| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
9 Mar 2007 : Column 2262W—continued
This data is not routinely gathered for longer time periods after leaving. Occasionally such information is gathered from sample surveys that follow up graduates a few years after they have left university, but this is only available at national level. For example, the “Class of 99 Study” (published in 2005) obtained information on the destinations of a sample of 1999 UK graduates around four years after graduation. This showed that the majority were in full-time employment as follows:
| Current situation, by gender | ||
| Situation | Male | Female |
| Source: The Class of 99: Early Career Paths of 1999 Graduates | ||
Learning Disability: Per Capita Costs
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what amount was spent per capita on students with learning difficulties in each of the last five years. [125732]
Bill Rammell: The following tables set out the amounts which have been allocated in respect of disabled students over the past five years. This includes:
funding from the mainstream disability allocation, which is the main funding delivered by the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE) to higher education institutions (HEIs) to support disabled students;
HEFCE's capital funding which has been provided to HEIs to improve provision for students with special needs, in line with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and its extension in the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001;
HEFCE's special initiative funding provided to HEIs and further education colleges which has funded 54 projects in two strands, to support small and/or specialist institutions with little provision for, or experience in supporting, students with disabilities and to develop and disseminate resources relating to the learning and teaching of disabled students; and
The disabled students' allowance which can help pay the extra costs a disabled student may incur to attend a course of higher education, as a direct result of their disability or specific learning difficulty.
We do not disaggregate these funds in respect of a student’s type of disability. Nor are we able to provide details of amounts spent by institutions on individual disabled students through the HEFCE funding. The mainstream disability allocation is delivered as part of the block grant to HEIs and as such is available for the HEIs to use in the way best suited to meet the needs of their students. In addition, although the allocation is calculated using the numbers of students recorded on the Higher Education Statistics Agency record as being in receipt of the disabled students' allowance, the funding does not follow individual students. We do not hold information centrally about spend per student in terms of the capital and special initiative funding.
| £ million | |
|
Special initiative funding (projects) (provided over a two-year period) | |
In addition to the above HEFCE has provided approximately £1.2 million per year to a co-ordination team to provide support to the sector in the form of resources, advice and guidance. From 2002-05 this support was provided by the National Disability Team. Since January 2006, the Disability Equality Partnership has taken on this role.
We do not break down awards of DSA by type of disability. Available data on English higher education students in receipt of DSA(1) are given in the table.
(1) Data includes full-time, part-time, and postgraduate DSA allowances.
| Disabled students' allowance (DSA) | |||
| Academic year | Number of HE students in receipt of DSAs( 1) | Expenditure on DSAs (£ million)( 2) | Average DSA expenditure per student (£)( 3) |
| (1) Numbers rounded to the nearest 10 students. (2) Numbers in millions. (3) Rounded to the nearest 10. (4) Due to a change in reporting arrangements, data are not centrally available for 2003/04. Source: Student Loans Company (SLC) | |||
Nurseries
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the occupancy rates for places in day nurseries were in each year since 2001, broken down by (a) private, voluntary and independent and (b) maintained nurseries. [125553]
Beverley Hughes [holding answer 6 March 2007]: The number of children per registered full day care setting place was 1.6 in 2001, 1.5 in 2003 and 1.4 in 2005 for both (a) private, voluntary and independent and (b) maintained nurseries. 2005 is the latest date for which figures are available. The number of children enrolled is greater than the number of places, as part-time children can share a full time place.
These figures are based on findings from nationally representative surveys of registered child care and early years providers, which are commissioned by the Department. The survey began in 1998 and was repeated in 2001, 2002-03 and 2005. Therefore while it is possible to provide occupancy rates for places in full day care settings for 2001, 2002-03 and 2005 it is not possible to provide the relevant data for 2002 and 2003 separately or for 2004.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many day nurseries have (a) closed and (b) opened since 2003, broken down by (i) private, voluntary and independent and (ii) maintained nurseries. [125554]
Beverley Hughes [holding answer 6 March 2007]: The available information is shown in the following table.
| Table 1: Full day care providers( 1) | ||||
| 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | March to December 2006 | |
| (1) Figures are rounded to the nearest 10 if under 100, and to the nearest 100 if over 100. Source: Ofsted | ||||
Ofsted data on closures include registered places in settings which are transferring ownership, and in settings which move from one Ofsted category to another, not just in those which are ceasing trading. For example, if a full day care provider moved to offering sessional provision, this would be recorded as a ‘closed’ full day care setting and an ‘opened’ sessional day care setting. The Ofsted data therefore exaggerate the true extent of turnover.
Ofsted have produced figures on the numbers of registered childcare providers and places on a quarterly basis from March 2003. Their latest figures were published in their report “Registered Childcare Providers and Places, December 2006”, which is available on their website at:
www.Ofsted.gov.uk/
Written Questions
Mr. Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when he expects to answer questions (a) 108839, on GCSEs, tabled on 7 December 2006, (b) (i) 112807 and (ii) 112766, on the study of foreign languages, tabled on 18 December 2006 and (c) 118399, on GCSEs, tabled on 30 January 2007, by the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton. [122124]
Jim Knight: In response to the hon. Member’s questions 108839 and 112807, the replies were issued on 20 February 2007, Official Report, columns 705-06W. A response to question 118339 was issued on 20 February 2007, Official Report, column 696W. A response to question 112766 was issued on 6 March 2007, Official Report, column 1910W.
Young People: Homelessness
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many 16 year olds were recorded as homeless in (a) the UK and (b) Lancashire in each of the last 10 years. [124965]
Yvette Cooper: I have been asked to reply.
Information about English local authorities' actions under homelessness legislation is collected in respect of households rather than persons. The number of households accepted by local authorities as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in priority need, and therefore owed a main homelessness duty, is not collected specifically for 16 year olds.
We collect data by the priority need category of acceptances, including those applicants vulnerable through being 16 or 17 years old, which is available since 2003/04. However, note that some 16 and 17 year olds applicants may have been accepted in alternative priority need categories, for example through having dependant children or being a pregnant woman, and so will not show up in these figures.
The following table present 16 or 17 year old priority need acceptance data for Lancashire local authorities, and for England. We do not hold data for the devolved Administrations.
| Acceptances (households) by priority need category—vulnerable through being 16 or 17 years old—Lancashire LAs and England | |||
| 16/17 year old priority need acceptances (households) | |||
| 2003/04 | 2004/05 | 2005/06 | |
| Note: England figure includes imputed data for missing Las. Source: CLG PIE Quarterly Homelessness Returns | |||
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |