Risks and Risk Mitigation

46. The following risk areas have been identified for the EEIP:

• Insufficient information of the right sort is collected to make a judgment as to efficiency and effectiveness of the programme.
• Poor monitoring systems and collection/distribution of knowledge — i.e. it will not be sufficient to generate and collect information, but also it must also be distributed and used.
• Too much concentration of resources in one or two projects — threat of “headline failure” doing significant damage to scheme and/or New Zealand’s reputation.
• Insufficient concentration of resources — funding spread too thin to have a significant impact, high transaction and compliance costs relative to benefit.
• Funds are directed to activities that would have happened in any case (“deadweight loss”), or are directed away from more useful activities.

47. Robust governance and management structures and thorough processes and procedures will central to managing the risks identified above.  Work programmes will be developed and proposals and project outcomes assessed drawing on industry expertise and experience.  Contracts will be specified in appropriate detail and regularly monitored against agreed progress points and milestones. 

48. Given the small size of the New Zealand international education sector and the limited experience in offshore provision of New Zealand providers, many potential members of the expert advisory body are also active participants in the industry.  Potential conflicts of interest would arise if members of the expert advisory body are employees of, or otherwise closely linked to, institutions applying for funds and/or where they can have access to commercially sensitive material of potential competitors.  Strict protocols will be in place to manage such conflicts, with advisory body members required to sign conflict of interest and commercial sensitivity declarations, and absent themselves from deliberations and decisions where a significant conflict exists.