30 34 year olds in the EU28. We are still signi?cantly ahead of the EU28 average which rests at 38.7% in 2015. This strong performance is confirmed in the recent OECD publication Education at a Glance which was published on 15 September 2016 and which placed lreland 6th in the OECD in terms of its Tertiary Attainment Rate amongst 25-34 year olds. - We do have to be cautious about how we interpret the results of these commercial global rankings. it is clear that performance in rankings are often highly reliant on surveys of opinion and of citations in journals which do not adequately capture the full range of activities taking place in our third level institutions. - There are a number of university ranking systems seeking to benchmark institutions internationally. The robustness and reliability of the various methodologies utilised to generate international league tables comparing different institutions across different countries is the subject of active debate. a An important issue in seeking to assess the performance of Higher Education lnstitutions in comparative terms is the relevance of input measures such as staff?student ratios and funding levels as opposed to key output and outcome indicators that are likely to be more directly related to the quality of any particular institution. I want a strong Higher Education system that serves the needs of all students, enterprise and other stakeholders through high quality teaching and learning, upskilling and reskilling, research and innovation as well as supporting the most disadvantaged to participate in higher education. It is important that we ourselves choose the goals and objectives and then benchmark ourselves against best international practice. I have acknowledged that funding is a key concern. I have also outlined the many positive measures that have been adopted to address this challenge, including additional investment of ?100m in higher education in 2018 compared to when the Cassells report was published in 2018. This additional funding has allowed for targeted initiatives in higher education including technological university development, skills programmes, performance and innovation funding as part of the RFAM, and apprenticeship costs in the sector. It will also allow for places to be provided for 2,100 additional students in 2018. I will look to build on this investment in 2019 and beyond. Higher education outcomes Our Higher Education System is undergoing a programme of unprecedented modernisation and reform. Through implementation of the National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, the aim is to develop the higher education system to equip people with the knowledge and skills necessary to live fulfilled and rewarding lives, and to meet the social and economic challenges facing Ireland. The implementation of the System Performance Framework (SPF), including Strategic Dialogue and the agreement of compacts with the Higher Education Institutions (HEls) underpins a changed relationship between the State and the higher education system, and this provides for a new level of accountability for public funding against national objectives. The Higher Education Authority (HEA) published the Third Higher Education System Performance 2014-201 7 Report in December 2017. This report reviewed the performance of the higher education system for the years 2014 to 2017 in critical areas such as access and its responsiveness to skills needs of the economy. This Department published the new Higher Education System Performance Framework for the period 2018 to 2020 in January of this year, in conjunction with the HEA. It sets out the ambition, goals and objectives for higher education for this three?year period. Far-reaching restructuring of the higher education landscape is already in progress as can be evidenced through the process for reforming initial teacher education and the passing of the Technological Universities Bill, 2018 in March 2018. This will allow the loTs to progress their applications for Technological University status. Higher Education outputs (incorporating the HEA Higher Education Systems Performance Review 2014?2017) The higher education system continues to expand and enrol more students. Overall, student numbers in the sector increased from 196,000 in 2011/12 to about 225,000 in 2016/17, an increase of some 13%. Third level education attainment (age 30?34) in Ireland was at 53.3% in 2017, up from 52.6% in 2013. The equivalent EU average stood at 39.7%, up from 37.1% in 2013. Ireland's attainment exceeds the EU average by 13.6 percentage points. The number and share of students from disadvantaged backgrounds and of students with a disability attending third level grew between 2012/13 and 2016/17. In that 4 year period:- 0 Students from disadvantaged backgrounds rose by 24% from 9,150 to 11,318 0 Students with a disability rose by 72% from 2,561 to 4,417. The Irish higher education system has continued to create more and stronger international linkages, while also attracting a greater number of students to study in Ireland. The most recent HEA data (2016/17) demonstrates that 11.6% of full? time students (20,972) were international. This is an increase of 7% on 2012/13. Ireland continues to have the highest level of maths, science and computing graduates aged 20-29 per 1,000 of the p0pulation of the EU. However the male? female mix requires attention with a below EU28-average of 12.3 females per 1,000 graduates in these areas. Ireland ranks in 14th place in the World Talent Report for 2017 and 21st in the World Competitiveness Yearbook 2017 in 2017, Ireland, in the European Innovation Scoreboard, was deemed a strong innovator, with innovation in SMEs and employment impacts of innovation highlighted as a key strength. The number of full-time new entrants to undergraduate higher education now exceeds 43,500, a ?gure that is 5% higher than five years ago, thus reflecting a continuing demand for higher education in Ireland. There are 9,800 students engaged in full?time and part-time postgraduate research in HEA-funded institutions, a figure which has increased by 6% since 2013/14 following four years of decline. There were almost 70,000 graduates of HEIs in 2016, of which 49,000 were undergraduates and 21,000 were postgraduates. This represents an increase of 8% on the previous year. The increase in graduate numbers may, in part, be due to changes to Teacher Training Programmes. At undergraduate level, the 3?year Bachelor of Education for Primary Level Teaching changed to 4 years in 2012/13. Furthermore, at postgraduate level, the 1-year Professional Diploma in Education was replaced by a 2-year Professional Master of Education in 2014/15. Higher Education System Performance Framework 2018-2020 The Higher Education System Performance Framework 2018?2020 represents the second phase of evolution of the changed relationship between the State and HEIs, which has been developed with the implementation of the first System Performance Framework for Higher Education, published in 2013. The purposes of the framework were articulated in 2013 and remain valid: - To hold the system accountable for performance for the delivery of national priorities and monitor performance of the system as a whole; a To articulate all the expectations of the system from different areas of government/agencies across the various dimensions of higher education activity; 0 To increase the visibility of performance of the system to Government and the wider public; 0 To contribute to system and policy development by highlighting structural and other deficits including data capacity; 0 To allow HEls to identify their strategic niche and mission and agree a performance compact aligned with funding with the HEA. As with the first framework, the HEA will use this new framework as the context for conducting a process of strategic dialogue with individual institutions. This will lead to the agreement of performance compacts with the HEA, with institution Key Performance Indicators (KPls) reflecting their contribution to overall system objectives and building on their own individual missions, capacities and Key System Objectives 2018-2020 1. Providing a strong talent pipeline combining knowledge, skills and employability which responds effectively to the needs of our enterprise, public service and community sectors, both nationally and regionally, and maintains Irish leadership in Europe for skill availability. 2. Creating rich opportunities for national and international engagement which enhances the learning environment and delivers a strong bridge to enterprise and the wider community. 3. Excellent research, development and innovation that has relevance, growing engagement with external partners and impact for the economy and society and strengthens our standing to become an Innovation Leader in Europe. 4. Significantly improves the equality of opportunity through Education and Training and recruits a student body that reflects the diversity and social mix of Ireland?s population. 5. Demonstrates consistent improvement in the quality of the learning environment with a close to international best practice through a strong focus on quality and academic excellence. 6. Demonstrates consistent improvement in governance, leadership and Operational excellence. These objectives, taken together, clearly indicate the key priorities of Government for the higher education system over the period ahead and will serve as a foundation for developing the system and for making investment decisions. They will also provide the basis on which to build greater transparency and accountability for the future. Future Challenges and Focus In 2016, two major political developments occurred which have created ongoing uncertainty for Ireland: the Brexit decision and the changing policy priorities and approaches in the United States. The Brexit decision raises particular concerns for higher education around people, access to networking and funding and changes to regulation and the broader economic environment. It also provides Ireland with opportunities: Ireland will be the only English speaking country in the EU and may become a much sought-after partner for European consortia with continental European universities and research organisations. lreland may also win foreign direct investment which will be attracted by its continuing membership of the EU and the availability of well-educated, flexible and international workforce. Ireland will need to ensure that the existing arrangements for staff, students and researchers with the UK will be maintained in any final agreement. In the broader context, the Brexit decision has already led to a strengthening and prioritisation of policy to further diversify export markets as reflected in the new Enterprise Ireland strategy: Build, Scale, Expand, Reach. In the context of political change in the US, the availability of talent, the responsiveness of education and training and the quality of our research and innovation will continue to be central to Ireland?s value prOposition for attracting foreign direct investment. The Qualifications and Quality Assurance (Amendment) Bill, 2018 once enacted will bring extra measures to protect and enhance the student experience of International students studying in Ireland. The implementation of the International Education Mark will provide a strong quality assurance mark to enhance confidence in Irish education internationally. Overall, enterprise policy aims to deliver growth that is sustainable, led by strong export performance, to build resilience into our economy by taking a portfolio approach to sectoral development that is underpinned by innovation, productivity and competitiveness across all sectors, and to ensure that employment opportunities are created in all the regions. Higher education has a key role to play in supporting the achievement of this ambition. Technological Universities The Technological Universities Bill completed all stages in both houses of the Oireachtas on 8 March 2018 was signed into law by the President on 19 March 2018. A commencement order for the relevant Sections of the Act relating to TUs (as opposed to loT related provisions) was made on 24 April 2018. The legislation now underpins the development of a new type of higher education institution, building on the and mission of institutes of technology to develop world class technological universities. The Chairs and Presidents of all 4 consortia attended an information summit in the Higher Education Authority on the TU application process on 18 April 2018, which was hosted by the Minister of State for Higher Education. The Minister of State for Higher Education has also met individually, or has scheduled meetings with, the Presidents and Chairs of the institutions in the relevant TU consortia to discuss progress on and timelines for application submission. The first application for TU designation on behalf of Dublin Institute of Technology, Institute of Technology Blanchardstown and Institute of Technology Tallaght, was submitted to the Minister for Education and Skills on 27 April 2018. On 16 May 2018 the Minister appointed the following persons from the HEA and QQI nominations to the advisory panel to consider the application: Panel Appointments Mr. Lucien Bollaert Professor Tim McTiernan Dr. Mary Ellen Petrisko Dr. Andree Sursock There are currently four consortia of Institutes of Technology engaged with the developmental process seeking to become designated as technological universities: TU4Dublin 0 Dublin Institute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Blanchardstown - Institute of Technology Tallaght Application submitted on 27 April 2018. Funding to date: c. ?5m Connacht Ulster Alliance (CUA) Galway?Mayo I nstitute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Sligo - Letterkenny Institute of Technology Application anticipated in 2020. Funding to date: c. ?2m Munster Technological University (MTU) - Cork Institute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Tralee Application anticipated in 2019. Funding to date: c. ?2m Technological University for the South-East (TUSE) Waterford Institute of Technology 0 Institute of Technology Carlow Application anticipated by end 2018. Funding to date: ?1m Higher Education Division 8th June 2018