sector update and briefing - home -...

Sector Update and Briefing

Bill Lumsden

Audit Director, Head of Further Education


Programme

• Sector update• Area Reviews and Due diligence • FE Commissioner(s)• The role of banks as stakeholders• The role of the Audit Committee• FRS 102 and the new FEHE SORP (transition issues)

Sector update


Sector Update

• Financial Sustainability- Funding levels, demographics

- Hypothecated taxes Apprenticeship Levy

- Pensions costs – valuations at March 2016

- Bank facilities

• Brexit impact

• HE [R] Bill

• Autumn Statement (23rd November)

• Machinery of Government changes to evolve yet

• College Accounts Direction 2015 to 2016

• Free Meals accounting – small but important

• Modern Slavery Act – a reminder (AOC will prompt too)


Sector Update (continued)

• Forthcoming accounting standards – Leases; Revenue Recognition

• Plate spinning:- Schools White Paper – now going Green

- Sainsbury Review on Technical education

- Funding rule changes (see also Free Meals above)

- Subcontracting assurance arrangements

- Funding sources – LEPs, Combined Authorities etc

- Banks (more later…)

- Prevent Duty compliance

- Going concern considerations

…and FRS 102 (best till last – more later…)

Financial sustainability in the FE sectorThe financial position of colleges is declining, and the FE college sector as a whole was in deficit in 2013/14 and 2014/15

Notes

1. This analysis excludes sixth form colleges

2. Surpluses and deficits are based on each college’s ‘adjusted operating surplus/deficit’ recorded in its accounts

Source: National Audit Office analysis of college accounts data published by the Skills Funding Agency/FR published May 2016

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Operating surplus/(deficit) of FE college sector (£m) 169 142 13 (34) (41.7)

Total number of FE colleges 254 250 245 244 239

Number of FE colleges in operating deficit of which: deficit more than 5% of income

5217

6212

8933

11047

9835

Percentage of FE colleges in operating deficit of which: deficit more than 5% of income

20%7%

25%5%

36%13%

45%19%

41%15%



College Financial Health Scores

Revised for 2015/16 onwards and assessed against the following:

• EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortisation) as a percentage of total income • The introduction of a “sector EBITDA” although no significant change from previous

approach

• Health ranking increased 1% (Inadequate = 3% and below vs 2015: 2% and below)

• Adjusted current ratio • No change in calculation or health ranking

• Borrowing as a percentage of total income • 2015 was as a percentage of net assets

• Health ranking changed to reflect the disparity between income and net assets

• Inadequate 50% and above (2015: 70% and above).


College Financial Health Scores

Moderation factors may be applied to the above ratios, such as a breach of a loan covenant where long term liabilities are restated as current liabilities.

The new assessment of financial health takes into account changes due to the adoption of FRS 102 in respect of deferred capital grants, investment property annual revaluation and holiday pay in particular.

College Accounts Direction 2015 to 2016

• Published at the end of January 2016 • Includes a number of mandatory requirements:

• Corporate Governance statement• Going concern disclosures• Statement on regularity, propriety and compliance• Specific accounting and disclosure matters:

o Public benefito Strategic reporto Related Partieso Key Management Personnel disclosureso Transactions with governors or trustees



IFRS 16 – Leases – heads up

• Accounting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2019• Long time in development – 2009 for discussion paper• Still “right of use” model though• Not yet endorsed for use by those entities applying EU IFRS• Bring all leases within its scope on balance sheet, showing an

asset for the right of use and a liability for the discounted amount of future payments


IFRS 15 – Revenue Recognition

• IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers – published 28 May 2014

• Single and comprehensive framework for revenue recognition• Effective for new accounting periods from 1 January 2018 (so

2018/19 for Colleges)• Existing IFRS guidance is set out in two relatively old standards

(IAS 18 Revenue and IAS 11 Construction Contracts) which are accompanied by a number of Interpretations

• 340 pages long (cf all existing guidance at c77 pages)• significantly more prescriptive and precise requirements in

comparison with existing IFRS


IFRS 15 – Revenue Recognition - issues

Is revenue recognised at a single point in time, or over a period of time?If over time, how should progress towards completion be measured and recognised?Will a contract need to be ‘unbundled’ into two or more components? (or ‘bundled’ into a single overall obligation?)How should contracts which include variable amounts of consideration (including rights of return) be dealt with?How should modifications to contracts be dealt with?Should costs associated with obtaining a contract be capitalised, or expensed immediately?What adjustments are required for the effects of the time value of money (a ‘financing component’)?Impact? – banking covenants; financial health scoring


FRS 102 – triennial review

• FRS 102 had a three year life – expected changes for 2018/19 anyway

• Formal triennial review was due in 2016/17 with a revised FRS effective from 1st January 2018

• Small entities – only adopting from 1st January 2016 so FRC decided to postpone full review by a year

• Changes from the review now expected to take effect from 1st

January 2019 (i.e. 2019/20 for FE Colleges)


Area Reviews and Due Diligence

Area Reviews

• 18 month programme well under way – target is still to complete by March 2017

• Findings of Waves 1 and 2 still not published though (July was promised)

• Wave 4 just started in late September/early October• Recommendations not binding• Restructuring Facility set up to cover costs of transition grants,

restructuring funds, and academisation• Transaction Unit (TU) to manage this facility


16

What does TU do?RF applicationsExceptional Financial SupportAcademisation

What do they need?• 36mth cash flow forecast• Implementation plan• Expert resource

Challenges?• Cultural shift• Insolvency regime• Apprenticeships

What TU leaves behind?• Forecasting• Focus on cash• Better governance

Stakeholders – Transaction Unit (TU)


Transition grant

• As part of the early stages of implementing area reviews, colleges can apply for a Transition Grant

• Fixed grant, for colleges only • Each area review final steering group will confirm what

significant changes are being recommended, and therefore which colleges are eligible to apply for support

• Grants are available within a fixed timescale and to specified criteria


Restructuring Facility (RF)

• A Treasury managed Fund• Fund of last resort in effect – eliminate all other options first• TU will assess all applications to the Restructuring Facility for

financial viability, sustainability and resilience on a case by case basis

• 6 month window for access from Steering Group recommendation• Applications assessed by the Transaction Unit (TU) – transition

grants should help ensure access to high quality advice• Expect 5 year commercial loans in the main (some may be non-

repayable…)• Arguably TU will succeed in its duties if it pays nothing out


Timing is everything


Due Diligence

Due diligence is an investigation of a business or person prior to signing a contract

Arose in the US in the 1930s in securities dealings

Can also be used as a verb…

A fuller definition:“the process by which one party conducts inquiries into the affairs of the other party for the purposes of timely, sufficient and accurate disclosure of all material statements /information or documents which may influence the outcome of a proposed transaction”


Due Diligence - guidance

BIS commissioned guidance due in June July August September …Will have accompanying Implementation Guidance when publishedComprehensive document (120 pages +) covering for example:• Who performs due diligence?• Internal teams from the College(s)• External advisors

• Types of due diligence (will be some overlap)• Financial • Legal (see next session)• Pensions• Estates• IT• Tax etc


Insolvency regime


Consultation published July 2016 – closed 5th August 2016

BIS Research paper noted absence of an insolvency regime

Also the “historic reluctance to close a college”

Absence of formal administration and insolvency practices…a further barrier to “exit”

All about COMPETITION

Effective from April 2017

FE Commissioner(s)

FE Commissioner

Originally appointed November 2013Team growing all the time (21 ish and counting)In scope: • Ofsted “inadequate”• Failing to meet national minimum standards of performance• Inadequate grades for Financial Health or Management

Role being split? “Orthrus” (elder brother of Cerberus)

• College intervention and support (as before)• Area review programmes


FE Commissioner

“Pointers” – 20 warning signs in letter dated 27 March 2015Annual report 2014/15 (published December 2015)Top 5 areas for improvement (some repetition for 2013/14):• The Role of the clerk• Governance• Leadership and Management• Quality Improvement• Financial Health


FE Commissioner – Financial Health

The report dryly notes that reductions in funding and changes in the funding rules have “challenged colleges”

• Small class size issues • Excessive numbers of management and support staff • Poor utilisation of teaching staff • Estates not addressed • Borrowing built on unsupported growth projections



Also:• New projects undertaken without necessary scrutiny or cost-

benefit analysis • Lack of regular reports on the financial contributions made by

each curriculum area • Failure to address inefficiencies in parts of the college’s

operations • High risk recovery plans lacking detail on how the strategy will be

delivered • Comment on the standard of auditing being disappointing with

main attention paid to processes



“Generally however it is a combination of factors rather than one issue that causes a college to be in financial difficulty”

• unsustainably high costs • instability in the senior management team • ineffective governance • a dysfunctional finance team • poor financial processes • unreliable management information • poor decision making in relation to capital schemes • insufficiently influential and effective audit services.


FE Commissioner letter 27 March 2015–“pointers”Included a number of common themes, several of which are financial:• Financial forecasts are not significantly different to the actual

out-turn• Management accounts don’t show significant swings from month

to month or from summer to the end of year• Borrowing as a percentage of turnover does not exceed 60% (40%

is a reasonable affordable target)• Staff costs less than 65% of turnover, c60% reasonable target• Creditor days are not greater than 45-60 at any one time. • Key Performance Indicator (KPI) dashboard of relevant

information is reliable, reviewed regularly and acted upon• Few empty classrooms or class sizes below 15


FE Commissioner – measures March 2016

Indicator Definition Target range

Operating Surplus/deficit (as a % of income)*

Surplus/(deficit) on continuing operations after depreciation and before exceptional items, tax, pension finance income and FRS 17 adjustments, divided by Adjusted income30

The aim would be to deliver colleges in strong financial health e.g. to have the potential to make an annual surplus of 3%-5%, which enables reinvestment in delivery but not limited to including capital

From colleges’ 2015/16 financial year the SFA and EFA will move to use of a measure of Earnings Before Interest Tax Depreciation and Amortisation (EBITDA) for the purposes of monitoring financial health. As this change progresses the use of this surplus measure for this process will be reviewed. Borrowings (as a % of income) Total borrowing, i.e. overdrafts, loans

(including exceptional financial support loans) and the capital element of finance leases) as a percentage of Adjusted income

<40%

Adjusted current ratio Current assets (excluding restricted cash from disposal of fixed assets held for future reinvestment and assets held for resale) divided by current liabilities (excluding deferred capital grants and holiday pay accruals)

>1

Staff costs (as a % of income) Total Staff costs (teaching and support, including contract tuition services but excluding restructuring) as a percentage of Adjusted income (excluding franchised provision income)

<65%

FE Commissioner – measures March 2016

Other relevant information used in Area Reviews (excerpts):

• SFA/EFA financial rating.

• Average cost per learner – this could provide an indication of class size, provision mix or efficiency.

• Proportion of business at NVQ Levels 4 & 5.

• Average Class Size – we would usually expect to see a minimum of 16, although this will vary for different types of provision (e.g. 16-18 and 19+ classroom based, traineeship, apprenticeship).

• Proportion of business that is apprenticeships - we would usually expect to see evidence that this is growing at least in line with Government targets, supported by an action plan.

• Quality - Quality of teaching should be at least Ofsted good and with plans for continuous improvement.

• Top three SMT salaries – we are looking to increase the transparency associated with pay in the sector.

• Estate information – including building condition – through % of buildings in category A or B; Estate utilisation, where we would expect to see plans to improve estate utilisation; and estate running costs as a % of income.

• Support/teaching ratio - this is the cost ratio between support staff and teaching staff and we would expect to see the ratio increase in favour of teaching. This data is not currently defined and we would look to colleges to provide this information in line with their perception of these categorisations in the first instance.

• Proportion of total income received in relation to provision which is delivered through sub-contracting or franchising arrangements.

• Outcomes for 16-18 year olds – including the average point scores for vocational and academic entries; percentage who achieve a grade C or better in English; and in maths; and percentage going into an education, employment or training destination. In line with the new proposed measures

FE Commissioner

• Sources of income by %

• SFA/EFA recurrent grant as a % of total income

• Historical cost surplus/deficit as a % of total income

• Operating surplus/(deficit) as a % of total income

• Underlying surplus/(deficit) as a % of total income

• Staff costs as a % of total income – excluding restructuring costs

• Staff and restructuring costs as a % of total income

• Current ratio

• Cash days in hand

• Creditor days with FE Commissioner “target”

• Debtor days

• Borrowings as a % of total income with FE Commissioner “target”

• Operating cash flow as a % of total income

Added aggregation of college data to show “merged” college summary results

Example of initial ratio analysis

FE Commissioner

Other measures:

SFA Financial Health scores – “sector EBITDA”Other (efficiency) measures in consideration include:• Spans of control• Detailed staffing ratios• SMT/SLT costs• Existing KPIs? How many is the “right” numberDifficulties:• Robust data sources• Time to collect data• Access to data• Comparability between FECs

Banks, Banks, Banks

The Management of Bank relationships

The Banking Context Now• Appetite (and ability) for support reduced• HE/FE on the banks’ radar – NAO report • Political/PR issues of enforcement action• Reluctance to be the change-bringer• Backdrop of austerity/government action• Sector attractiveness – very uncertain outlook• Independent reviews still prevalent


Banking Inputs to Restructuring: Security

Changing views on security• Moving from unsecured to secured

• Assets professional valued

Implications of granting security on FE property?• Ultimately bank could enforce – unlikely

• Need to gain bank approval for asset sale

Selling assets• Bank involved in asset sale

• Sale would deplete bank security

• Property originally funded by grants?


Audit Committee responsibilities


Joint Audit Code of Practice – published June 2016

• Minor “editorial” changes to the previous version- Recognises the new shared service for the SFA and EFA (FAS2T)

- Sign off of Regularity SAQ required now (before year end)

• Each College must have an audit committee which follows best practice in corporate governance. The audit committee is responsible for advising the governing body about the adequacy and effectiveness of the College’s assurance framework

• Terms of reference need to be established including achieving an appropriate mix of skills and experience

What is Risk Management?WHAT IS RISK?

Risk Definition:

Something that will impact on the objectives of the organisation

Considers threats as well as opportunities

Considers all risks, not just those associated with finance and insurance

Risk ManagementWHAT IS RISK MANAGEMENT?Risk management is a structured process for considering risks or opportunities

arising from the delivery of corporate objectives.

Provides a process for identifying risks

Provides a process for prioritising risks (working out which ones are important

usually by a means of measuring or quantifying them)

Puts into place measures that control and reduce the harmful effects or

maximise opportunities

Puts in place a process for monitoring risks

Risk ManagementWHY DO WE NEED RISK MANAGEMENT?

Risk Management has grown in prominence on governance agendas

It is a requirement that Board members and managers can demonstrate that

they understand the risks associated with their organisation’s business

Risk ManagementBOARD RESPONSIBILITIESEnsure that there is an ongoing process for identifying, evaluating, and

managing the risks faced by the organisation, and should review this process

regularly:

Set the tone and influence the culture of risk management

Determine the appropriate risk appetite or level of exposure for the College

Actively participate in major decisions affecting the College’s risk profile or exposure

Monitor the management of significant risks and opportunities to reduce the likelihood

of unwelcome surprises

Satisfy itself that the less significant risks are being actively managed, possible by

encouraging a wider adoption of risk management

Report annually on the organisation’s approach to risk management, with a description

of the key elements of its processes and procedures

Risk ManagementMANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES

In determining its policies with regard to internal control and thereby what

constitutes a sound system of control, management should consider:

Nature and extent of the key risks facing the College

Extent to which the key risks affect the College’s ability to achieve its own

objectives

Extent of risk which it regards as acceptable (risk appetite, more on this later)

The ability of the College to reduce the likelihood and impact of risks that do

occur (mitigation)

Cost/benefit of the control framework

Risk ManagementRESPONSIBILITIES

ManagementBoard

Risk Appetite

Risk Identification

Link with College / Group’s Strategy

Managing Risks

Monitoring the key risks

Audit Committee

Assess arrangements

Monitor the process

Risk ManagementKEY STAGES

• Understand key business objectives• Identification of major risk groups• Identification of specific risk exposures

• Likelihood and impact (gross or inherent risk)• Assessment of effectiveness of existing

controls• Likelihood and impact (net or residual risk)• Prioritisation of key business risks

• Treat, Tolerate, Transfer, Terminate, Take• Modify/improve existing controls• Design and implement new internal controls

• Regular assessment of risk profile• Effectiveness reviews of improved controls• Review and reporting

Identify

Evaluate

Manage

Monitor

How we define it:

It’s about what the organisation wants to do and how we go about it

Board’s job to define it ultimately

Defining appetite allows management to take an appropriate level of risk for the business, given the potential for reward

Risk AppetiteWhat is risk appetite?

Risk AppetiteA Board defined risk appetite

Classification

Description

Averse Avoidance of risk and uncertainty is a key Organisational objective

Minimalist Preference for ultra‐safe business delivery options that have a low degree of inherent risk and only have a potential for limited reward.

Cautious Preference for safe delivery options that have a low degree of residual risk and may only have limited potential for reward.

Open Willing to consider all potential delivery options and choose the one that is most likely to result in successful delivery while also providing an acceptable level of reward (and value for money etc.).

Hungry Eager to be innovative and to choose options offering potentially higherbusiness rewards, despite greater inherent risk

Who is in and who is out

• Members of the audit committee must not have executive authority

• Audit committees should include a minimum of three members, the majority of who should be members of the governing body

• Audit committee members should not be members of a College’s finance committee or its equivalent

• Cannot include the Chair of the Corporation or the Principal

• Chair reports back to the Corporation



Role of the Audit Committee

• Ensure delivery of an overall assurance framework through the best use of total resource

• Support the Corporation in fulfilling its statutory and regulatory responsibilities

• Understand key business risks

• Understand differing roles and responsibilities of internal and external auditors

• Identify adequacy of internal audit resource

• Monitor effectiveness of internal and external auditor relationships

• Continuous evaluation and improvement


The effective Audit Committee?

• One member with recent accounting experience

• A good Chair

• A good Clerk

• Member knowledge and experience brought out not left at the door

• Engagement on critical matters to the institution (planning)

• Good use of ‘audit resource’

• Contextual questioning of senior management

• 5 minute presentation, 25 minute questions (not the other way around)

• Length of meeting does not define the quality of the debate

• Integral part of governance

• Engagement with the Accounting Officer

Three lines of defence modelA sound governance, risk and assurance structure includes each of the following three lines of defence:

Boar

d an

d A

udit

Com

mit

tee

■ Create a risk and control environment

■ Risk definition and assessment■ Risk management and reporting

Business operationsDay-to-day operations

1st line

What is it? What is its role? RISK AND CONTROL

■ Strategic management■ Policy and procedure setting■ Guidance■ Monitoring/compliance■ Improvement

Oversight functionsFinance, Legal, HR, Quality and Risk Management

2nd line

■ Provide independent challenge and assurance

Independent assuranceInternal Audit, External Audit and other independent assurance providers

3rd line

RISK AND CONTROL

RISK AND CONTROL



Internal audit (if appointed)

• No longer mandatory (Education Act 2011)

• Accounts Direction sets out requirements including the formal opinion on governance, risk and control in the annual accounts

• SFA/EFA no longer advising on scope of work so Colleges need to understand their total assurance arrangements, including use or otherwise of Internal Audit

• Assurance maps are critical (regardless of IAS appointment)

• Terms of reference and resources

• Keep aligned to overall (current) risk profile

• Are they the right people for each project (skill set)


External Audit

• Primary role - opinion on financial statements and on Regularity

• Independent and objective – true and fair view

• Specified terms in the JACOP (Annexes A and B)

• Colleges may ask external auditors to provide additional services

• the audit committee must agree all significant matters with a bearing on the auditor’s objectivity and independence

• additional work must not impair the independence of the external audit opinion


Audit Committee – External Audit plans

• Scope/coverage across the whole operation

• Planning- all key accounting matters identified

- materiality

- balance of work

- deadlines (not too tight)

• Meetings without executives

• Audit findings - level of errors (significance and number)

• Output - Executive Report/management letter


Contentious issues

• First hand reports

• Listen

• Question

• Consider

• Objectivity of presenter


“We are unique”

• Is your College really unique –the only English College facing a particular issue?

• Use your auditors/sector knowledge

• General awareness of governors, not just committee meetings

• Be alert to ‘warning bells’


“If I don’t ask I cannot be blamed”

• Do the numbers make sense?

• Look at easy stuff/stay in comfort zone


Expectations

• Scheduled matters

• Challenge internal and external auditors

• Challenge management

• Restricted conversations – no record

• Overview (not just at AC), Code of Good Governance:-

“the Code adopts and builds on the Seven Principles of Public Life which provide an ethical framework for the personal behaviour of governors”.

Audit Committee - judgements

• Inappropriate accounting policies/practices:- unusual formats

- novel accounting

- FRS 102 trailed and now real

• Issues to look out for:- unusual transactions

- last minute changes affecting results

- unusual trends/relationships

- numerous unadjusted errors

- ‘tone’ of reporting - minimalist disclosure?



Committee Management

• Role of Chair

• Role of Clerk

• Collation and circulation of papers

• Weekend before meeting

• Summary of IA (or management) reports for satisfactory / good but full reports for limited assurance?

• Discussion vs ‘for information’

• Use of AOB

• Interaction with Governing Body

The benefits of hindsight report – Housing Corporation – lessons learnt

1.Drive out unnecessary complexity: The more complicated things become, the greater their chances of going wrong.

2.Understand the risks that could be fatal: just how much strain would it take to spell the end for the organisation?

3.Always have a Plan B: Following on from the ‘what ifs?’ of stress testing, it’s important to have credible and oven-ready plans for when something goes drastically wrong.

4.Be ambitious, but keep perspective: every board should deploy its assets for maximum social result, but Boards need to be the inbuilt reality check for the vision and drive of the executive.

5.Focus on the skills and competence of Board members: without a high-performing Board, no organisation can get by for very long. There needs to be a robust ‘grip’ of the core business areas.


The benefits of hindsight report – Housing Corporation – lessons learnt

6. Create the conditions for effective challenge: A highly skilled Board is a good start, but the right behaviours and a well-designed governance cycle also need to be in place.

7. Engage positively with the regulators: They may not always be 100% right, but they have the valuable perspective of experience, not to mention a range of statutory powers and responsibilities.

8. Keep an iron grip on performance and compliance: Boards should not allow themselves to become operationally embroiled, but in a complex modern business, there is a myriad of important compliance areas, and each one needs regular attention and oversight, within an overall integrated framework of business assurance.


THE BENEFITS OF HINDSIGHT REPORT – HOUSING CORPORATION – LESSONS LEARNT

9. Empower and value the Audit Committee: In terms of governance the audit committee should generally be the point of first alert for a possible failure of control.

10. Never forget the tenants (beneficiaries?): The board’s duty is to the current and future generations of tenants, as well as to taxpayers and the wider sector.


FRS 102 and the New FEHE SORP

THE STORY SO FAR■ FRS100 (Application of financial reporting

requirements) published Nov 2012, latest version September 2015

■ FRS101 (Reduced Disclosure Framework) published Nov 2012, latest version September 2015

■ FRS102 published Mar 2013 and updated September 2015

■ FRS 103 (Insurance contracts) published Mar 2014

■ FRS 104 (Interim Financial Reporting )published March 2015

■ FRS 105 (…Micro Entities) published July 2015

Future?? FREDs in issues (63 and 64); refresh for 2019/20 (diary date)


FRS 102 TIMELINEThe effective date is years beginning 1 January 2015.

For a July year end entity the timetable is as follows:

Oct 2010 31 July 2014 31 July 2015 31 July 2016

FRC issued revised

exposure drafts

Jan 2012

Final standards available

2013

FRC issued exposure drafts on

The Future of UK GAAP

Comparative Balance Sheet

ComparativeProfit & Loss

Transition date

First reporting

dateAccounting

policies

CurrentProfit & Loss

SORP available

YOU ARE HERE!


DON’T FORGET THE FE HE SORP

FRS102

Standalone, based upon IFRS for SMEs with elements of UK GAAP

266 pages (plus 110 pages of appendices…) (still smaller)

Replaces SSAPs, FRSs and UITFs

Simplified with less disclosure requirements

SORP

Accounts direction

78 pages (same)

Takes precedent over Charities SORP

Some additional disclosure requirements e.g. Emoluments


FIRST-TIME ADOPTION OF FRS 102

• Fair value as deemed cost for property assets

• Past revaluations as deemed cost for property assets

• Business combinations

• Lease incentives

Key exemptions from full retrospective application


FIRST-TIME ADOPTION OF FRS 102

• Description of each accounting policy change (distinguishing identified errors from adjustments arising as a result of new UK GAAP)

• Reconciliation of net assets at:— date of transition (31 July 2014); and— comparative balance sheet date (31 July 2015)

• Reconciliation of the surplus/deficit for the year to 31 July 2015

Reconciliations from old to new UK GAAP


SOURCES OF INFORMATION

BIS Research papers:


FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT

Bill LumsdenAudit Director

[email protected] 238121

sector update and briefing - home -...

Documents