Compliance with the Compulsory Student
Services Fees (CSSF) Framework 20122015
Dr Drew Donnelly
Assistant Policy Analyst
Tertiary Education
Recap on the CSSF Framework
•
In 2011, Ministerial Direction given to providers specifying
decision-making, accounting and reporting requirements
for Compulsory Student Services Fees (CSSF)
•
This Direction applies to universities, polytechnics,
wānanga and Private Training Establishments (PTEs)
•
The Direction was amended in 2013 with increased
reporting requirements.
•
There was no amendment to the Ministerial Direction in
2014.
Decision-Making Requirements
•
Providers must establish adequate arrangements for
decisions to be made jointly, or in consultation with,
students, or their representatives, on the following matters:
a. The amount of CSSF
b. Types of Service
c. The procurement of these services
d. The method for authorising expenditure on these
services.
Accounting and Reporting Requirements
Accounting
Providers must hold CSSF fees either in a separate bank
account or account for the fees separately
Reporting
Providers must provide information on CSSF in their annual
reports or (in the case of PTEs) the written report they send
to students. The following information must be included:
a. A description of the services to be funded
b. A statement of the fee income and expenditure for each
type of student service
c. The levy charged per Equivalent Full Time Student
d. A note stating how they are complying with the accounting
requirement of the direction.
Categories of Service
Providers may charge compulsory student services
fees to support the delivery of the following categories
of services:
(a) Advocacy and Legal Advice
(b) Career Information, Advice and Guidance
(c) Counselling Services
(d) Employment Information
(e) Financial Support and Advice
(f) Health Services
(g) Media
(h) Childcare Services
(i) Clubs and Societies
(j) Sports, Recreation and Cultural Activities.
Slowing Annual Increases (Universities)
18
16
14
12
Annual average % change 2010-13
10
% change 2013-2014
8
6
4
2
0
AUT
Lincoln
Massey
Auckland
Canterbury
Otago
Waikato
VUW
2013 Review of Reporting
Compliance
•
Most providers not fully complying with the reporting
requirements.
•
Areas needing improvement included:
• Describing services provided
• Reporting CSSF income and expenditure separately for each type of
service
• Charging for services that fell outside the listed categories of service.
Actions taken:
• Official guidance issue by the Tertiary Education Commission reminding
providers of their obligations under the Direction
• The Direction was amended to require:
• (a) providers to report the amount of CSSF per EFTS charged.
• (b) providers to report how they are complying with the accounting
requirement
• (c) PTEs to send a copy of their written CSSF report, to the Ministry of
Education.
2014 Review of Reporting Compliance
•
•
•
To our knowledge, all universities, polytechnics and
wānanga, that charge CSSF levies, are reporting on CSSF.
The majority are now complying with the requirement to
give a description of those services
Most are complying with the requirement to report CSSF
income and expenses separately (a compliance
improvement from 10% to 57% of providers between 2012
and 2013).
Action taken:
• As compliance had improved, Direction not amended
• TEC re-issued official guidance.
Areas for Improvement
•
In 2014, only 35% of universities, polytechnics and wānanga
the CSSF levy per EFTS
•
Only 21% stated how they were complying with the
accounting requirement
•
Very few PTEs are complying with the requirement to send
the Ministry of Education a copy of the written report they
send to students.
•
Some providers still charging for services that don’t fall within
one of the categories.
Example of CSSF Reporting Good Practice
2014 (Part One)
Example of Good Practice (Part Two)
Reporting Next Steps
•
2015 Review of the framework includes a review of the
reporting requirements
•
Your feedback essential.