|
|
Minutes of the meeting of the University Council held on Friday 27 March 2009.
Members:
Sir Bryan Carsberg (Chair); Dr Memis Acar; Dr Jo Aldridge;
John Blackwell; Dr Anja Baumhoff; Penny Coates; Professor Ian Davidson (ab); Brian
Dent (ab); Gifty Edila; Sir John Gains; Marc Gibson; David Goss; Professor Neil
Halliwell; Norma Honey; Sir John Jennings; Jim Murphy; Jim Mutton; Professor
Ric Parker; Professor Richard Parry-Jones (ab); Georgie Payne; Professor
Shirley Pearce; Simon Proffitt; Professor Ian Reid; Jackie Strong; Nigel
Tamplin; Alan A Woods; Dr Dominic Wring.
In attendance:
Professor Morag Bell; Peter Davenport; Professor Terry Kavanagh; Sir Charles McCullough; Dr Jennifer Nutkins; Professor Ken Parsons; Miranda Routledge; Will Spinks; Jon Walker; Caroline Walker; Dr Kathryn Walsh
Andrew Burgess (for item 09/09), Ron Gray (for item 09/12)
Apologies for absence were received from:
Brian Dent, Professor Richard Parry-Jones
Items 21.4 and 21.8 – Estates Management Committee and Student Experience Committee reports were unstarred by the LSU President.
Minutes of the Meeting of Council held on 28 November 2008 [COUN08-M9] were CONFIRMED.
09/03.1 Review
of Effectiveness of Council
COUN09-P1
Further to minute 08/128.1, Council REVIEWED
progress against the recommendations relating to the Review of Effectiveness of
Council. The following issues were
raised:
·
It was
REQUESTED that the development of a discussion forum be re-investigated. Action: Assistant Secretary
·
It was
AGREED that computer accounts for lay members be established in advance of the
development of the intranet. Action:
Assistant Secretary
09/03.2 Staff
Survey
COUN09-P2
Further to minute 08/130, Council RECEIVED an
update on actions taken in response to the Staff Survey. It was NOTED that, in Professor
Rothberg’s absence, the Provost would be chairing the Steering Group
responsible for driving the project forward.
A number of working groups had been established to look at areas for
improvement in more detail and all were due to submit interim reports in June
and final recommendations in October.
All groups had been briefed to identify “quick wins” as well
as issues requiring longer term implementation.
09/03.3 KLEC
(
Further to minute 08/134.1 (iv), Council RECEIVED
an update on KLEC. The Project
Board had met on a number of occasions to consider the offer to establish a
campus in
09/03.4 Other
Matters Arising
Further to minute 08/126.1, the
LSU President sought reassurance on the process for consulting with
stakeholders in relation to the Central Park Master Plan. It was CONFIRMED that discussions at the
Project Management Board were at a very early stage and that Graham Osbourne,
Project Manager, would be having individual meetings with the various
stakeholders in due course.
09/04.1 Council
NOTED with regret that Paul Glover had resigned from Council and Audit Committee
with effect from February 2009. Council
was grateful to Paul for his contribution in recent years and to Peter
Davenport who was serving as Acting Alumni Association President and would be
in attendance at Council meetings until a new President was appointed.
09/04.2 Council
NOTED that Professor Ian Davidson would be resigning from Council, Nominations
Committee and Treasurer’s Committee with effect from 1 April 2009. In his absence, Council expressed their
thanks for his contributions and wished him well in his new job.
09/05.1 2008 Research Assessment Exercise
COUN09-P3
The
Chair introduced the item by reminding Council that the University’s
outstanding result in the RAE was a consequence of excellent work and detailed
planning across the campus over many years.
In particular, the Provost (previously PVC(R)) had introduced the
concept of Personal Research Planning which had helped academic staff to manage
their research proactively. The current
PVC(R) had continued this practice and Council wished to record particular
thanks to both of them for their contributions to the outcome. The financial impact for 2009/10 was positive
but the Chair warned that this needed to be set in the context of the current
economic climate which was expected to impact negatively on the sector in
future HEFCE settlements.
The
Provost introduced the paper and highlighted the following:
Funding
was linked to volume which stood the University in a good position having
returned a high proportion of staff. The
ratio of funding by * rating was 7(4*):3(3*):1(2*) giving the University a
£6.3M increase in QR funding. This had
improved the University’s ratio of HEFCE Teaching (T) and Research (R) funding
from 3(T):1(R) to 1.9(T):1(R) bringing it in line with many Russell Group
institutions with medical schools. The
extra funding would continue for 5 years.
Unlike
the funding algorithm, the league tables did not take volume into account and were
based on grade point average. Whilst
Loughborough had significantly improved its position in the league tables published
so far it was generally felt that the position was understated when compared to
the detailed results.
09/05.2 Research Excellence Framework (REF)
COUN09-P4
The Provost
outlined proposals for the Research Excellence Framework (REF) - the government's
new methodology for assessing research in order to allocate QR funding from
2014. The initial proposals had been
significantly revised so that there would be one framework covering all subject
areas. There would be more focus on metric-based measures than in
previous exercises but environment, impact and light touch peer review would
continue to feature significantly. The University was well placed in
terms of receiving up-to-date information on the proposals as it had five
members of staff on the Expert Advisory Group.
The Provost
outlined the University's preparations for the new methodology. All research
active staff would continue to prepare Personal Research Plans (PRPs) which
would be monitored by RPMG. The Institutional Repository was an essential
tool in ensuring that research outputs were widely accessible in order to
demonstrate impact factors and increase citations. Research student
numbers would continue to be an important measure of activity and so University
investment would remain a priority.
Several members commented on the need to engage
members of staff across the University with the concept of "impact"
which was difficult to measure, particularly in some subject areas.
Council was reassured that the PVC(E) was closely involved in this area.
Significant strides had already been made to ensure that colleagues understood
the importance of, and techniques for, demonstrating the ways in which
published research had significantly impacted on areas such as other research,
government policy, industry and more widely across society.
Despite the
excellent RAE results and the advanced planning in place for REF, the Treasurer
remained concerned about research grant and contract income which had plateaued
a number of years previously. He reminded Council that the Silver Scenario
assumed a 5% increase in research income and wondered to what extent the RAE
results would influence this. The Provost assured Council that the
University was not complacent following the RAE results and was putting
mechanisms in place to improve the way in which intended research applications
(identified in the PRPs) could be tracked and supported by the Research Office. The
University would continue efforts to improve the quality of research
applications in order to increase success rates.
09/06 University Strategy/Planning
09/06.1 Human Resources
Implementation Plan
Council
NOTED that an initial draft of the Human Resources Implementation Plan had been
considered by Human Resources Committee and that the final draft was expected
for July 2009.
09/06.2 Draft Timetable for the
Review of the University Strategy
COUN09-P5:
RECEIVED
09/07 Key Performance Indicators
COUN09-P6
The Provost introduced the
KPI update. Only two indicators (other than RAE results which had been
reported separately) had changed significantly since the last meeting - both
related to student satisfaction. Firstly, international student satisfaction
and secondly general student satisfaction - both measured by the Student
Barometer Survey. The University's performance on both indicators had
improved.
On a related issue, a
member queried progress with the current National Student Survey.
Response rates were slightly lower than at the same point the previous year and
the University, in close partnership with the Students' Union, was doing all it
could to encourage finalists to respond.
The Director of External
Affairs reported that the indicator for Social Impact and Engagement had
changed. The University had previously taken part in the BITC survey but
it was not specifically aimed at higher education and the University had
therefore been benchmarked against non comparable institutions making it
difficult to interpret results in a meaningful way. BITC were now working
with HEFCE to produce a survey more relevant to the sector titled
"Universities which Count". The University was taking part in
the first survey on a voluntary basis and the development of this indicator
would be monitored closely.
09/08.1 University
Budget 2008-09
COUN09-P7
The
Director of Finance updated Council on the 2008-09 budget which was still projecting
an overall surplus of £3.8M. There had been some deterioration in imago's
commercial activities, thought to be a consequence of the economic
climate. However, this had been off-set by a decrease in the utilities
bill - an area where further savings were expected by the end of the year.
Approximately 50% of the University's energy currently came from renewable
sources. The low interest rate meant that the University's earnings from
investment had decreased but
this was balanced by
reduced payments on loans so the overall impact was broadly neutral. ELT
regularly reviewed the impact of the recession on the University's activities and would alert Council to any
major issues that arose. In response to a query, it was confirmed that
the increase in expenditure by academic departments was due almost entirely to
the 5% pay award in October.
09/08.2 HEFCE
Recurrent Grant 2009-10
COUN09-P8
The
Director of Finance introduced the paper which notified Council of the
recurrent grant from HEFCE for 2009-10. The settlement from HEFCE was
good news for the University due to the uplift in QR funds (driven by RAE
results). The additional funding for SIVs had been rolled into the
recurrent grant. However, the Director of Finance warned Council
that difficult times lay ahead due to an expected review of public spending
which could potentially reduce the public funds available to the sector.
The letter from HEFCE contained hints of this, referring to an absolute cap on
student numbers and financial penalties for institutions that over
recruited.
Student applications were
high and so recruitment would need to be carefully managed throughout the year
to ensure that the University was not penalised for over recruitment. The
University was mindful of the fact that the increase in the budget from HEFCE
for 2009-10 was only a short term gain and that prudence was necessary in the
medium term.
The
HEFCE settlement enabled the University to set parameters for its internal
budgets and Council would be asked to approve the 2009-10 budget in July.
Next year's budget would need to be considered carefully against the ambitious
capital plan. HEFCE had brought forward £200M of capital expenditure from
2010-11 to 2009-10 and the University had made three successful bids against
the initiative. However, all expenditure on the projects needed to fall
in 2009-10 which could be quite difficult and meant that only relatively modest
projects could be funded in this way.
A member queried the extent
to which the University's WP strategy might be compromised by the cap on
student numbers combined with increased applications. This balance
remained a challenge for the University but the concessions period in August
allowed some flexibility and this was
one way in which it had been addressed in previous years. The University
was required to regularly review its WP strategy and HEFCE now required a Strategic
Assessment to be submitted by the end of June. Council would receive a copy for
information in July.
09/09.1 Progress Report
COUN09-P9: RECEIVED
09/09.2
COUN09-P10
The Director of Facilities
Management (FM) delivered a presentation outlining plans for the re-development
of the
The
project centred around the development of a new Design Centre and the
demolition/re-building of existing facilities affecting a number of
departments. The project was ambitious and a phased approach would be
adopted with completion expected in 2016. There was a strong case for the
project as current accommodation in the
Design Centre which would
bring together key strands of design
activity into one location and create some exciting opportunities.
Enabling works for the Design Centre would begin in August 2009 and completion
was planned for 2011.
This was a very exciting
development and had been given top priority amongst major projects.
However, it would be expensive and a project of this size would require careful
monitoring against appropriate benchmarks in relation to both cost and
environmental sustainability features. Council would need to be assured
that the project remained within a reasonable budget tolerance and to be
regularly updated on progress and costs. The target for construction
costs was £2,360 per sq metre which allowed for a healthy contingency and
placed the project (in cost terms) somewhere in the middle of recent major projects.
It was noted that a number of construction companies had been badly affected by
the recession and the University was putting in place a number of checks to
mitigate risk in this area. Full financial checks would be carried out
before interviews commenced. The contractor procurement route would be
two-staged - selecting separate companies for design and build to help protect
against over reliance on an individual company.
It
was noted that the last three major projects had been significantly affected
both in terms of timing and cost due to problems in obtaining planning
permission. The planned works were close to residential properties which
could introduce delays and/or complications. The
Director of FM was trying
to mitigate the risks and had already met with the Director of Planning at
Charnwood Borough Council (CBC). Additionally, the University had tested
planning strategies with Grimleys and had met with the planners to discuss the
project. Members of the Executive also had regular meetings with the
Leader and Chief Executive Officer of CBC. Council was reassured that the
University was adopting a tiered approach to seeking planning approval.
09/09.3 Towers Hall Refurbishment
COUN09-P11
The
Director of FM introduced the paper which outlined a proposal for the
refurbishment of the Towers Hall of Residence. This met with imago's long
term accommodation strategy and protected some of the catered provision on
campus. If the building was not refurbished it would
deteriorate to the point
where it was uninhabitable and demolition would be required. This would
be a costly process (circa £2M) in itself. The works were expected to be
completed during the academic year 2009/10 and be ready for occupation at the
start of 2010/11. De-cant space in the
Council
AGREED to DELEGATE AUTHORITY to the Chair of Council to move the project to Stage
3 of the major projects procedure during July/August 2009 at a cost £5.086M
with a tolerance of 10% should tender exceed the budget estimate.
It was noted that two major
developments would be taking place in close proximity to one another at the
same time and that this was likely to have a major impact on the surrounding
area - not least on
COUN09-P12
Dr Kathryn Walsh presented
the agenda paper which outlined progress on the Science and
Council APPROVED the
decision to start the formal search for a development partner following the
Competitive Dialogue process and AGREED the membership of the Selection
Panel.
Council
DELEGATED AUTHORITY to the Selection Panel to sign off the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire,
issue the OJEU Notice and Developer Prospectus and manage the next stage of the
developer selection process.
It was expected that a
final recommendation on the preferred developer would come to Council for
approval in Spring 2010. Throughout this time the project would be
closely managed in the context of the economic climate.
09/11.1 Report of Meeting – 3
March 2009
The Chair of the Audit
Committee gave a brief verbal report on the last meeting of the Audit Committee.
Satisfactory progress continued to be made in respect of Risk Management,
Internal Audit and the VFM agenda. The University was also making good
progress with the final implementation of Agresso. The Audit Committee
had conducted a review of its own effectiveness and would report back to
Council in July. The Chair of the Audit Committee encouraged other
committees to do the same.
09/11.2 Appointment of External Auditors
COUN09-P13
Council was reminded that
the main function of the external auditors was to certify the annual financial
statements/accounts. HEFCE guidance was that external auditors should be
re-appointed every seven years. The current external auditors - Deloittes
- had completed a seven year term but it had been previously agreed by both the
Audit Committee and Council that full market testing to find a replacement firm
would not be necessary. Instead, a full performance review of Deloittes
had been undertaken in February. The process included a constructive
discussion with Deloittes which identified some areas for improvement.
Deloittes were also rotating partners and this meant that the University's
account manager would change which was considered to be consistent with the
spirit of the HEFCE guidance.
On the recommendation of the
Audit Committee and the Review Panel, Council AGREED to RE-APPOINT Deloittes
for three 3 years from April 2009. Council APPROVED the fee of £44,970
excluding subsidiary companies.
COUN09-P14
The
Director of DARO attended to introduce the item. The initiative to award
Honorary Bachelor Degrees to students from the former constituent colleges was
proving immensely
popular. 1300
individuals had currently expressed an interest and the two ceremonies planned
for the summer were already over subscribed. It was hoped that there
would be an opportunity linked to the December graduation ceremonies to
accommodate the individuals on the waiting list. The Director of DARO
stated that it was the best response he had ever seen to a single alumni
relations initiative. Council congratulated the University for making the
gesture which was truly appreciated by the alumni. Some members queried
how this would convert to fundraising. The impact was difficult to
measure and the gesture had always intended to be friend-raising rather than
fund-raising. However 170 donations had been received as a direct result
already . Council placed on record its thanks to DARO, in particular the
Alumni Office, who were working hard to make the initiative a success.
09/13.1 Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)
(i) Research Grants and Contracts
COUN09-P15: NOTED
(ii) Research Outputs
COUN09-P16: NOTED
09/13.2 Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching)
Undergraduate and Taught Postgraduate
Recruitment, 2009 Entry
COUN09-P17: NOTED
09/13.3 Pro-Vice-Chancellor (
COUN09-P18: NOTED
Following
the recent Review of Effectiveness of Council, it had been agreed that the
Chairman would make a verbal report at each meeting to pick up on relevant
issues discussed by Chairman's Advisory Group (CAG) that had not been covered
elsewhere on the agenda. One of the key objectives of CAG was to provide reassurance to the Chairman that the
University's financial controls were operating effectively. To this end,
CAG had spent the majority of its most recent meeting discussing financial
matters. The £6.3M additional revenue from the RAE had been discussed
including initial thoughts on how this might influence the 2009-10 budget in
the context of the difficult external financial climate. In particular,
CAG had considered:
-
the risk associated with a
potential increase in inflation in future years
-
the pressure on the public
budget and the assumption that the HE sector might be significantly affected by
cuts in public spending.
Loughborough was in a
stronger position than most other institutions but the additional income would
need to be spent wisely to protect future financial stability. Various
financial simulations would need to be undertaken to model a range of
scenarios.
CAG had also considered the
Major Projects/Capital Plan and the hosting of an international team for the
Olympics. The University was in discussion with five teams and hoped to
reach a final discussion in the next few months. The decision would be
taken in the context of forging a strong long term relationship .
09/15.1 Recent Developments at
the University
i.
The
University was organising a wide range of events in celebration of the
Centenary and Council members were encouraged to attend. As part of the Centenary, a very successful
Festival of Science had been held in March. Professor Ken Parsons was
thanked for his contributions to the event.
ii.
UCEA
were due to meet with all sector Trade Unions on 30 March to receive their pay
claims. The national position would be
clearer after that and Council would be kept informed of significant
developments.
iii.
Professor
Denis Loveday had been shortlisted in the Financial Times "Climate
Challenge". The winner would be selected via an online voting system
which all members of Council were invited to take part in.
iv. The LSU President reported that Lucy Hopkins
had recently addressed the Select Committee on Innovation, Universities,
Science and Skills Committee which was looking at “Students and
Universities".
09/15.2 Policy Developments for
HE in the
COUN09-P19
Council
NOTED the agenda paper. The VC would be
pleased to receive suggestions for areas
of policy that Council
members would like to see included in future papers.
09/16.1 New Amendments
On the recommendation of Senate, Council
APPROVED amendments to:
Ordinance II (Status of Students).
COUN09-P20
Ordinance IV (Titles of Degrees and Conditions of Award).
COUN09-P21
Ordinance XVII (Conduct and Discipline of Students).
COUN09-P22
09/16.2 Confirmation of
Amendments
Further to minute 08/129 and paper COUN08-P156,
Council CONFIRMED the repeal of Ordinance VIII.
COUN09-P23
Council RECEIVED a report of the meetings of
Senate held on 28 January and 4 March 2009 and:
09/17.1 APPROVED Programme Proposals.
09/17.2 APPROVED new title and amendments to the
departmental structure of the
COUN09-P24
09/17.3 APPROVED the establishment of the Centre
for Biological Engineering.
COUN09-P25
09/17.4 APPROVED changes to composition of the
Health, Safety and Environmental Committee.
COUN09-P26
09/17.5 NOTED discussions relating to the Design
Centre.
09/17.6 NOTED that Student Guidance and Welfare had
changed its title to Student Services.
COUN09-P27: RECEIVED.
COUN09-P28: RECEIVED.
Council NOTED that
the Chair (or nominee with delegated authority) had taken action between
meetings to approve:
09/20.1 Access Agreement with OFFA
09/20.2 Treasurer Committee Membership –
appointment of Professor John Whittaker with effect from 1 April 2009 (vice
Professor Ian Davidson)
Council RECEIVED reports from the following Committees:
09/21.1 Advancement Committee – 11 February
2009 [COUN09-P29]
09/21.2 Audit/Treasurer’s Committee –
13 November 2008 [COUN09-P30]
09/21.3
09/21.4 Estates Management Committee – 15
January and 4 March 2009 [COUN09-P32]
This item
was unstarred by the LSU President to request a copy of the Space Allocation
Sub-Committee minutes.
09/21.5 Health, Safety and Environmental Committee
– 18 February 2009 [COUN09-P33]
09/21.6 Performance Monitoring Group – 2
December 2008 [COUN09-P34]
09/21.7 Research Performance Monitoring Group
– 25 November 2008 and 27 January 2009 [COUN09-P35]
09/21.8 Student Experience Committee – 21 January 2009 [COUN09-P36]
This item
was unstarred by the LSU President to highlight to Council members that the
Students’ Union were unhappy with the level of hall fees. Council was reminded that, as part of the funding
arrangements (i.e. PFI) for the Car Park 7 development (new residential halls),
hall fees were now calculated on a formulaic basis linked to RPI. The increase of 8.63% was unusual but was due
to the high RPI in the month when the fees were set. This was the consequence of providing new rooms
at no capital cost to the University to ensure capital was available for other
developments on campus. The implications had been debated at length when the
decision to go ahead with the PFI route was taken and LSU had been involved
throughout the discussions.
Accommodation on campus was still competitively priced compared to the
market place and the Director of imago would be asked to bring forward a
summary of provision benchmarked against other providers to a future meeting. Action:
Director of imago
The LSU
President also wished to query the policy on extending licence periods to cover
the Easter vacation in certain halls.
Students in these halls had no choice but to pay for additional weeks
and the Students’ Union had received a number of complaints about
this. imago had reported that there was
demand for Easter vacation accommodation and that it was actually over
subscribed for 2009-10. A member of the
Access to Learning Fund Panel commented that an increasing number of students
were citing accommodation costs as significant contributors to financial
hardship. It was agreed that Council would
find a briefing on student finance issues useful.
09/21/9 Costing and Pricing Committee – 17
September 2008 [COUN09-P37]
The LSU President raised an issue related to false fire
alarms in Unite managed properties. The
University recognised that the false alarms had been problematic and that Unite
had been slow to respond to initial complaints.
However, as the halls were managed by a third party, accountability rested with Unite. The Director of imago had initiated a process
to help to address the issue and LSU were appreciative of the
University’s support on the matter.
Thursday, 9 July 2009 (2.15pm)
Author – Miranda Routledge
Date – April 2009
Copyright (c)