DOCSLIB.ORG

2009-10 Survey: Ross-CASE 2011 Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2009-10 Survey: Ross-CASE 2011 Report Ross–CASE Survey 2009-10 Final Report Authors: Nicholas Gilby, Cole Armstrong Date: March 2011 Prepared for: The Ross Group and CASE Contents 1 Executive summary ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 The context for the 2009-10 survey................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Commentary by the Ross Group Editorial Board .............................................................................................. 3 1.3 Key data ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 1.4 University fundraising performance in 2009-10................................................................................................. 8 1.5 University alumni fundraising in 2009-10........................................................................................................... 9 1.6 University fundraising costs in 2009-10............................................................................................................. 9 1.7 University fundraising staffing in 2009-10........................................................................................................ 10 2 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Survey management ....................................................................................................................................... 11 Survey methodology ................................................................................................................................. 11 Data quality ............................................................................................................................................... 12 Who responded to the survey? ................................................................................................................. 12 2.2 Conventions..................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.3 Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................... 14 3 Total funds......................................................................................................................... 15 3.1 Commentary by the Ross Group Editorial Board ............................................................................................ 15 3.2 New funds secured.......................................................................................................................................... 16 3.3 Changes in new funds secured ....................................................................................................................... 20 3.4 Cash income received..................................................................................................................................... 21 3.5 Changes in cash income received................................................................................................................... 25 3.6 Cash income received by English institutions which could be eligible for matched funding ........................... 26 3.7 Summary of total funds trends......................................................................................................................... 29 4 Analysis of gifts ................................................................................................................ 30 4.1 Commentary by the Ross Group Editorial Board ............................................................................................ 30 4.2 Legacy income received.................................................................................................................................. 32 4.3 Gifts-in-kind ..................................................................................................................................................... 34 4.4 Campaigns ...................................................................................................................................................... 35 4.5 Largest pledges ............................................................................................................................................... 36 4.6 Largest cash gifts ............................................................................................................................................ 39 4.7 Annual Fund cash income............................................................................................................................... 42 4.8 Alumni donors.................................................................................................................................................. 43 4.9 Donors ............................................................................................................................................................. 47 4.10 Summary of trends in analysis of gifts ...................................................................................................... 48 5 Key cost trends.................................................................................................................49 5.1 Commentary by the Ross Group Editorial Board ............................................................................................ 49 5.2 Total fundraising expenditure .......................................................................................................................... 50 5.3 Structure of fundraising costs.......................................................................................................................... 51 5.4 Fundraising expenditure per pound received .................................................................................................. 54 5.5 Expenditure on alumni relations ...................................................................................................................... 59 5.6 Fundraising and alumni staffing....................................................................................................................... 60 5.7 Cost of alumni magazine................................................................................................................................. 61 5.8 Fundraising capacity building scheme managed by UUK ............................................................................... 63 5.9 Summary of key cost trends ............................................................................................................................ 64 6 Findings from Wales ........................................................................................................ 65 6.1 Fundraising...................................................................................................................................................... 65 6.2 Alumni fundraising........................................................................................................................................... 66 6.3 Fundraising costs and staffing......................................................................................................................... 67 Appendix A Reporting Rules............................................................................................ 69 Appendix B Rules relating to the inclusion or exclusion of corporate gifts and sponsorship ........................................................................................................................ 87 Appendix C List of Institutions responding to the survey............................................ 88 Appendix D List of checks undertaken by NatCen for Ross-CASE survey 2009-10..90 Appendix E Mission Group members ............................................................................. 95 Appendix F Alternative fundraising expenditure per pound secured measure .......101 1 Executive summary This report presents the results of the 2009-10 Ross–CASE Survey of Gifts and Costs of Voluntary Giving which evaluates the philanthropic health of universities in the UK and, to a more limited extent, a number of further education institutions. The survey is carried out every year and is commissioned on behalf of the Ross Group of Development Directors and the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) in Europe. The Ross Group is a network of leading fundraising professionals from research intensive universities in the UK and Ireland. Members of the Group are Directors of Development or equivalent positions in their home universities. The Group began this survey in 2001-2 in order to ensure that there was a reliable source of data on the philanthropic health of universities in the UK. This survey is one of the Ross Group’s major projects. The Group’s members have worked collaboratively to define common standards of philanthropic reporting, in terms of both income and costs, throughout the UK, and to engage the wider university sector in the need for participation in the survey. Until this survey began, there was no general sector-wide source for data on philanthropy in higher education in the UK. CASE is the membership association that serves educational institutions around the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • And Second Choice (2) for EACH Session a – E, in the Last Column
    LSDA Regional Research Conference, 2 July 2004 WORKSHOP CHOICE Please indicate your preferred choice (1) and second choice (2) for EACH session, in the last column. Name: ……………………………………………… Organisation: …………………………………… Email: …………………………………………… Tel: ………………………………………………. Session 1 9.45am – 10.30am Sandra Rennie, Bradford College The use of individual learning plans in promoting effective learning Peter Vickers, Joseph Priestley College Can supported employment be offered by FE as part of its curriculum for adults with learning difficulties or disabilities? Dely Elliot, Scottish Further Education Unit Situating emotional intelligence in higher education Mary Coyle, York College A couple of small acorns: using a regular teaching and learning bulletin and a classroom display service to spread good practice within York College Gillian Bishop, Wakefield College Progression of adult learners from community to college – the picture at Wakefield College Session 2 10.30am – 11.15am Dr. Jan Eldred, Mike Baynham, Bridget Embedding literacy, language and numeracy in vocational Cooper, Nancy Gidley, University of Leeds/ programmes – 2 case studies in Yorkshire and Humber NIACE Hilary Beverley, North Lincolnshire Council Barriers to inclusion for adults with learning difficulties - Adult Education Service hidden assumptions Jonathan Tummons, Yorkshire Coast The acquisition of academic literacies amongst part time College and adult students Helen Kenwright, York College Formative assessment techniques in post compulsory education and training Tony Scaife,
    [Show full text]
  • Leeds College of Building Inspection Report
    Leeds College of Building Inspection report Unique reference number: 130542 Name of lead inspector: Bob Busby HMI Last day of inspection: 12 November 2010 Type of provider: General Further Education College North Street Address: Leeds West Yorkshire LS2 7QT Telephone number: 01132 22 6000 Published date December 2010 Inspection Number 354440 Inspection report: Leeds College of Building, 12 November 2010 2 of 28 Information about the provider 1. Leeds College of Building is a medium-sized general further education college that specialises in construction education and training. It is the only specialist construction college in England. It is based on seven main sites including satellite sites with Leeds City Council plus delivery on local school sites. Most learners are white males. The highest proportion of learners come from the Leeds area, but the remainder come from a much broader catchment area. Many of the learners come from inner city wards, which are amongst the 10% most deprived wards in the country. 2. Provision is offered from entry level through to higher education, with the majority of learners on programmes at foundation and intermediate levels. The college offers courses for full-time and part-time learners in engineering and manufacturing technologies, construction, planning and the built environment, information and communication technology and preparing for life and work. The largest number of enrolments is in construction, planning and built environment. 3. The Skills Funding Agency funds the training which includes apprenticeships and programmes funded through Train to Gain. Funding for 16-18 year olds is through the Young Peoples Learning Agency (YPLA – Education Leeds).
    [Show full text]
  • School and College (Key Stage 5)
    School and College (Key Stage 5) Performance Tables 2010 oth an West Yorshre FE12 Introduction These tables provide information on the outh and West Yorkshire achievement and attainment of students of sixth-form age in local secondary schools and FE1 further education sector colleges. They also show how these results compare with other Local Authorities covered: schools and colleges in the area and in England Barnsley as a whole. radford The tables list, in alphabetical order and sub- divided by the local authority (LA), the further Calderdale education sector colleges, state funded Doncaster secondary schools and independent schools in the regional area with students of sixth-form irklees age. Special schools that have chosen to be Leeds included are also listed, and a inal section lists any sixth-form centres or consortia that operate otherham in the area. Sheield The Performance Tables website www. Wakeield education.gov.uk/performancetables enables you to sort schools and colleges in ran order under each performance indicator to search for types of schools and download underlying data. Each entry gives information about the attainment of students at the end of study in general and applied A and AS level examinations and equivalent level 3 qualiication (otherwise referred to as the end of ‘Key Stage 5’). The information in these tables only provides part of the picture of the work done in schools and colleges. For example, colleges often provide for a wider range of student needs and include adults as well as young people Local authorities, through their Connexions among their students. The tables should be services, Connexions Direct and Directgov considered alongside other important sources Young People websites will also be an important of information such as Ofsted reports and school source of information and advice for young and college prospectuses.
    [Show full text]
  • Let Mindgenius Organise Your Thoughts!
    Computing Service Keynotes Volume 32 Number 2 January 2006 Let MindGenius organise your thoughts! Also in this Issue: Changes to email quotas Network Service developments New PC study room in Langwith New colour printer ManagingKeynotes email in Outlook Volume 32, Number 2 From the Editor Contents We are pleased to start the new calendar year by announcing a range of new News in Brief services and facilities. Staff news 1 Computer consumables vending machine 1 ❖ ❖ New colour printer available 1 New PC study room open in Langwith 1 Recent developments around campus contents include a new PC study room in Infrastructure Langwith College which contains a Network Service developments 2 colour printer available to all users, and IT Infrastructure Forum 2 the installation of a convenient computer Changes to email quotas 2 consumables vending machine in the J B Morrell Library. Software and Training MindGenius 3 ❖ ❖ Iliad for University update 3 Connecting to the campus network, Email whether by wired or wireless methods, Managing email in Outlook 4 is becoming easier and simpler due to Planned upgrade to the Mailing Lists developments in the Network Access Service 4 Service – see page 2 for further information. ❖ ❖ We’d like to draw your attention to the new site licence for the MindGenius ‘mindmapping’ tool which, it is claimed on the supplier’s web site, can help you to get 20 hours’ work done in 6! ❖ ❖ Finally, you’ll no doubt be pleased to hear that email quotas for staff and research graduates have been increased (page 2). Some general advice on managing email in Outlook can be found on page 4.
    [Show full text]
  • University Collaboration on Technology Transfer Pdf 4.9 MB
    University Collaboration on Technology Transfer: An All-Island Feasibility Study University Collaboration on Technology Transfer: An All-Island Feasibility Study Contents FOREWORD 03 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 04 SECTION 1 CONTEXT 08 SECTION 2 CURRENT ENVIRONMENT 10 SECTION 3 PROFILE OF THE SECTOR 16 SECTION 4 OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATION 19 SECTION 5 EXTERNAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE SECTOR 23 SECTION 6 WHAT WORKS ELSEWHERE 25 SECTION 7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 30 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 METHODOLOGY 35 APPENDIX 2 CASE STUDIES 46 APPENDIX 3 RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS 56 APPENDIX 4 GLOSSARY 58 DISCLAIMER InterTradeIreland, Universities Ireland and the Irish Universities Association are confident that the information and opinions contained in this document have been compiled by the authors from sources believed to be reliable and in good faith, but no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made to their accuracy, completeness or correctness. All opinions or estimates contained in this document constitute the authors’ judgement as of the date of this document and are subject to change without notice. This publication is intended to provide general information to its readers concerning the subject matter of the publication. It is not intended to provide a comprehensive statement of the subject matter of the publication and does not necessarily reflect the views of InterTradeIreland. While care has been taken in the production of the publication, no responsibility is accepted by InterTradeIreland for any errors or omissions herein. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS InterTradeIreland, Universities Ireland and the Irish Universities Association would like to thank Technology & Research Services (Heriot-Watt University), the universities across the island, North and South, and the consultees who participated in the research, for their assistance with the development of this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Colleges Mergers 1993 to Date
    Colleges mergers 1993 to date This spreadsheet contains details of colleges that were established under the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act and subsequently merged Sources: Learning and Skills Council, Government Education Departments, Association of Colleges College mergers under the Further Education Funding Council (FEFC) (1993-2001) Colleges Name of merged institution Local LSC area Type of merger Operative date 1 St Austell Sixth Form College and Mid-Cornwall College St Austell College Cornwall Double dissolution 02-Apr-93 Cleveland College of Further Education and Sir William Turner's Sixth 2 Cleveland Tertiary College Tees Valley Double dissolution 01-Sep-93 Form College 3 The Ridge College and Margaret Danyers College, Stockport Ridge Danyers College Greater Manchester Double dissolution 15-Aug-95 4 Acklam Sixth Form College and Kirby College of Further Education Middlesbrough College Tees Valley Double dissolution 01-Aug-95 5 Longlands College of Further Education and Marton Sixth Form College Teesside Tertiary College Tees Valley Double dissolution 01-Aug-95 St Philip's Roman Catholic Sixth Form College and South Birmingham 6 South Birmingham College Birmingham & Solihull Single dissolution (St Philips) 01-Aug-95 College North Warwickshire and Hinckley 7 Hinckley College and North Warwickshire College for Technology and Art Coventry & Warwickshire Double dissolution 01-Mar-96 College Mid-Warwickshire College and Warwickshire College for Agriculture, Warwickshire College, Royal 8 Coventry & Warwickshire Single dissolution
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 No. 1675 EDUCATION, ENGLAND The
    STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2011 No. 1675 EDUCATION, ENGLAND The Joseph Priestley College, Leeds (Dissolution) Order 2011 Made - - - - 7th July 2011 Laid before Parliament 8th July 2011 Coming into force - - 1st August 2011 The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills makes the following Order in exercise of the powers conferred by section 27 of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992(a). This Order is made with the consent of the further education corporation established to conduct Leeds City College(b). It is made for the purpose of giving effect to a proposal for the dissolution of the further education corporation established to conduct Joseph Priestley College, Leeds(c) (“the corporation”) made by the Chief Executive of Skills Funding. The Secretary of State has consulted the corporation and the YPLA. 1. This Order may be cited as the Joseph Priestley College, Leeds (Dissolution) Order 2011 and comes into force on 1st August 2011. 2. On 1st August 2011 the corporation is dissolved and all of its property, rights and liabilities are transferred to Leeds City College, being a body corporate established for purposes which include the provision of educational facilities or services. 3. Section 26(2), (3) and (4) of the Act applies to any person employed by the corporation immediately before 1st August 2011 as if the reference in that section — (a) to a person to whom that section applies were to a person so employed; (b) to the operative date were to 1st August 2011; (c) to the transferor were to the corporation; and (d) to the corporation were to Leeds City College.
    [Show full text]
  • Value for Money in Higher Education
    House of Commons Education Committee Value for money in higher education Seventh Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 24 October 2018 HC 343 Published on 5 November 2018 by authority of the House of Commons The Education Committee The Education Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Education and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Robert Halfon MP (Conservative, Harlow) (Chair) Lucy Allan MP (Conservative, Telford) Ben Bradley MP (Conservative, Mansfield) Marion Fellows MP (Scottish National Party, Motherwell and Wishaw) James Frith MP (Labour, Bury North) Emma Hardy MP (Labour, Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) Trudy Harrison MP (Conservative, Copeland) Ian Mearns MP (Labour, Gateshead) Lucy Powell MP (Labour (Co-op), Manchester Central) Thelma Walker MP (Labour, Colne Valley) Mr William Wragg MP (Conservative, Hazel Grove) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/education-committee and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Richard Ward (Clerk), Katya Cassidy (Second Clerk), Chloë Cockett (Committee Specialist), Anna Connell-Smith (Committee Specialist), Victoria Pope (Inquiry Manager), Natalie Flanagan (Senior Committee Assistant), Olivia Cormack (Committee Assistant), Hajera Begum (Committee Apprentice), Gary Calder (Senior Media Officer) and Oliver Florence (Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • The Student Visa System: Principles to Reform
    THE STUDENT VISA SYSTEM: PRINCIPLES TO REFORM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Universities UK, GuildHE, MillionPlus, the Russell Group, University Alliance and UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA) have identified five principles that should underpin the design of the new student visa route and several actions that must be taken to achieve this reform. These actions include improving the international student experience, reducing the administrative burden and increasing reliability, transparency and accountability of the immigration system. BACKGROUND Under the current immigration system universities wishing to recruit international (non- EEA) students must sponsor these students, requiring the university1 and student to comply with a range of duties. In December 2018 the UK government published an Immigration White Paper announcing plans for a post-Brexit single visa route for all non-UK domiciled students. The White Paper outlined a commitment to streamlining the existing immigration system to develop more ‘light touch’ sponsorship procedures. The International Education Strategy published on 16 March 2019 reiterates this intention, stating that the government will ‘…keep the visa application process for international students under review, with the aim of improving the customer journey both for students and their sponsoring institutions’. The strategy’s intention to strengthen the UK’s visa offer for international students is central to achieving its ambition of growing the UK’s education exports to £35 billion a year and increasing the number of international higher education (HE) students in the UK to 600,000 by 2030. Together, the commitments in the Immigration White Paper and the International Education Strategy present an opportunity to rethink how the student visa system operates for universities and students.
    [Show full text]
  • Excellence, Concentration and Critical Mass in UK Research
    Concentration and diversity: understanding the relationship between excellence, concentration and critical mass in UK research A report by University Alliance Libby Aston and Liz Shutt December 2009 Research Paper 2009/01 © Copyright University Alliance 2009 ISBN 978-1-908190-04-8 Concentration and diversity: understanding the relationship between excellence, volume and critical mass in UK research Executive Summary 1. Selectivity not concentration has driven excellence • A policy of selectivity – funding research based on quality – has driven up the quality of UK research since the introduction of the RAE, not concentration. • Selectivity has resulted in concentration of research funding where quality exists. This is fully supported by University Alliance. • The UK has one of the most highly selective research funding methods in the world – QR funding in 2009-10, based on RAE 2008, has not changed that: o In 2007-8, four institutions received 29 per cent of Quality-related (QR) funding (and 23 around 75 per cent). o In 2009-10, four institutions received 32 per cent of QR funding (and 25 around 75 per cent). • Selectivity can, however, be taken too far. HEFCE’s ‘Fundamental Review of Research Policy and Funding’ concluded that “a major increase in selectivity could reduce the number of research-led institutions to a level that would be inconsistent with the general health of the UK research base, in terms of both its economic and its social contribution…leading to complacency and ossification.” 2. Excellence is not determined by volume alone • There is no direct correlation between volume and excellence outside some of the physical sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The
    KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE AND COMMERCIALISATION: THE STATE OF THE PROFESSION IN UK HIGHER EDUCATION Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The State of the Profession in Higher Education “Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The state of the profession in UK Higher Education” This report was commissioned by PraxisUnico Contact: [email protected] Authors: Rob Johnson and Mattia Fosci www.researchconsulting.co.uk Contact: [email protected] Report dated: February 2016 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 2 CONTENTS Foreword 5 Executive summary 7 Background and methodology 9 The KEC profession in UK higher education 11 The work of KEC professionals 19 Profiling KEC professionals 25 Improving the effectiveness of the KEC profession 31 Key trends and challenges 37 Appendix 1 43 Appendix 2 44 Appendix 3 46 3 Knowledge Exchange and Commercialisation: The State of the Profession in Higher Education 4 FOREWORD The focus on taking research knowledge into commercial products and services, policy and social interventions is intense. PraxisUnico has represented professionals working at the interface between researchers and external organisations for almost 15 yearsI. During that time we have seen the work of such intermediaries become increasingly recognised and respected. The UK is ranked 4th in the world for university- industry collaboration in R&DII. The government’s ambition is that universities should ‘continue to increase their collaboration with industry to drive At a time of growth research commercialisation’ and increase the ” in the economy income they earn from working with business III and others to £5 billion by 2025 .
    [Show full text]
  • Leeds Site Allocations Plan Matter 2
    LEEDS SITE ALLOCATIONS PLAN MATTER 2 – COMPLIANCE WITH CORE STRATEGY KCS DEVELOPMENT Peacock & Smith Limited Suite 9C Joseph’s Well Hanover Walk Leeds LS3 1AB T: 0113 2431919 F: 0113 2422198 E: [email protected] AUGUST 2017 www.peacockandsmith.co.uk Leeds SAP Examination (Matter 2) Peacock & Smith Ltd 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1.01 These comments are submitted on behalf of KCS Development, a residential site promotion company seeking the allocation land of south of Harewood Road, Collingham (Site 1293) in the Leeds Site Allocations DPD (SAP) for 85 no. homes with extensive open space and buffer landscaping. 1.02 KCS Development is a Member of a consortium of housebuilders (the Collingham Consortium) and site promoters that is proposing a comprehensive masterplan for future housing development in Collingham. The KCS site comprises one of 4 allocations that are proposed in the settlement that together will deliver: 450 new homes, thus reflecting Collingham’s role as one of the larger settlements in the Outer North East Housing Market Characteristic Area (HMCA), with a good range of shops and services and public transport services; A site for a new primary school, thus providing the opportunity for education facilities within Collingham to be substantially improved, to the benefit of existing and future residents; and A new access route between Harewood Road and the A58 Leeds Road, which would help to reduce traffic through Collingham Local Centre. 1.03 KCS Development is also a member of a consortium of housebuilders and site promoters (the ONE Consortium) that is proposing an alternative strategy to meeting housing needs in the ONE HMCA than that proposed by the Council.
    [Show full text]