DSA decision matrix information relating to NMH

The request was partially successful.

Dexter Johnstone

Dear Student Loans Company Limited,

Please can you publish the information in DSA decision matrix document which is related to NMH support, along with your 'Quote Selection Process' document, the 'DSA process Map - quote selection' document and the 'NMH Guidance Preferred NMH provider' document.

The last three documents are all referenced in the 'DSA decision matrix' document.

Yours faithfully,

Dexter Johnstone

FOI Publication Scheme, Student Loans Company Limited

Dear Mr Johnstone

Thank you for your email dated 01/06/2015 requesting information under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000. Your request has been logged under
reference 81-15 . Please quote this reference in future communications.

A full response will be issued in due course.

Yours sincerely

Dona Marie Steele
Paralegal
Student Loans Company Limited
100 Bothwell Street
Glasgow
G2 7JD

show quoted sections

FOI Publication Scheme, Student Loans Company Limited

Dear Mr Johnstone

I need to correct the SLC reference which you were previously assigned. The
SLC reference for your Freedom of Information request is 82-15.

Regards

Yours sincerely

Dona Marie Steele
Paralegal
Student Loans Company Limited
100 Bothwell Street
Glasgow
G2 7JD

show quoted sections

FOI Publication Scheme, Student Loans Company Limited

3 Attachments

Dear Mr Johnstone

I refer to your request dated 01/06/2015 requesting the following
information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”):

"Please can you publish the information in DSA decision matrix document
which is related to NMH support, along with your 'Quote Selection Process'
document, the 'DSA process Map - quote selection' document and the 'NMH
Guidance Preferred NMH provider' document.

The last three documents are all referenced in the 'DSA decision matrix'
document."

Response

Having consulted with the relevant departments within the Student Loans
Company Limited (“SLC”) I can confirm that the information you have
requested is held by SLC.

Please find attached the following documents:
· Relevant extracts of our DSA Decision Matrix relating to NMH
for DSA support recommendations.
· Quote Selection Process. In the quote selection document there
is reference to a "current marginal allowance" this is
currently 0 as there is no discretion to pay more than was
originally agreed unless there is a disability related need.
The DSA Process Map – Quote Selection is included at the end of
this document on page 7.
· NMH Guidance Preferred NMH Provider document. Please note that
our DSA Team have advised that this document is no longer in
use.

Please note that the DSA Decision Matrix is a document which is reviewed
periodically and there are updates which have not yet been applied in
regards to the recent DSA policy changes for 2015/2016 academic year. The
most up-to-date information about DSA policy can be found in the public
domain at:
http://www.practitioners.slc.co.uk/polic...

Redactions

Please note that the following redactions have been made in the above
documents:

1. The names of any SLC staff have been referred to in any of the
attached documents, these have been redacted under section 40(2) of
the FOIA.

The name of any member of staff is considered to constitute their
personal data. I have therefore considered whether the disclosure of
this personal information is subject to the exemption under section
40(2) of the FOIA (by virtue of section 40(3)(a)(i). If the
disclosure of the personal data would contravene any of the eight
data protection principles contained within the Data Protection Act
1998 the exemption under section 40(2) of the FOIA will apply. It is
unlikely that it would be within the expectations of the individuals
concerned that their name would be put into the public domain. All of
the individuals are junior members of staff and it is considered
unfair to the individuals to release information which could be used
to identify them. Therefore disclosure would be in contravention of
the first Data Protection Principle, which requires personal data to
be processed “fairly and lawfully”.

Accordingly, I am of the view that the exemption under section 40(2)
of the FOIA is engaged.

2. Any information, including the names of any organisation which have
been used for illustrative purposes only, which is considered to fall
outwith the scope of your request has been redacted/removed/not
included.

Internal review process

I trust that my answer to you is satisfactory; however, if you are unhappy
with the decisions made by me in relation to your freedom of information
request, you may ask SLC for an internal review.

Any such review would be conducted by John Brown, Company Secretary, 100
Bothwell Street, Glasgow, G2 7JD. You may request a review by writing to
John Brown or by emailing the FOI Office
([SLC request email]). In the event that John Brown took part
in the original decision, then David Wallace, Deputy Chief Executive, will
conduct the review. SLC will only consider requests for internal reviews
which are made within 3 months of the date of our original response (except
in exceptional circumstances).

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision.
The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Dona Marie Steele
Legal Executive
Student Loans Company Limited
100 Bothwell Street
Glasgow
G2 7JD

Email: [SLC request email]

(See attached file: DSA Decision Matrix_Redacted.pdf)(See attached file:
DSA Guidance - Preferred NMH provider v1.0_Redacted.pdf)(See attached file:
DSA Process - Quote Selection v3.0_Redacted.pdf)

show quoted sections

Dexter Johnstone

Dear FOI Publication Scheme,

Thank you for the information you have sent me. There is quite a lot of missing pages from the DSA decision matrix - p1-96, 98, 101-103, 106-108, 111-113, 115-117, 119-132, 141, 148-149, 151-161, 163-165, 167-172, 175-182, 184-194, 196-216, 223-235, 237, 248-250, 252-261, 264-308 are missing.

Furthermore there is a large amount of redactions in the pages that I have been sent.

Please can you release the full and unredacted DSA decision matrix document?

Yours sincerely,

Dexter Johnstone

FOI Publication Scheme, Student Loans Company Limited

Dear Mr Johnstone

Thank you for your email dated 02/07/2015.

We do not consider any information to be missing from our response. You
had requested the information in the DSA decision matrix that related to
NMH support. As indicated in our response, relevant extracts were
provided. The pages of the DSA decision matrix that were not included
therefore fell outwith the scope of your request.

The redactions made in the document have been explained.

We are treating your email of 02/07/2015 for the release of the full and
unredacted DSA decision matrix as a new request for information. Your
latest request has been allocated reference 94-15 and a full response will
be issue din due course.

Yours sincerely

Louise Chapman
Legal Executive
Student Loans Company Limited
100 Bothwell Street
Glasgow
G2 7JD

Tel: 0141 243 3062 (ext 33062)

From: Dexter Johnstone <[FOI #271328 email]>
To: FOI Publication Scheme <[email address]>
Date: 02/07/2015 13:00
Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request (SLC ref 82-15)

Dear FOI Publication Scheme,

Thank you for the information you have sent me. There is quite a lot of
missing pages from the DSA decision matrix - p1-96, 98, 101-103, 106-108,
111-113, 115-117, 119-132, 141, 148-149, 151-161, 163-165, 167-172,
175-182, 184-194, 196-216, 223-235, 237, 248-250, 252-261, 264-308 are
missing.

Furthermore there is a large amount of redactions in the pages that I have
been sent.

Please can you release the full and unredacted DSA decision matrix
document?

Yours sincerely,

Dexter Johnstone

show quoted sections

FOI Publication Scheme, Student Loans Company Limited

Dear Mr Johnstone

I refer to your email dated 02/07/2015 requesting the following information
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“FOIA”):

“Please can you release the full and unredacted DSA decision matrix
document.”

Response

While I can confirm that the document which you have requested the full and
unredacted disclosure of is held by the Student Loans Company Limited
(“SLC”), I must also advise that the FOIA exempts certain information from
disclosure.

Although the disclosure of information by SLC may serve the public
interest, promoting transparency and accountability in relation to the
activities of SLC, this is not always the case. In certain circumstances,
competing and/or conflicting requirements take precedent and have the
effect of exempting SLC from the obligation to make particular disclosures.

SLC have already provided you with those sections of the matrix document
which you previously requested which could be disclosed. SLC must
therefore now rely on one of the available exemptions to address your
request for further full and unredacted disclosure of the DSA decision
matrix document.

To this end, section 36(2)(c) exempts information from disclosure if, in
the opinion of a qualified person, disclosure:

“would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely otherwise to
prejudice, the effective conduct of public affairs”.

The intention behind Section 36(2)(c) of the FOIA was to cover situations
where it is necessary to withhold information in the interests of good
government. Any application of this exemption is subject to a public
interest test.

In the present circumstances, it is acknowledged that the disclosure of
information which explains how decisions concerning Disabled Students’
Allowances (“DSAs”) are agreed and reimbursements of DSA provisions are
approved by SLC is considered to be in the public interest. The disclosure
of such information might aid the public’s understanding of the DSA funding
process and the information would translate parts of the DSA process into
plain English, empowering members of the general public to gain a greater
understanding of how DSAs are agreed and reimbursements are processed and
authorised. The DSA decision matrix document which you have requested the
full and unredacted disclosure of provides scenarios for eligible DSA
students in various circumstances which have the effect of clearly
documenting what DSA provisions SLC are empowered to award and reimburse.

However, any arguments in favour of disclosure must be set against the
disadvantage of disclosure. SLC is wholly owned by the Secretary of State
for Business, Innovation and Skills and the Devolved Administrations and
administers the policies set by them under the relevant legislation and
associated regulations. The role of SLC is clearly defined within the
Student Support Regulations (as amended year on year) as being to
administer student finance on behalf of the Government and the Devolved
Administrations.

The public has an expectation that Government departments and bodies will
take action to safeguard public funds and challenge those committing fraud.
The Annual Performance and Resource Agreement (“APRA”) documents the
priorities, objectives and performance measures which further regulate the
behaviours which can be adopted by SLC. The reduction of fraud and error
is one of SLC’s intrinsic objectives which routinely forms part of the
APRA. Any measures and improvements undertaken by SLC are agreed with the
UK Government and the Devolved Administrations. While acknowledging that
the covert and ever-evolving nature of fraud means that total elimination
of fraud is likely to be extremely difficult to achieve, the release of
information which identifies potential ways to manipulate the DSA process
would be contrary to both the public interest and expectation as well as
counter-productive to any fraud prevention activity. Notwithstanding
potential public interest in disclosure, it is essential that in order to
actually serve the public, organisations such as SLC are allowed to have a
safe space, away from public scrutiny, to enable decisions to be taken and
practices implemented in relation to activities such as DSA entitlement,
assessment and reimbursement.

It is the conclusion of SLC that the release of detailed information
concerning our DSA processes and procedures could be used to manipulate our
processes to the detriment of our wider customer base, the taxpaying wider
public and our own objectives to the taxpaying wider public. For example,
resources would need to be diverted to manage the effect of such
disclosure. The inevitable increase in queries from DSA stakeholders to
all areas of the business would need to be managed. Due to the large
number of different stakeholders involved in the DSA process there would be
an increase in customer, supplier and study needs assessor contact. Public
service will be more effectively delivered if SLC is able to carry out its
function to process DSA in an effective and secure manner.

Consequently, SLC conclude that the application of the public interest test
in accordance with Section 36(2)(c) of FOIA merits withholding the full and
unredacted DSA decision matrix document.

I would explain that information regarding DSAs can be found in the
legislation, Part 5 Chapter 3 of The Education (Student Support)
Regulations 2011 which is available at:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/...

Furthermore, the most up-to-date information about DSA policy can be found
in the public domain at:
http://www.practitioners.slc.co.uk/polic...

Internal review process

I trust that my answer to you is satisfactory; however, if you are unhappy
with the decisions made by me in relation to your freedom of information
request, you may ask SLC for an internal review.

Any such review would be conducted by John Brown, Company Secretary, 100
Bothwell Street, Glasgow, G2 7JD. You may request a review by writing to
John Brown or by emailing the FOI Office
([SLC request email]). In the event that John Brown took part
in the original decision, then David Wallace, Deputy Chief Executive, will
conduct the review. SLC will only consider requests for internal reviews
which are made within 3 months of the date of our original response (except
in exceptional circumstances).

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision.
The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire SK9 5AF

Yours sincerely

Steven J.A. Kennedy
Solicitor
Student Loans Company Limited
100 Bothwell Street
Glasgow
G2 7JD

Email: [SLC request email]

show quoted sections