Quilliam Foundation

M Khan made this Freedom of Information request to Department for Education

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was partially successful.

Dear Department for Education,

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000. Please provide the following:

1. All correspondence between the Department and Quilliam Foundation over the past 3 years.

2. Details of meeting held between the Department and Quilliam Foundation over the past 3 years.
2a. Please provide copies of meeting minutes.

3. Details of any funding given to Quilliam Foundation over the past 3 years. For each amount please provide the:
3a. business case/justification or equivalent
3c. the monitoring and reporting put in place
3d. the name(s) of person/position who approved the amounts

4. Which Department objectives were achieved by giving this money?

Yours faithfully,

M Khan

Department for Education

Dear Mr/Ms Khan

Thank you for your recent enquiry. A reply will be sent to you as soon as possible. For information; the departmental standard for correspondence received is that responses should be sent within 20 working days as you are requesting information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2014/0041308.

Thank you

Department for Education
Ministerial and Public Communications Division
Tel: 0370 000 2288

show quoted sections

Department for Education

Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your freedom of information (FOI) request of 5 June 2014
about the Quilliam Foundation.
You asked for: 

 1. "All correspondence between the Department and Quilliam Foundation
over the past 3 years.
 2. Details of meeting held between the Department and Quilliam
Foundation over the past 3 years.

* Please provide copies of meeting minutes.

 3. Details of any funding given to Quilliam Foundation over the past 3
years. For each amount please provide the:

* business case/justification or equivalent
* the monitoring and reporting put in place
* the name(s) of person/position who approved the amounts

 4. Which Department objectives were achieved by giving this money?”

I have dealt with your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
(“the Act”). Please find the answers to your requests below.

 

1.            All correspondence between the Department and Quilliam
Foundation over the past 3 years.

The Department holds information within the scope of your request.
However, this is being withheld because it is exempt from disclosure under
Section 36(2) of the Act.

Section 36(2) of the Act exempts from disclosure information which, in the
reasonable opinion of a qualified person (a Minister in the case of
Government Departments):

* Would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank provision of
advice to ministers – Section 36(2)(b)(i)
* Would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of
views for the purposes of deliberation – Section 36(2)(b)(ii)
* Would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely otherwise to prejudice,
the effective conduct of public affairs – Section 36(2)(c)

A Minister has decided that, in his reasonable opinion, disclosure of the
information you requested would be likely to have this effect.

Section 36 is a qualified exemption and therefore a public interest test
has been carried out. In doing so the following factors have been taken
into consideration:

* There is a general public interest in disclosure because of the need
for there to be open and transparent government and the sharing of
information with the public should be free and open.
* Officials must be allowed space to develop their thinking and explore
available options, including with relevant stakeholders and partners.
This is important for the process of effective government.  
Disclosing the information requested would work directly against this,
inhibiting officials and stakeholders from exploring ideas and options
due to fear that information about them might be disclosed at a later
stage; and
* Such disclosures would make it more likely that individuals and
organisations that we work with would be unwilling to do so. As a
result, the quality and range of advice to Ministers would be reduced.
Disclosure may well result in others becoming unwilling to express
their opinions for fear that they would be made public.

The arguments for and against release have been considered and it is our
view that the balance of public interest falls in favour of the
maintenance of this exemption. This is because we have concluded that the
public interest benefits of openness and transparency are outweighed by
the detrimental effect that is likely to be caused. The exemption applies
here because there is a need to ensure a space within which ministers and
officials are able to discuss options and delivery, freely and frankly. 
We consider that the public interest lies in withholding this information
because releasing the negotiations on potential strands of work could
identify key priorities for preventing extremism in schools and lead to
counter measures being taken to mask extremism where it occurs.  It could
also lead to schools being less free and open with us in the future.

Section 40(2) (personal data) is also being applied in this instance.
Personal data is that which relates to a living individual who can be
identified from that data, or from that data and other information which
is likely to be in, or to come into, the possession of the requestor.
Disclosure of this information would contravene a number of the data
protection principles in the Data Protection Act 1998, and would be
regarded as ‘unfair’. By that, we mean the likely expectations of the data
subject that his or her information would not be disclosed to others and
the effect which disclosure would have on the data subject. Section 40(2)
is an absolute exemption and is not subject to the public interest test.

 

2.            Details of meeting held between the Department and Quilliam
Foundation over the past 3 years.

There were six steering group meetings related to the project between May
2011 and November 2011. The meetings provided oversight of the project and
monitored progress against agreed milestones.

 1. The first steering group meeting in May focused on initial planning
and development of the methodology for the workstreams to be
undertaken by Quilliam.
 2. The second meeting in June included a discussion on project planning
and how any final products produced would fit into existing
strategies.
 3. The third meeting in July focused on project progress and plans for
the next part of the project.
 4. The fourth meeting in August looked at project progress and plans for
the next part of the project.
 5. The fifth meeting in September focussed on progress, planning for the
end of the project and handover back to DfE.
 6. The final meeting in November looked at final outputs and handover
back to DfE.

 

a.            Please provide copies of meeting minutes.

The Department holds information within the scope of your request.
However, this is being withheld because it is exempt from disclosure under
Section 36(2) of the Act.

Section 36(2) of the Act exempts from disclosure information which, in the
reasonable opinion of a qualified person (a Minister in the case of
Government Departments):

* Would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank provision of
advice to ministers – Section 36(2)(b)(i)
* Would, or would be likely to, inhibit the free and frank exchange of
views for the purposes of deliberation – Section 36(2)(b)(ii)
* Would otherwise prejudice, or would be likely otherwise to prejudice,
the effective conduct of public affairs – Section 36(2)(c)

A Minister has decided that, in his reasonable opinion, disclosure of the
information you requested would be likely to have this effect.

Section 36 is a qualified exemption and therefore a public interest test
has been carried out. In doing so the following factors have been taken
into consideration:

* There is a general public interest in disclosure because of the need
for there to be open and transparent government and the sharing of
information with the public should be free and open.
* Officials must be allowed space to develop their thinking and explore
available options, including with relevant stakeholders and partners.
This is important for the process of effective government.  
Disclosing the information requested would work directly against this,
inhibiting officials and stakeholders from exploring ideas and options
due to fear that information about them might be disclosed at a later
stage; and
* Such disclosures would make it more likely that individuals and
organisations that we work with would be unwilling to do so. As a
result, the quality and range of advice to Ministers would be reduced.
Disclosure may well result in others becoming unwilling to express
their opinions for fear that they would be made public.

The arguments for and against release have been considered and it is our
view that the balance of public interest falls in favour of the
maintenance of this exemption. This is because we have concluded that the
public interest benefits of openness and transparency are outweighed by
the detrimental effect that is likely to be caused. The exemption applies
here because there is a need to ensure a space within which ministers and
officials are able to discuss options and delivery, freely and frankly. 
We consider that the public interest lies in withholding this information
because releasing the negotiations on potential strands of work could
identify key priorities for preventing extremism in schools and lead to
counter measures being taken to mask extremism where it occurs.  It could
also lead to schools being less free and open with us in the future.

Section 40(2) (personal data) is also being applied in this instance.
Personal data is that which relates to a living individual who can be
identified from that data, or from that data and other information which
is likely to be in, or to come into, the possession of the requestor.
Disclosure of this information would contravene a number of the data
protection principles in the Data Protection Act 1998, and would be
regarded as ‘unfair’. By that, we mean the likely expectations of the data
subject that his or her information would not be disclosed to others and
the effect which disclosure would have on the data subject. Section 40(2)
is an absolute exemption and is not subject to the public interest test.

 

3.            Details of any funding given to Quilliam Foundation over the
past 3 years. For each amount please provide the:

* business case/justification or equivalent
* the monitoring and reporting put in place
* the name(s) of person/position who approved the amounts

The Government wants to ensure that young people are safeguarded from
extremist messages in schools and in out of school settings and the Due
Diligence and Counter Extremism Division (DDCED) (formerly the Preventing
Extremism Unit) was established in late 2010 to deliver the Department for
Education’s commitments in the Government’s Prevent strategy. 

The department does not hold a formal business case, however during the
early development of the Division, there was a need to strengthen the
evidence available to us about the nature and extent of extremist activity
in schools.  As an independent counter-extremism think tank already
working in this field, Quilliam was considered to have the expertise
necessary to undertake a project that would support the developing work of
DDCED.

 A decision in principle was made to provide the Quilliam Foundation with
a one-time grant of £120,000 and this was communicated to them on 29^th
March 2011 (as shown on their [1]Companies House webpage).  This grant was
approved through the normal Department for Education process and was
signed off by the Permanent Secretary. Working in partnership with the
Quilliam Foundation, the detail of the project was then negotiated and a
final Grant Funding Agreement and project specification was in place on
19^th April 2011.

The department does not hold a formal monitoring process for this project,
however as per the project specification, the Department for Education
provided a project manager and steer for this project through regular
meetings.

 

4.            Which Department objectives were achieved by giving this
money?

The agreed objectives of the project were to consider the risk factors for
children and young people that lead to extremism; determine the approaches
that schools take to hiring out premises and inviting visiting speakers;
analyse Prevent products on the market that relate to schools; and
consider possible options for building capacity in schools to deal with
extremism.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please
remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are unhappy with the way your request has been handled, you should
make a complaint to the Department by writing to me within two calendar
months of the date of this letter. Your complaint will be considered by an
independent review panel, who were not involved in the original
consideration of your request. 

If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint to the
Department, you may then contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2014/0041308. If
you need to respond to us, please visit:
[2]www.education.gov.uk/contactus, and quote your reference number.

Yours sincerely,

Angela

Angela Jansen
Due Diligence and Counter Extremism Division
[3][email address]
[4]www.gov.uk/dfe

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/th...
2. http://www.education.gov.uk/contactus
3. mailto:[email address]
4. http://www.gov.uk/dfe

Dear Department for Education,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Department for Education's handling of my FOI request 'Quilliam Foundation'.

Q1. All correspondence between the Department and Quilliam
Foundation over the past 3 years.

You have confirmed the department holds this information but are withholding it under Section 36(2) and 40(2). I don’t believe the exemption is applicable to the entirety of the correspondence. Please feel free to redact any words/lines where applicable.

Q2. Details of meeting held between the Department and Quilliam
Foundation over the past 3 years.
Thank you for providing the details of the meetings held.
You have confirmed the department holds the minutes from the meetings but are withholding it under Section 36(2) and 40(2). I don’t believe the exemption is applicable to the entirety of the minutes. Please feel free to redact any words/lines where applicable.

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

Yours faithfully,

M Khan

Department for Education

1 Attachment

Dear Sir / Madam,
I am writing to inform you that the Department has now completed its
internal appeal process following your complaint of 3 July 2014.
You requested:

I am writing to request an internal review of Department for Education's
handling of my FOI request 'Quilliam Foundation'.

Q1. All correspondence between the Department and Quilliam Foundation
over the past 3 years.

You have confirmed the department holds this information but are
withholding it under Section 36(2) and 40(2). I don’t believe the
exemption is applicable to the entirety of the correspondence. Please
feel free to redact any words/lines where applicable.

Q2. Details of meeting held between the Department and Quilliam
Foundation over the past 3 years.
Thank you for providing the details of the meetings held.
You have confirmed the department holds the minutes from the meetings
but are withholding it under Section 36(2) and 40(2). I don’t believe
the exemption is applicable to the entirety of the minutes. Please feel
free to redact any words/lines where applicable.

The Department has made an independent re-assessment of the case, chaired
by a senior officer who was not involved with the original request and has
decided that while some of the information cannot be disclosed for the
same reasons as set out our response of 27 June, some information can be
released.

With regards to your request regarding correspondence between the
Department and Quilliam Foundation over the past three years, the panel
has determined that some of this information can be released and have
included these as a separate attachment to this letter.

Please note that a small number of redactions have been made to the
correspondence. The Department is applying Section 40(2) and Section 36(2)
of the Act to these redactions for the same reasons as set out in the
letter of 27 June.

With regards to your request for the minutes of the meetings held between
the Department and the Quilliam Foundation, the panel determined that this
information cannot be disclosed for the same reasons as set out in the
letter of 27 June.

If you are unhappy with the decision to withhold part of the information
sought, you have the right to appeal directly to the Information
Commissioner. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

            Information Commissioner’s Office

            Wycliffe House

            Water Lane

            Wilmslow

            Cheshire

            SK9 5AF

If the Commissioner comes to the conclusion that that the information
should be released, he will issue an enforcement notice which will set out
the steps which the Department must take and the date by which they must
be taken.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please
remember to quote our reference number in any future communications.
 
Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2014/0047526. If
you need to respond to us, please visit:
[1]www.education.gov.uk/contactus, and quote your reference number.

Yours sincerely,

Angela Jansen

Angela Jansen
Due Diligence and Counter Extremism Division
[2][email address]
[3]www.gov.uk/dfe

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.education.gov.uk/contactus
2. mailto:[email address]
3. http://www.gov.uk/dfe

Jack left an annotation ()

Hello M Khan,

According to BizDb[1] you can contact them at Po Box 60380 35-50 Rathbone Place WC1A 9AZ London. Maybe you can ask them directly?

Resource:
[1] http://www.bizdb.co.uk/company/the-quill...

Megan left an annotation ()

Does anyone know what are their opening times? I would appreciate any feedback.