Nid ydym yn gwybod a yw'r ymateb mwyaf diweddar i'r cais hwn yn cynnwys gwybodaeth neuai peidio - os chi ywMelissa Franks mewngofnodwch a gadael i bawb wybod.

2018 Entry Statistics for A106

We're waiting for Melissa Franks to read a recent response and update the status.

Dear University of Manchester,

I would like to know the following information:

1) How many students received offers for the A106 course for 2018 entry and also for 2019 entry?

2) How many students were admitted even though they missed the grades for their offer for the A106 course for 2018 entry? What were the ranges in grades for these students?

3) Is a lower grade in chemistry penalised in relation to other subjects? Is A*BB preferential to AAB?

Yours faithfully,
Melissa

MTRS FOIA, University of Manchester

Dear Melissa

I am writing to acknowledge your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 received by The University of Manchester yesterday, our reference as per the subject line.

The University will respond to your request within 20 working days.

Kind regards

David Smith

David Smith | Information Officer | Information Governance Office | Directorate of Compliance and Risk |Professional Support Services | G006 Christie Building | The University of Manchester | Oxford Road | Manchester | M13 9PL | Tel +44(0) 161 306 8120 | www.manchester.ac.uk

We are all responsible for protecting personal data held by the University, including who we share that data with. Stop and think before you send your email.  For further guidance see: www.dataprotection.manchester.ac.uk

Confidentiality and Legal Privilege: The contents of this email and its attachment(s) are confidential to the intended recipient and may be legally privileged. It may not be disclosed, copied, forwarded, used or relied upon by any person other than the intended addressee. If you believe that you have received the email and its attachment(s) in error, you must not take any action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone. Please respond to the sender and delete this email and its attachment(s) from your system.

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

MTRS FOIA, University of Manchester

Dear Melissa

 

Thank you for your request for information received by The University of
Manchester on 11/07/2019.  We have now considered your request and our
response can be found below.

 

1) How many students received offers for the A106 course for a) 2018 entry
and also for b) 2019 entry?

 

a)       Please be advised that you can already access this information on
our website at:

 

[1]https://www.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/study/m... (2018
information is under 2017/18 in each of the data tables)

 

b)      2019 entry data - please be advised that this information is
exempt under Section 22 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 as it is
intended for future publication.  We have been told by the School of
Medicine that the information should be on their website in September
2019.

 

As Section 22 is a qualified, prejudice-based exemption, we must conduct a
public interest test in its application. Details of this can be found
below.

 

Public Interest Test

 

Factors in Favour of Disclosure

 

Disclosure of the data requested ahead of the intended publication date
would improve transparency in the University, which in turn could further
public debate.

 

Factors Against Disclosure

 

Disclosure ahead of the intended publication date would be inappropriate
as it would mean a revision of existing scheduled work to collate the
information at this time. This would be an unnecessary burden on the
University, especially as the task is already scheduled for completion and
the information is due to be published soon anyway.

 

Balancing Test

 

For the reasons outlined above, it is the view of The University of
Manchester that the balance lies in favour of withholding the information
at this time.

 

2) How many students were admitted even though they missed the grades for
their offer for the A106 course for 2018 entry? What were the ranges in
grades for these students?

 

The University has considered this question and unfortunately we are
unable to provide the information you have requested at this time. This is
because the information is deemed to be exempt by virtue of the listed
exemption at Section 43 (2) – Commercial Interests. This is a prejudice
based exemption and as such we are required to conduct a public interest
test when applying it. Further details of this can be found below.

 

Section 43 (2) – Commercial Interests

 

Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would,
or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person
(including the public authority holding it).

 

We may rely on this exemption if the disclosure would prejudice someone’s
commercial interests (including the University’s own).  Commercial
interests may be prejudiced where a disclosure would be likely to:

·         Damage its business reputation or the confidence that customers,
suppliers or investors may have in it

·         Have a detrimental impact on its commercial revenue or threaten
its ability to obtain supplies or secure finance

·         Weaken its position in a competitive environment by revealing
market sensitive information or information of potential usefulness to its
competitors

 

Public Interest Test

 

Factors in Favour of Disclosure

 

Disclosing the requested data would ensure that members of the public
could be satisfied that the University of Manchester applies the highest
standards during its admissions process. In so doing, this would give the
public confidence in the medical professionals of the future.

 

Factors Against Disclosure

 

Medical schools are increasingly in competition with each other in the
selection of the best possible candidates. If the level of data requested
were to be made publicly available we would be placed at a significant
commercial disadvantage, as our ability to attract the highest calibre of
students would be likely to be prejudiced.

 

Balancing Test

 

The University of Manchester has carefully considered the balance of
public interest in this instance and has concluded that whilst there is a
public interest in the University being as transparent as possible, we
feel that the ability of The University of Manchester to be able
to compete effectively to attract the best students outweighs this.

 

This email serves to act as a refusal notice for questions 1 and 2, as per
Section 17 (1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

 

3) Is a lower grade in chemistry penalised in relation to other subjects?
Is A*BB preferential to AAB?

 

This is not a valid request under the Freedom of Information Act as it is
seeking an opinion rather than recorded information.  However our Medical
School staff have said that they would be very happy to answer any such
questions you have about their admissions process if you contact them at
[2][email address].  More information on A-level subjects
that are acceptable for entry is also available on the Medical School
website in their Frequency Asked Questions section
([3]https://www.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/study/m...)

 

If you feel that The University of Manchester has refused access to
information to which you are entitled, or has not dealt with your request
appropriately under the FOIA, you have a right of appeal.

 

An appeal in the first instance should be directed to the Information
Governance Office at [4][email address]. You should include: 

·              details of your initial request

·              any other relevant information

 

The University will deal with your appeal within a reasonable time, and
will inform you of the projected time scale on receipt of your complaint.
You are also welcome to contact the Information Governance Office with
informal questions about the handling of your request. 

 

After The University’s internal appeals procedure has been exhausted, you
have a further right of appeal to the Information Commissioner’s
Office. Details of this procedure can be found at [5]www.ico.org.uk

 

Kind regards

 

David Smith | Information Officer | Information Governance Office |
Directorate of Compliance and Risk |Professional Support Services | G006
Christie Building | The University of Manchester | Oxford Road |
Manchester | M13 9PL | Tel +44(0) 161 306 8120 | [6]www.manchester.ac.uk

References

Visible links
1. https://www.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/study/m...
2. mailto:[email address]
3. https://www.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/study/m...
4. mailto:[email address]
5. http://www.ico.org.uk/
6. http://www.manchester.ac.uk/

Dear University of Manchester,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of University of Manchester's handling of my FOI request '2018 Entry Statistics for A106'.

I have seen you issue this refusal notice before and I feel it's completely unacceptable. Past the jargon, and aswell as the internal review, I would like you to detail to me how my request would damage the university's commercial interests. This is patently untrue in that it is clear this information is desired solely for the benefit of current applicants, and calming potential worry, as well as clarifying the university's attitude to missed offers. If anything, it is highly likely this would benefit the university, by assisting prospective applicants in their understanding of the way in which the university will treat their application.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/2...

Yours faithfully,

Melissa Franks

MTRS FOIA, University of Manchester

Dear Melissa,

 

Thank you for your email requesting an internal review.

 

We will endeavour to provide a response to your Internal Review within 20
working days.

 

With best regards

 

Lisa

 

Dr Lisa Crawley l  Information Officer  l Information Governance Office
l Directorate of Compliance and Risk l  Professional Support Services |
Room G7 Christie Building  l Compliance & Risk Management Office l  The
University of Manchester  l  Oxford Road  l  Manchester  l  M13 9PL  l 
Tel +44 (0)161 275 8400  

MTRS FOIA, University of Manchester

2 Atodiad

Dear Melissa,

I am now writing with regarding your email dated 09 August 2019 requesting
an internal review of your Freedom of Information request. 

I have now had an opportunity to review the way in which we responded; I
note that we responded within the timeframe required by the FOI Act, I
have therefore gone on to consider the use of the exemptions and in doing
so I have further liaised with the relevant department within the
University where necessary. The review has now been concluded and we can
respond as follows:

 

1) How many students received offers for the A106 course for 2018 entry
and also for 2019 entry?

 

In terms of question 1, data for 2018 is readily available on our website
and we directed you to this. Data for 2019 is due to be published later
this month on our website. Under Section 22 of the Freedom of Information
Act data can be refused if it is to be published at a future date. Section
22 is a qualified, prejudice-based exemption and we are required to carry
out a public interest test in its application.

The Public Interest Test

Factors in Favour of Disclosure

Disclosure in response to your request would increase transparency into
the admissions process of the University.

Factors Against Disclosure

As the data is due to be published imminently it would not be appropriate
to publish it sooner in response to your request as the work has already
been timetabled.

Balancing Test

Given the above, the University believes that the balance lies against
disclosure and that Section 22 has been correctly applied.

2) How many students were admitted even though they missed the grades for
their offer for the A106 course for 2018 entry? What were the ranges in
grades for these students?

 

You specifically asked that we review the application of the Commercial
Interests exemption to withhold this information. Information is
considered exempt under this exemption if disclosure would prejudice the
commercial interest of any person, including the University’s own
commercial interest. This exemption can be applied if the release of
information would:

·         Damage its business reputation or the confidence that customers,
suppliers or investors may have in it

·         Have a detrimental impact on its commercial revenue or threaten
its ability to obtain supplies or secure finance

·         Weaken its position in a competitive environment by revealing
market sensitive information or information of potential usefulness to its
competitors.

 

Public Interest Test

As Section 43(2) is a qualified exemption we are required to carry out a
public interest test to determine if the commercial interest is overridden
by the public interest from a release of the information concerned.

Factors in Favour of Disclosure

The release of the data would aid in the transparency of our admissions
process. In so doing, this would give the public confidence in the medical
professionals of the future.

Factors Against Disclosure

·         The University operates in a highly competitive environment that
is becoming increasingly competitive as more applicants now receive
multiple offers from medical schools across the world. Releasing this
information would give competitors insight into decision making that is of
vital strategic importance, this could alter their offer making behaviour
in subsequent years and result in under- or over-recruitment of students
to the University. As you may be aware the UK government levies fines for
medical schools that recruit in excess of their caps on student numbers
and each medical school has to maintain a very delicate balancing act.
Offer making behaviour, and the actions of other medical schools in
accepting ‘near miss’ applicants has consequences for strategic numbers
planning of the Manchester cohort.

·         Releasing the data will be of little value to potential
applicants because the market is volatile; the best way of ensuring a
place at medical school is to meet the terms of an offer.

 

·         Finally, you note in your email that the data is required
‘solely for the current applicants’ this being the case the argument that
the release of the data will be in the public interest is diminished given
the very small size of the applicant population.

Balancing Test

The University of Manchester has considered the balance of public interest
and has concluded that the balance lies in withholding the data.
Universities operate in a competitive market and our ability to attract
the best able students would be impeded if we were to release the data.

3) Is a lower grade in chemistry penalised in relation to other subjects?
Is A*BB preferential to AAB?

 

In terms of question 3 under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act,
requests can be made for recorded information only.  This question is not
asking for recorded information but rather an opinion and as such it does
not constitute a valid request under the Act. The University is not
obliged to create new information or to answer questions that staff may
know the answer to under the Act. Rather than refuse to answer the
question as invalid we endeavored to be as helpful as possible and advised
that the Medical School staff would be happy to answer questions about
their admission process if you contact them. 

To conclude, the internal review upholds the original response and finds
that the application of Section 22 and Section 43 has been correctly
applied.

If you are unhappy with our response you have the further right to appeal
to the Information Commissioner’s Office. Details of this procedure can be
found at [1]www.ico.org.uk.

With best regards

 

Alex

 

 

Alex Daybank | Head of Data Protection (University Data Protection
Officer) | Information Governance Office | Directorate of Compliance and
Risk |Professional Services | G7  Christie Building | The University of
Manchester | Oxford Road | Manchester | M13 9PL |Ext (77)62473 |Tel +44(0)
161 306 2473| [mobile number] | [2]www.manchester.ac.uk

[3]data_matters_logo2-(3)

We are all responsible for protecting personal data held by the
University, including who we share that data with. Stop and think before
you send your email.  For further guidance see:
[4]www.dataprotection.manchester.ac.uk

 

Confidentiality and Legal Privilege: The contents of this email and its
attachment(s) are confidential to the intended recipient and may be
legally privileged. It may not be disclosed, copied, forwarded, used or
relied upon by any person other than the intended addressee. If you
believe that you have received the email and its attachment(s) in error,
you must not take any action based on them, nor must you copy or show them
to anyone. Please respond to the sender and delete this email and its
attachment(s) from your system.

 

 

 

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Nid ydym yn gwybod a yw'r ymateb mwyaf diweddar i'r cais hwn yn cynnwys gwybodaeth neuai peidio - os chi ywMelissa Franks mewngofnodwch a gadael i bawb wybod.