Hc 327 Funding For Disadvantaged Pupils
Download Hc 327 Funding For Disadvantaged Pupils full books in PDF, epub, and Kindle. Read online free Hc 327 Funding For Disadvantaged Pupils ebook anywhere anytime directly on your device. Fast Download speed and no annoying ads. We cannot guarantee that every ebooks is available!
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 21 |
| Release | : 2015 |
| Genre | : Business & Economics |
| ISBN | : 0215086341 |
Since the introduction of the Pupil Premium in 2011, there is some evidence that the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers has started to narrow. Head teachers have increased their focus on tackling this obdurate issue and there are many examples of schools using the Pupil Premium on interventions that work. The work of the Education Endowment Foundation has also been important in developing the evidence base for what works best, and so helping schools to choose the best interventions for their own circumstances. However, the Department for Education needs to be better at supporting schools to share and use best practice more consistently so that more schools use the Pupil Premium effectively. In addition, there remain inequalities in the core funding received by schools with very similar levels of disadvantage. As the impact of the Pupil Premium will take a long time to be fully realised, the Department needs to do more to demonstrate its emerging benefits in the meantime. We also urge the Department to carry out an early review of the effectiveness of the Early Years Pupil Premium
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 21 |
| Release | : 2016-02-05 |
| Genre | : Medical |
| ISBN | : 0215090934 |
Survival rates for cancer patients in England have generally been worse than those in other high-income countries in Europe, mainly because patients in England tend to be diagnosed later and have poorer access to treatment. The government set up the Cancer Drugs Fund in 2010 to improve access to cancer drugs that would not otherwise be routinely available on the NHS. In the last five years about 80,000 people received drugs through the Fund. However, the Department of Health and NHS England do not have the data needed to assess the impact of the Fund on patient outcomes, such as extending patients' lives, or to demonstrate whether this is a good use of taxpayers' money. NHS England overspent the Fund's �480 million budget for the two years 2013-14 and 2014-15 by �167 million. The cost of the Fund grew from �175 million in 2012-13 to �416 million in 2014-15, an increase of 138% in two years, but NHS England did not start to take action to control the cost until November 2014. There is agreement that the Fund is not sustainable in its current form and NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) are currently consulting on proposals to reform the Fund from April 2016. We expect NHS England, in making changes, to take account of our recommendations and apply the clear lessons from the last five years to ensure that the new Fund is managed better in the future.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 25 |
| Release | : 2015 |
| Genre | : Business & Economics |
| ISBN | : 0215087852 |
It is staggering that the government has given over £40 million to Kids Company over the past 13 years and still has no idea what it was getting for taxpayers' money. It was not part of this inquiry to assess the outcomes of Kids Company's work. We object to the obvious unfairness of central government directly funding a charity which operated in only two London boroughs for most of its existence, with around £4 million a year, at the expense of other charities and young people across the country. Despite repeated warnings and concerns about Kids Company's financial situation and the impact it was achieving, funding to the charity continued and was never seriously questioned, let alone stopped. Instead responsibilities were passed between departments like a hot potato. All the warning signs of a failed and expensive experiment had long been there but it was not until June 2015 that officials finally stood up to ministers, said enough was enough, and sought ministerial direction before providing more money. By then it was too late
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 24 |
| Release | : 2015 |
| Genre | : Education |
| ISBN | : 0215088123 |
The declining financial health of many further education colleges has potentially serious consequences for learners and local economies, but the bodies responsible for funding and oversight have been slow to address the problem. Too often, they have taken decisions without understanding the cumulative impact that these decisions have on colleges and their learners. Oversight arrangements are complex, sometimes overlapping, and too focused on intervening when financial problems have already become serious rather than helping to prevent them in the first place. The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills and the Department for Education appear to see area-based reviews of post-16 education as a fix-all solution to the current problems, but the reviews do not cover all types of provider and it is not clear how they will deliver a robust and financially sustainable sector.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 17 |
| Release | : 2015 |
| Genre | : Medical |
| ISBN | : 0215088190 |
The General Practice Extraction Service (GPES) is an IT system designed to allow NHS organisations to extract data from all GP practice computer systems in England. This data would be used to monitor quality, plan and pay for health services and help medical research. The National Audit Office conducted an investigation into the service following concerns raised during a financial audit of the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The investigation found that the project had been delayed and only one customer, NHS England, had so far received data from GPES. Mistakes in the original procurement and contract management contributed to losses of public funds, through asset write-offs and settlements with suppliers. However, the need for the service remains and further public expenditure is needed to improve GPES or replace it. This inquiry will examine the procurement and development of the GPES system, the total expected cost of the GPES programme, which increased from £14 million to £40 million during planning and procurement, and how the capability of GPES can be used to provide a suitable data extraction service in the future.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 25 |
| Release | : 2016 |
| Genre | : Political Science |
| ISBN | : 0215090926 |
We acknowledge that Universal Credit has stabilised and made progress since the previous Committee of Public Accounts first reported on the programme in 2013. However, there remains a long way to go. Implementation of Universal Credit so far has focussed mainly on the simplest cases and the Department for Work & Pensions has again delayed the programme. The completion date for the roll-out of its new digital service is six months later compared to when we looked at the programme only a year ago, and the Department now expects that Universal Credit will be fully operational in March 2021. The Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts that there will be a further six-month delay beyond the Department's latest planned end-date. We remain disappointed by the persistent lack of clarity and evasive responses by the Department to our inquiries, particularly about the extent and impact of delays. The Department's response to the previous Committee's recommendations in the February 2015 report Universal Credit: progress update do not convince us that it is committed to improving transparency about the programme's progress.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 21 |
| Release | : 2016 |
| Genre | : Political Science |
| ISBN | : 0215090799 |
In March 2015 HM Treasury agreed to sell its 40% stake in Eurostar for £585.1 million, almost double the valuations produced before the sale by both the government's project team and UBS its financial adviser. While some of this difference may be explained by the successful sale process and favourable market conditions, it is also further evidence of the government and its advisers undervaluing assets. We are also concerned about the seeming over-reliance by government on a small pool of costly advisers for asset sales. For example, UBS, the financial adviser for this transaction, was also involved in the sale of the Royal Mail and High Speed 1 (HS1). Eurostar also agreed, in a separate transaction, to redeem the government's preference share, providing a further £172 million for the taxpayer. The sale of the UK government's entire financial interest in Eurostar therefore generated proceeds of £757.1 million, significantly less than taxpayers' total financial investment in Eurostar which is estimated to have been some £3 billion. In October 2015, some two years later than expected, the Department for Transport published an evaluation of the economic impact and regeneration benefits for HS1. We are concerned that this delay has prevented the evaluation, which shows that the costs of HS1 far outweigh its quantified benefits, from being used to aid the scrutiny of other projects such as High Speed 2. Despite the results of its own evaluation, which it described as "world class", the Department maintains that there are further "wider wider benefits" from HS1 that it cannot yet value which make the investment worthwhile.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 21 |
| Release | : 2016 |
| Genre | : Business & Economics |
| ISBN | : 0215091353 |
The last time we discussed rail franchising was in 2012, in the wake of the collapsed competition for the InterCity West Coast franchise. We are encouraged that, since then, the Department for Transport has strengthened its capability to let franchises, but there are still gaps in its ability to then manage the contracts effectively. The Department's increased focus on the passenger experience is also welcome, but it is unclear when passengers themselves will actually see the benefits. Furthermore, the Department has not yet developed the partnerships with operators that are required to support innovation, improve efficiency and improve services for passengers. Successful rail franchising depends on strong interest from the market and effective competition but there are barriers to entry to the UK market and the possibility that current participants in the market may drop out. Any reduction to the current level of competition is a major risk to securing value for money for the taxpayer. Perhaps the biggest challenge facing the Department is to manage the complex interdependencies between passenger rail franchises, the infrastructure that train services run on and the introduction of new fleets of trains to the network. Uncertainty about infrastructure work has resulted in delays to franchise competitions and the Department will have to rely on potentially expensive changes to franchises during the life of contracts. The Department's role is to provide a strategic lead for the complex rail system but it has not yet shown that it has embraced this role. It needs to provide a coherent strategic vision and stronger leadership to ensure that the investment decisions it makes now do not result in increased costs in the long term.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 21 |
| Release | : 2016 |
| Genre | : Medical |
| ISBN | : 0215090845 |
Since the previous Committee of Public Accounts reported in 2012, the Department of Health and NHS England have made progress in improving outcomes for diabetes patients. International evidence now available also suggests that the UK performs well compared to other countries in terms of outcomes for diabetes patients. However, there are significant variations in the routine care and support that diabetes patients receive, and in outcomes for diabetes patients. We are concerned that the witnesses from the Department and NHS England painted an unduly healthy picture of the state of diabetes services in England. Although an individual diabetes patient's prospects are getting better, the number of people with diabetes is rising by 4.8% a year, and performance in delivering the nine care processes and achieving the three treatment standards, which help to minimise the risk of diabetes patients developing complications in the future, has stalled. In addition, very few new diabetes patients are taking up education that could help them manage their condition, and the number of diabetes patients experiencing complications (which account for over two-thirds of the cost of diabetes to the NHS) continues to rise. This all means that the costs of diabetes to the NHS will continue to rise. In order to control these costs, the Department and NHS must take significant action to improve prevention and treatment for diabetes patients in the next couple of years.
| Author | : Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Committee of Public Accounts |
| Publisher | : The Stationery Office |
| Total Pages | : 21 |
| Release | : 2015 |
| Genre | : Political Science |
| ISBN | : 0215086511 |
There has been a systemic failing in the provision of support to vulnerable care leavers. The quality and cost of support that local authorities give to care leavers varies unacceptably across the country and outcomes for young people leaving care are poor and worsening. Ofsted's inspections have found that two-thirds of local authorities' care leaver services are inadequate or require improvement and there is no clear relationship between the amount spent and the quality of service. The scale of variability in the quality and cost of support, and a lack of understanding of what causes this, show that this is a systemic issue, rather than a problem in just a few local authorities. We welcome the Government's intent to improve the lives of care leavers, signalled by the launch of the Care Leaver Strategy in 2013, and the fact that more good practice in supporting care leavers is now emerging. But central and local government must both take more responsibility for improving outcomes and the quality of support.
