UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
CNL/15/39
COUNCIL
A meeting of the Council was held on Thursday 16 April 2015 at 2.00pm in the Council Chamber,
Northcote House.
PRESENT:
Pro-Chancellor, Miss S J Turvill (Chair)
Mr C J Allwood
Provost, Professor J M Kay
Mr G Brown
Dr S Buck
Mr N Bull
Ms A Conroy
Professor K E Evans
Ms R Gillies
Mr P J M Hodges
Mr R M P Hughes
Mr P Lacey
Ms B Rigg
Dr A M Shaw
Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, Professor Sir Steve Smith
Professor S Tomlinson
Ms S Wilcox
IN ATTENDANCE:
Director of Communication and Corporate Affairs, Mrs J Chafer
Chief Financial Officer, Mr A Connolly
Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Professor M Goodwin
Governance and Compliance Lead, Mr C A Lindsay
Director of Human Resources, Ms J A Marshall
Chief Operating Officer, Mr R G Pringle
Director of Academic Services and Deputy Chief Operating Officer, Ms M I
Shoebridge
Executive Officer, Mrs J Williams
APOLOGIES:
Ms T Costello, Ms J Hargadon, Professor N Kaye, Mr C C Pomfret,
Professor T A Quine, Mr R Davies, Sir Robin Nicholson, Professor N J Talbot
15.17
Chair’s Opening Remarks
The Chair welcomed Chris Lindsay, Governance and Compliance Lead, as an observer to the
meeting.
15.18
Declarations of Interest
Members NOTED the register of members’ interests in relation to the business of the agenda
including standing declarations of interest.
15.19
Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 26 February 2015 were CONFIRMED (CNL/15/15).
15.20
Matters Arising from the Minutes
There were no matters arising from the minutes.
Page 1 of 7
15.21
Vice-Chancellor’s Report
(a) Council RECEIVED a report from the Vice-Chancellor (CNL/15/16), and drew attention to the
following topics:
(i)
External Appointment of Professor Janice Kay – Professor Kay had been appointed to
the new Strategic Advisory Committee on Quality, Accountability and Regulation, under
the new Regulation and Assurance Directorate of the Higher Education Funding Council
for England (HEFCE). The core purpose of the Committee is to support the HEFCE
Board in shaping HEFCE’s role as lead regulator. The Vice-Chancellor recorded his
congratulations to Professor Kay on this prestigious appointment.
(ii)
Nurse Review – RCUK Appointment for Professor Nick Talbot FRS – Professor Nick
Talbot had been asked by the Chair of Research Councils UK (RCUK) to act as a ‘critical
friend’ to RCUK by providing feedback on its response to the call for evidence to the
Nurse Review.
(iii) MRC Proximity to Discover - The Medical Research Council had recently awarded £200k
to Exeter in order to increase industry-academic engagement via their Proximity to
Discover programme. The funds would be available for academic-industry partners to
apply for funds to support partnerships via the most appropriate mechanism.
(iv) Wellcome Trust Awards – Academic colleagues in the College of Humanities had
recently been awarded in excess of £1m in Fellowship and Investigator Awards by the
Wellcome Trust. Dr Alun Withey and Dr Fabrizio Bigotti received Wellcome Trust
Fellowships, which had already begun, and Dr Kate Fischer and Dr Jana Funke were
awarded a joint Wellcome Trust Investigator awards, due to begin in the Autumn.
(v) Outcome of the FXU Sabbatical Elections – the Vice-Chancellor was very pleased to
announce the outcome of the FXU sabbatical elections as follows:
FXU President Exeter: Grace Fisher (BSc Geography)
FXU President Falmouth: Fred Mallin (BA Photography)
FXU President Student Experience: Amanda Chetwynd-Cowieson (BA Photography,
Falmouth)
FXU President Community and Welfare: Alexa Webster (BA Photography, Falmouth)
Council recorded their congratulations to those elected. The turnout had been very
good, with 1,763 students having voted, 28.5% of the student population. However, the
turnout of Exeter students was 50.6%.
(b) In addition to the written report, the Vice-Chancellor drew attention to the following:
(i)
Election of the Council Professional Services Representative – as Council was aware,
Ordinance 39 provided for the election of a member of Professional Services (PS) staff to
the Council of the University for a term of three years. The term of office of the current
PS staff member of Council, Pete Hodges, was due to expire on 31 July 2015.
An election for a member of PS staff to serve on Council for the period 1 August 2015 to
31 July 2018 was held between Wednesday 11 March and Thursday 2 April 2015.
Thirteen members of the PS staff of the University were nominated for the election.
Voting took place by the alternative vote system and 28% of staff who were eligible to
vote took part in the election. This was up from 19% in 2012.
After 12 rounds of counting, Sally Turner, Management Accountant at the University of
Exeter Medical School, had more than 50% of the votes and was declared elected.
Sally has worked at the University for nine years and has a breadth of knowledge having
previously working in Finance Services, the School of Sport and Health Sciences and
Academic Services before joining the Medical School two years ago.
The Vice-Chancellor recorded his congratulations to Sally and looked forward to
welcoming her on to Council.
Page 2 of 7
(ii) General Election Manifestos – the Vice-Chancellor provided members with a summary of
the main parties’ policies relating to Higher Education (HE). The key points from each
manifesto would be made available to members at:
http://www.exeter.ac.uk/about/organisation/council/reference/agendas/
(iii) QR (Quality-Related Research Funding) Settlement – the Vice-Chancellor shared with
members the outcomes from the QR settlement.
Exeter was the third biggest cash winner in the sector with an increase of £3.8m on its
QR funding. This was only surpassed by King’s College London and University College
London. Exeter’s increase represented a 22 per cent uplift on its previous allocation, and
an increase of 150 per cent since 2001.
This was made up of a £4.2m uplift in mainstream QR based on Quality Profile,
combined with a small decrease in Research Degree Programme (RDP) funding (based
on volume of PGRs).
In discussion with members the following key points were noted:
15.22
•
The University needed to be the beacon in the south west and be ready to position
itself for place-based innovation and investment.
•
Professor Nick Talbot was representing Exeter on the review of Life Sciences in the
South West and was leading this through GW4. The GW4 institutions were working
together and with other agencies e.g. Met Office and National Statistics agency to
look at potential areas for investment such as big data.
•
Exeter’s results for Impact in the REF were not as strong due to the number of staff
(at least 300) that were hired between RAE 2008 and REF2014 and were not able
to bring their impact case studies with them. If the University retained good staff
then it would be in a much stronger position for impact studies for 2020.
•
Critical mass would also need to be grown ahead of 2020. If posts in the current
business plan were appointed then Exeter would have 1338 academic staff by 2020.
It was important for Exeter to attract outstanding new academics, develop its current
academics and nurture talent in early career researchers.
•
The University had a process in place now for collecting impact studies and a list of
impact studies for 2020 was already being developed. Colleagues in Research &
Knowledge Transfer (RKT) were also working with academics to think about impact
before grant proposals were written.
Report from the Students’ Guild and FXU Presidents
Council CONSIDERED reports from the Students’ Guild and FXU Presidents (CNL/15/17).
These reports were intended to provide Council with an overview of the student experience at the
University of Exeter – both at the Exeter campuses (Annex A) and the Penryn Campus (Annex B).
Rachael Gillies, President of the Students’ Guild introduced the papers and noted that the idea of
providing a report to Council on the student experience had been recommended at the Student as
Governor Seminar run by the Leadership Foundation.
The Guild report was split in to two sections, with the report using the foundation of 5 key themes:
The Importance of Relationship, Growth, Consumerism, Attitudes and Expectations and Parity of
Experience, to look at areas which made up the unique student experience at Exeter. These areas
were Academic, Welfare and Wellbeing, Student Life and Extra-Curricular.
The report from FXU provided the context of the experience of students studying at the Penryn
Campus and was separated by the following themes and topics: Parity of experience crossCampus, Education, Extra-Curricular, Student Life and Institutional Growth.
Members commended the excellent reports and in discussion of them the following key points
were noted:
Page 3 of 7
•
A number of points were common and some were individual to different campuses. The
Students were more demanding as a result of the £9k fee. Students did not like the term
customer but felt they were investing in their education and their individual experience was
very important within this. Students expected to be listened to and their views acted upon.
They looked for value for money and to be supported by their institution. However, they did
not always know what their £9k was paying for. The Guild was therefore working with the
Chief Financial Officer and Director of Communication and Corporate Affairs on a piece of
work to educate students about where their fee goes.
•
Space was a really important issue that was raised by students on all the committees they sat
on and student feedback needed to be part of the University’s strategic planning for capital
and space. The greater demand for space by the institution had impacted on the space for
student activities and social events. The Guild was working with Event Exeter to see how their
needs could be fulfilled. However, whilst this would help with current demand it did not solve
future growth needs. There had been 25 new societies affiliated to the Guild this year alone
and this resulted in more demands on space. Whilst the Guild felt that the student voice was
being heard, it was likely to become an even more important issue to students in the future.
•
Colleagues were looking at the efficient utilisation of space and the ways that academic
spaces could be used in a joint way with students.
•
It was important to involve students in the professional services transformation, both on work
streams and in supporting implementation. The channels of communication needed to be kept
open with students on this; particularly where they were essential in the University’s activities.
•
Student growth had become the single biggest issue that was raised in consultation with
students. The Guild was working on this with the University, and the Vice-Chancellor, Provost
and Chief Operating Officer (COO) would be holding an all-student talk at the end of April to
talk about the University’s future plans. Not all of the concerns were about growth itself, but
about the availability of resources to support the growth e.g. availability of space, Library
provision etc.
•
There was a Student App to help students find vacant study seats around campus. There
would also be 300 extra spaces created over the summer in the library. St Luke’s library was
being looked at too as another area of development.
•
The Student-Staff Liaison Committee (SSLC) representatives provided feedback in every
discipline. The Medical School was the most challenging for the Guild to work with as it was
the discipline it knew least about due to students having a very different working pattern. The
Guild recognised that there was lots more to do to support Medical School students and was
working on this.
This included looking at the provision at St. Luke’s and the parity of
experience for students there.
•
The reports provided a very good insight in to what students were feeling. They provided a
good of way of thinking about the balance of the size of the institution and where resources
should go in order to optimise Exeter’s strategy. The Guild had been working on areas that
were highlighted for improvement in the last National Student Survey (NSS) – e.g. space and
living costs. It was hoped that some of the changes that had been made as a result would
improve scores in certain areas.
•
The strategy for growth was important to consider in terms of the balance between
undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PGT) students and the impact this would have on
space, since PGT programmes had different space needs.
•
The report did not reference work and career guidance as this was not one of the things that
students were most vocal about at the moment. However, this was not to say they did not
think it was important as it was one of the Guild’s five areas for investment and priority work
that had been presented to the Budget Scrutiny Group.
•
In relation to extending the teaching day the Guild had a list of ten key mitigations that had
been shared with the University and they were working to make these come to fruition. A long
list of potential mitigation activities had come from consultation done both last year and fresh
consultation recently. A summit had then been held between the Guild and University to talk
Page 4 of 7
about the concerns and finalise the list of ten. It was hoped that the transition would be
smoother as a result of the mitigation. Communication with students was key during a period
of change; helping them understand how they would, and would not, be affected. There was
also a proposal being developed, for consideration by the Capital Strategy Group, around
using the Northcott Theatre for teaching for two days per week from 2015/16.
•
The recent THE Student Experience Survey had scored the Guild / FXU as 5.6. This was
compared to some students’ unions scoring as high as 6.4. Those who scored the highest
marks were very different types of unions and were the envy of the sector. Whilst it was
recognised that there was still work to do, the Guild was in the upper quartile for the Russell
Group.
•
Wellbeing continued to be an issue of concern. Students were positive about wellbeing
services but felt they were under resourced. The Guild and University were considering what
could be done for students when they first arrive at Exeter to make the transition smoother
from home and school. This included a formalised peer support structure which had been
successfully piloted in some departments and would be rolled out further. These types of
interventions would aim to prevent the need to access wellbeing services in the future. The
Welcome Week team at Exeter was very successful and had received excellent feedback.
Personal tutors also played a big role and there had been a recent review of the personal tutor
system. Implementation of the recommendations from this review would be important.
•
Students responded to creative ways of tacking wellbeing; making it part of a conversation and
showing that there were other places and things that could be done besides visiting the
wellbeing centre. Work was being done on activities to help with exam stress in the summer
and positive feedback had been received from this.
15.23
Second Financial Forecast (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE)
5.24
HEFCE Grant Letter (COMMECIAL IN CONFIDENCE)
15.25
Ethics (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE)
Gail Seymour in attendance
15.26
(a)
ANNUAL ETHICS REPORT AND DUAL ASSURANCE UPDATE (CNL/15/20)
(b)
STATEMENT ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY (CNL/15/21)
Endowment Investments: Annual Report
Council RECEIVED the annual report on Endowment Investments (CNL/15/23).
15.27
Governance, Disbursement and Stewardship of Endowment Fund
Council RECEIVED a report on the governance, disbursement and stewardship of endowment
funds (CNL/15/24).
15.28
Senate
Council CONSIDERED a report from the Senate meeting held on 18 March 2015 (CNL//25/25) and
APPROVED:
(a) The amendments to:
i) Ordinance 23 – The Faculties (SEN/15/13A)
ii) Ordinance 5 – The Conduct of Examinations (SEN/15/22A)
iii) Ordinance 11 – Degrees Awarded after Advanced Study (SEN/15/22B)
(b) Additional nominations for Honorary Degrees (see also Minute 15.31)
(c) The reappointment of Professor Nick Talbot as Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and
Knowledge Transfer) for a period of five years to 31 July 2020.
Page 5 of 7
(d) The appointment of Professor Tim Quine (Associate Dean Education, CLES and Professor of
Earth System Science) as Dean of the Faculty of Taught Programmes on an interim basis
until 31 July 2015.
15.29
Audit Committee
Council RECEIVED the draft minutes of the Audit Committee meeting held on 27 February 2015
(CNL/15/26).
15.30
Academic Promotions
Council RECEIVED a report of promotions agreed between 6 November 2015 and 8 April 2015
(CNL/15/27).
15.31
Honorary Degree Nominations for 2015/16 (CONFIDENTIAL)
15.32
Infrastructure
(a)
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
Council RECEIVED a report on infrastructure projects (CNL/15/30).
(b)
CAPITAL STRATEGY GROUP
Council RECEIVED the minutes from the meetings of the Capital Strategy Group held on
10 February 2015 (CNL/15/31) and 17 March 2015 (CNL//15/32).
(c)
15.33
BUILDING A HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT (COMMERCIAL IN
CONFIDENCE)
University Terms and Academic Calendar 2015/16
(reference minute 15.11)
Council APPROVED the University Terms and Academic Calendar for 2015/16 (CNL/14/34).
15.34
Graduation: Summer 2015 (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE)
15.35
Transparent Approach to Costing (TRAC) Return
Council RECEIVED the TRAC returns and reasonableness tests (CNL/15/36).
In discussion with members the following key points were noted:
•
The first graph on page 2 (Headline TRAC income and expenditure) indicated that Exeter
recovered on average 65% of its research costs. This was compared to the Russell Group
(RG) where the average recovery was 81%. If Exeter was at the RG average the University
would be better off by £24m per annum. Whilst some of the difference was due to QR lag,
this would not be sufficient to close the gap.
•
The second graph (% research cost recovery by category) indicated that:
o Exeter’s QR income was still at 2008 levels and catch up was expected with the 2014 REF
results.
o The amount of academic time and cost being spent on internally funded research was high
compared to the RG.
o High financial incentives provided to PGR students was depressing Exeter’s recovery
compared to the RG.
o Exeter’s recovery on externally funded grants and contracts was much closer to the RG
performance.
•
Whilst TRAC had received some criticism in the past, the results across the sector had been
very consistent and had been validated by the University’s workload allocation model
(SWARM) which had been piloted in two Colleges for this process. This would now be rolled
out across all Colleges.
Page 6 of 7
•
The Chief Financial Officer had delivered a presentation on TRAC for Research to all College
Executives. This covered key messages about what could be done to influence TRAC. A
very short document would be produced for Deans and Associate Deans of Research to
disseminate to academics. The exercise would also be repeated with College Executives for
TRAC for Teaching.
•
The data suggested that Exeter had opportunities to improve its recovery rates and to
generate more headroom for the institution. It was important to look for efficiencies and learn
how to be smarter in improving the recovery of full economic costs (FEC) from research.
•
Appendix 1B presented the income as a percentage of FEC for different types of research.
The University needed to consider and maximise those research types that delivered the
highest rate of recovery.
•
There was still an issue in the way in which colleagues returned timesheets. There was
potentially an overstating of the cost of research due to the working week definition. The roll
out of the use of SWARM should eliminate this.
•
The institution-own funded research had the lowest FEC recovery rate. This raised a number
of cultural and HR issues around the expectation that all staff were entitled to carry out
research. However, there were very few academics that were funded entirely be research
grants. Institution-own funded research was important for junior staff who had not yet won
grants and for blue sky thinking.
•
The low FEC recovery rate for research funded by charities was an issue in particular for the
Medical School. However, research income from prestigious charities such as the Wellcome
Trust was not to be discouraged but instead needed to be balanced with other categories of
research income. Although charities did not generally contribute to overheads, charity
support QR was an attempt by HEFCE to supplement charity awards.
•
It was very important to educate colleagues about TRAC and how research was paid for.
This would be an item on the agenda at the joint meeting of Council and Senate in May.
Council retrospectively APPROVED the TRAC returns and reasonableness tests.
15.36
HEFCE’s Assessment of Institutional Risk
Council RECEIVED HEFCE’s annual assessment of institutional risk (CNL/15/37).
It was NOTED that the University was at this time ‘not at higher risk’ and that this was the best
possible outcome.
15.37
Affixing the Seal of the University
Council AUTHORISED the fixing of the University seal to the documents listed in CNL/15/38.
15.38
Chair’s Closing Remarks (COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE)
JW/JAL
12 May 2015
M:\Exec Officer\COUNCIL\2014-15\April 2015\Council Minutes 16 April 2015.doc
Page 7 of 7