Newcastle University - Strategic Risk Register (October 2013)
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1:
SR1A Failure to publish adequate
research outputs
1.
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
TOP 20 IN THE UK FOR RESEARCH
Monitoring of research outputs through MyImpact.
In part
MyImpact IT
System, Monitoring
by URC and EB
Deans of
Research
Overall Status:
AMBER
Risk owned by Nick Wright
Triggered by:
1. Failure of PDR framework
2. Resistance from staff
3. Management inaction
4. HEFCE QR funding removed
for 2* research
1. Work towards the REF
raises concerns given the
removal of 2* funding.
2.
Comprehensive system of Performance & Development
Review (PDR) in place and fully implemented.
No
SAP HR System
2. Securing a much higher
coverage of the PDR system
is a key management
objective.
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
Consequences:
1. Reduced funding after next REF
2. Loss of reputation
KPI: Research Output - Impact Relative to World 2003 – 2012
2
NEWCASTLE UNIV
--UK TOTALS
1.8
--UK: RUSSELL GROUP TOTALS
World Average
1.6
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Cited Year
RISK SCORES
Impact relative to world is defined as “the percentage of documents that have been cited relative to the total number of documents cited in the
world (a value greater than 1 indicates the impact is better than the average for the world).”
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
3
12
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1:
1.
SR1B Failure to obtain new
research grants and contracts
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
TOP 20 IN THE UK FOR RESEARCH
Monitoring and benchmarking of awards and income through
University Research Committee and EB.
Yes
Research
Committee Papers
D Hill
Overall Status:
AMBER
Risk Owned by Nick Wright
Triggered by:
1. Reduction in budgets for
research support
2. Failure to develop research
initiatives
3. Failure to respond to changes in
respective research markets
2.
Continued monitoring of changes in priorities and delivery
plans of major funder at Faculty and institutional level.
Yes
Research
Committee Papers
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
3.
Faculty Plans.
Yes
Planning Process
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
Consequences:
1. Loss of revenue
2. Underutilisation of resources
Status reflects national
budgets being frozen and
changing priorities of
funders evidenced through
delivery plans.
.
Newcastle University – Research Grants and Contract Income
08/09
RG&CI £84.5m
09/10
£85.2m
10/11
£88.5m
11/12
£86.0m
12/13
£93.4m
Research Grants and Contract Income
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
95
£millions
90
85
80
RISK SCORES
75
70
08/09
09/10
10/11
11/12
12/13
Page 2 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
2
8
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1:
SR1C Failure to recover sufficient
research income
Evidence of Control
in Place
TOP 20 IN THE UK FOR RESEARCH
1.
Clear understanding of the research cost base
Yes
TRAC return to
HEFCE
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
2.
Robust application costing and pricing system in place
Yes
MyProjects
system
Director of
RES
3.
Clear guidance to academic staff on the importance of
contribution and margin on research income to their
Unit/Faculty
Yes
Guidance on web,
minutes of FEB
(FMS)
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
4.
Clear policy for using contribution and margin from research
awards for the human and capital infrastructure in a way that
incentivises staff and supports the strategic objectives of the
Faculty as a whole
Yes
Capital Capacity
Fund in SAgE,
Sustainability pot in
FMS and HaSS
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
5.
Planning and monitoring process in place to revise income
portfolio to favour sponsors funding close to FEC
Yes
Faculty plans,
KPIs set and
monitored in
Annual planning
meetings (FMS and
SAgE)
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
Risk owned by Chris Day, Steve
Homans and Charles Harvey
Triggered by:
1. Failure to secure sufficient
research contribution
2. Failure to price funding
applications appropriately
3. Failure to understand our cost
base
4. Change in funder policies to
reduce contribution
5. Overemphasis on income
sources where sponsors will not
fund at approaching FEC
Consequences:
1. Insufficient income generated to
support renewal of research
infrastructure
2. Inability to contribute to general
support
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
KPI
Total University contribution £000
Total University contribution
Charity QR £000
2008/09
18,932
22%
4,176
Overall Status:
GREEN
2009/10
20,521
24%
4,681
2010/11
21,507
24%
4,958
2011/12
17,407
20%
5,035
Page 3 of 25
2012/13
17,173
18%
4,783
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
4
12
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2:
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
TOP 20 IN THE UK FOR STUDENT SATISFACTION
SR2A Failure to recognise student
expectations and to deliver on the
student experience
1.
Clear and owned Learning, Teaching and Student Experience
Strategy. Revised Learning, Teaching and Student Experience
Strategy to be approved in December 2013.
Yes
Learning, Teaching
and Student
Experience Strategy
S Cholerton
Risk owned by Suzanne Cholerton
2.
Implementation of Newcastle University offer for undergraduates
across campuses. Development of Offer for postgraduate taught
student experience
Yes
Activities
monitored by
ULTSEC
governance structure
S Cholerton
3.
Local and University-wide systems for student engagement,
consultation and feedback established
Yes
Institutional Student
Representation
Policy.
Implementation of
student module
evaluation system
monitored by
ULTSEC
S Cholerton
4.
High quality services provided for students – sport, library,
computing, student progress service, student wellbeing service.
Yes
Annual Plans
published and
delivery monitored
by ULTSEC
L Braiden
5.
Investment planned for student residential accommodation
Yes
Accommodation
Strategy
M Hunter
6.
Opportunities for employment related skills development open to
all.
Yes
Careers Service
Annual Report
monitored by
ULTSEC
M Lintern
Triggered by:
1. Lack of good quality teaching
and IT facilities
2. Teaching that does not support
the student learning experience
3. Staff not engaging with students
4. Failure to provide sufficient
good quality student
accommodation
5. Failure to deliver value for
money
Consequences:
1. Poor performance in NSS, ISB,
PRES, PTES and League Tables
2. Failure to attract students in
sufficient numbers and of
sufficient quality
3. Reputational damage
4. Poor continuation rates
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
KPI: National Student Survey Overall Satisfaction Scores
Question 22. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of the course.
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
87%
87%
89%
89%
90%
Newcastle rank joint 9th for overall satisfaction for the comparator group of 35 institutions.
Newcastle overall satisfaction target is 90%.
Page 4 of 25
Overall Status:
AMBER
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
3
12
Risk, Description and Owner
Controls Required
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2:
SR2B Failure to maintain teaching
quality and standards
Control In
Place and
Working
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
TOP 20 IN THE UK FOR STUDENT SATISFACTION
1.
Clearly articulated and owned Learning, Teaching and Student
Experience Strategy. Revised Learning, Teaching and Student
Experience Strategy to be approved in December 2013.
Yes
Learning, Teaching
& Student
Experience Strategy
S Cholerton
2.
Quality assurance mechanisms in place for internal and external
validation.
Yes
ULTSEC minutes
E Clewlow
3.
Implementation of student module evaluation system
No
Steering Group and
Scorecard
L Braiden
4.
Comprehensive system of Performance and Development Review
(PDR) and effective management of staff in place.
Yes
SAP HR System
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
5.
Implement Action Plan for QAA Institutional 2009 Audit
recommendations.
Yes
QAA comments.
E Clewlow
6.
Work with schools to improve NSS, ISB, PRES and PTES
performance.
Yes
NSS Scores on
Planning Website.
Action plans
monitored by
ULTSEC
governance structure
S Cholerton
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
7.
Investment in spaces and facilities, combined with high quality
services provided for students – estates, sport, library, computing,
student progress service, student wellbeing service.
Yes
Annual Plans
published and
delivery monitored
by ULTSEC
S Cholerton
Overall Status:
GREEN
Risk owned by Suzanne Cholerton
Triggered by:
1. Failure to commit to the
Newcastle Offer
2. Poor performance of academic
staff
3. Loss of key academic staff
4. Loss of teaching facilities
5. Poor teaching facilities
6. Failure to meet external
accreditation standards
7. Failure of quality assurance
processes
8. Failure to implement November
2009 QAA Audit
recommendations
Consequences:
1. External accreditations withdrawn
2. Damage to reputation
3. Difficult to attract students
4. Poor NSS, ISB, PRES and PTES
scores
KPI: National Student Survey – Overall School Satisfaction
Council Key Performance Indicator Target is for all schools to have a 90% minimum for Overall Satisfaction.
2011 NSS
2012 NSS
2013 NSS
100%
3
2
1
90% - 99% 80% - 89% 70% - 79% 60% - 69%
17
15
6
0
18
14
2
1
26
11
2
0
Page 5 of 25
Implementation of institutionwide student module
evaluation system 13/14
5.
QAA recognition that
‘the University appears to
have made good progress
in addressing the
recommendations of the
Institutional Audit’, April
2010.
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
2
8
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2:
SR2C Failure to achieve widening
participation benchmarks and
Access Agreement milestones
1.
Consequences:
1. Reputational damage
2. Loss of W.P. income and some
threat to fee income
3. Inability to charge higher fees
for Home Undergraduates
2.
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
TOP 20 IN THE UK FOR STUDENT SATISFACTION
Widening Participation Strategy and Widening Participation
Strategic Statement (WPSS) in place and updated annually.
Yes
Risk owned by Suzanne Cholerton
Triggered by:
1. Decreasing numbers of
appropriate student applications
2. Loss of or reduction in targeted
funding
3. Change to fee regime
4. Change to HEFCE number
controls
Evidence of Control
in Place
Strong and well-established PARTNERS Programme and
partnerships with 130 schools and colleges in target regions.
Strong links with others in broad Northern region (through
Graduate Ambassadors) and plans for significant growth.
Yes
2014 Access
Agreement; WPSA;
Admission of students
through schemes and
WP progress
L Braiden
External moderator
and evaluation
reports; Number of
partnerships, Student
& Grad Ambassadors
L Braiden
Overall Status:
AMBER
LPN intake has been broadly
in line with HESA
benchmarks since 2005-06.
Other WP benchmarks (state
schools; NS-SEC 4-7) more
challenging to meet.
3.
Setting and agreeing WP targets for Schools in context of
HEFCE number controls and Access Agreement targets
Yes
Planning and delivery
of annual Admissions
Strategy (Agreed
ABB+ strategy doc);
faculty and School
WP targets
L Braiden,
S Homans,
C Harvey,
C Day
4.
Admissions Policy reviewed and revised annually.
Yes
UG Admissions
Policy and Minutes of
Fair Access
Committee
K Hind
All WP benchmarks
significantly exceeded for
regional intake. University
strategy for recruitment from
outside the region is to be a
net importer of talent to the
North East.
Many of the factors that
affect WP are outside
University control and
influence e.g. structural
inequalities.
KPI: Young full-time first degree entrants from low participation neighbourhoods
Newcastle (%)
Benchmark (%)
07/08
6.6
7.4
08/09
6.3
6.8
09/10
7.9
7.0
10/11
7.5
7.0
11/12
7.3
6.8
12/13*
7.4
* provisional
Progress over Time:
PROBLEMATIC/Satisfactory/Good
8.0
7.5
7.0
Newcastle (%)
6.5
RISK SCORES
Benchmark (%)
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
4
16
6.0
07/08
08/09
09/10
10/11
11/12
Page 6 of 25
12/13
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: FOCUS ON THREE SOCIETAL CHALLENGE THEMES: AGEING; SOCIAL RENEWAL; SUSTAINABILITY
SR3A Failure to develop Newcastle
Science City in a manner
consistent with the Strategic
Overview
1.
Formal partnership structure established with the City.
Yes
Risk owned by Nick Wright
Two Page
Document ‘Science
City Formal
Company
Structure,’ 6 month
reports to Council
N Wright
Overall Status:
GREEN
The relationship with the
City Council is strong.
Need to appoint a new CEO
of Science City Co.
Triggered by:
1. Disagreements with partner
2. New national policies
2.
Consequences:
1. Reputational damage
2. Unsustainable estate
3. Significant financial losses
University Special Interest Group containing members of
Council.
Yes
Special Interest
Group
N Wright
KPI: Research Income from Industry (£000s)
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
UK industry, commerce & public corporations
4,154
4,375
5,864
3,911
4,169
EU industry, commerce & public corporations
506
571
647
856
547
Non-EU industry, commerce & public corporations
1,468
1,088
992
1,583
1,963
TOTAL
6,128
6,034
7,503
6,350
6,679
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
6,000
4,000
UK
EU
2,000
RISK SCORES
Non-EU
0
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Page 7 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: FOCUS ON THREE SOCIETAL CHALLENGE THEMES: AGEING; SOCIAL RENEWAL; SUSTAINABILITY
SR3B Failure to gain institutional
buy in to the societal challenge
themes concept.
1.
Strategic funds available to support initiatives.
Yes
Annual budget
round
R Dale
Overall Status:
AMBER
2.
Faculty management structure established for each theme from
year 2 on.
Yes
Institute structure in
faculties
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
Risk owned by Nick Wright
Triggered by:
1. Failure to communicate issues
2. Staff resistance
Consequences:
1. Failure to achieve strategic
objective
2. Loss of partnership opportunities
3. Reputational damage
Societal Challenge Themes
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
The identification and establishment of 3 themes;

Ageing– Featured the Changing Age campaign, which is now being sustained in the Faculty of Medical Sciences. Institute for Ageing
and Health has been the driving force behind the vision for a unique Campus for Ageing and Vitality.

Sustainability – Led by SAgE Faculty. Newcastle Institute for Research on Sustainability (NIReS).

Social Renewal – Led by HaSS Faculty. Newcastle Institute for Social renewal created as a hub for research activity.
Page 8 of 25
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
4
12
NET
3
2
6
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: FOCUS ON THREE SOCIETAL CHALLENGE THEMES: AGEING; SOCIAL RENEWAL; SUSTAINABILITY
SR3C Failure to secure and exploit
intellectual property assets
1.
Policies to protect patents approved and communicated.
Yes
Patents approved
and communicated
Director of
RES
2.
Angel Alliance established with Durham.
Yes
Angel Alliance
Web Page
N Wright
3.
Faculty Deans appointed to lead on the processes supported by
Research and Enterprise Services.
Yes
Patents and Spin
Offs
C Day, S
Homans, C
Harvey
Overall Status:
GREEN
Risk owned by Nick Wright
Triggered by:
1. Loss of IP asset to third party
2. No use made of IP asset
Consequences:
1. Missed reputation enhancement
opportunities
KPI: Patents Filed/Granted and Company Spin Outs
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Number of Patents Filed
21
22
20
23
17
Number of Patents Granted
6
3
2
4
4
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2012/13
5
3
5
5
1
Number of new Spin Out
companies created
2012/13 numbers are preliminary
Page 9 of 25
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
3
9
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: A SIGNIFICANT INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PROFILE AND REPUTATION
SR4A Failure to develop a significant
international profile
Risk owned by Ella Ritchie
Triggered by:
1. Failure to leverage reputational
capital from our diverse
international activity
2. Failure to provide sufficient
governance and support services for
international projects
3. Failure to capitalise on SIT initiative
4. Failure to develop NUMED
Malaysia as a high quality
international branch medical
campus
Consequences:
1. Loss of revenue.
1.
Strategic framework for internationalisation agreed.
Yes
The international
strategy and
implementation plan
E Ritchie
2.
International Executive Group co-ordinating and tracking activity to
ensure a “One University” approach.
Yes
International
Executive Group
Minutes
E Ritchie
3.
Use membership of the Russell Group, UUK International and Europe
Board and EUA to leverage international profile.
Yes
Membership of these
groups
E Ritchie
4.
Business case procedures used for all international projects.
Yes
FMBSG and EB
Monitoring process
R Dale
5.
Ensure that SIT project delivers programmes and complies with QA.
ULTSEC ensures QA compliance
Yes
Minutes of the SIT
Project Monitoring
E Ritchie, S
Cholerton
6.
Ensure NUMed Malaysia is developed within budget, meeting GMC
and other regulatory requirements and with operational integration
with the Faculty.
Yes
Minutes of the Board
meetings
R Jordan, E
Ritchie
7.
Business partnership with INTO.
Yes
Performance of the
Joint Venture.
EB/Council Reports.
AC Stevenson
8.
Reputation and Ranking SIG recommendations including investment
in overseas PR and THE supplement
Yes
PR Strategy and
Action Plan
A Kelly
9.
Action plan for development of international profile, agreed by
Executive Board and Council
In part
Action Plan
E Ritchie
Yes
Responsibility with
DVC.
E Ritchie
10. Responsibility for international activity allocated to an EB member
KPI: Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings

Newcastle World Rank 2012-13: =180th. Overall score 2012/13: 48.6

Newcastle World Rank 2011-12: 146th. Overall score 2011/12: 47

Newcastle World Rank 2010-11: 152nd. Overall score 2010/11: 51.2



Overall Status:
AMBER
1. Fall in 2012 THE World
League Table is disappointing
2. Need improved
communications about
international activities – linked
to PR.
3. Research project planned to
look at international
membership groups and which
we should join.
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
Newcastle World Ranking on International Outlook 2012 -13: 52nd Overall score 2012/13: 74.4
Newcastle World Ranking on International Outlook 2011 -12: 48th. Overall score 2011/12: 76.2
Newcastle World Ranking on International Outlook 2010-11: 37th. Overall score 2010/11: 80.5
Page 10 of 25
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
3
12
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: A SIGNIFICANT INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PROFILE AND REPUTATION
SR4B Failure to maintain
academic and financial viability of
the NUMed Malaysia campus
1.
Agreement with GMC to accredit programme.
No
Correspondence
with GMC, Visit
reports
C Day, R
Barton
Risk Owned by Chris Day
2.
Devise appropriate HR policies to facilitate the appointment of
academic staff to work in Malaysia.
Yes
HR policies for
staff overseas
Ex. Dir. Of
HR
3.
Clear marketing strategy and timely student recruitment
campaigns
Yes
NUMed Steering
Group documents
and minutes
L Smith, R
Jordan
4.
Student accommodation – ensure it is fit-for-purpose and has
capacity for student number growth.
Yes
Accommodation
now substantially
complete – need to
monitor capacity
with increased
student numbers
E Ritchie, R
Dale
5.
Staff recruitment and succession planning needs identified and
substantial succession planning achieved.
Yes
NUMed Advisory
Group and Steering
Group minutes
C Day
6.
Development of additional courses (e.g. Masters programmes)
at marginal cost and delivery of Biomedical Sciences
programme from 2013
Yes
NUMed Steering
Group minutes,
FMBSG business
cases
B Hirst(PG);
Jane Calvert
(UG)
Triggered by:
1. Failure to meet recruitment
targets and maintain financial
viability
2. Failure to achieve GMC and
MMC accreditation
3. Failure to provide student
accommodation
4. Failure to recruit and retain
appropriate academic staff
including a failure of
succession planning
Consequences:
1. MBBS course in Newcastle
loses GMC accreditation
2. Reduced fee income
3. Inability to deliver courses
4. Loss of reputation
5. Poor student satisfaction
Overall Status:
AMBER
Accreditation risk is being
managed proactively.
Good recruitment in
September 2012 – 118 and
good anticipated recruitment
2013
First additional courses
being delivered in 2013
KPIs
1. Accreditation by GMC and MMC (5 years from start of course): in active dialogue with GMC and MMC, proceeding well.
2. Student intake:
2009 actual
2009 target
40
24
2010 target
40
2010 actual
40
2011 target
100
2011 actual
57
Note: GMC cannot confirm accreditation until the degree is actually awarded.
Page 11 of 25
2012 target
100
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
2012 actual
118
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
5
15
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: A SIGNIFICANT INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PROFILE AND REPUTATION
SR4C Failure to maintain the
academic and financial viability of the
Singapore campus
Risk owned by Steve Homans
Triggered by:
1. Failure to recruit/retain staff of
sufficient quality
2. Failure to recruit students
3. Failure to deliver parity of
experience for staff and students
4. Failure to establish effective
governance structure
5. Inconsistent approach across
various subject areas
6. Failure to maintain a positive
working relationship with SIT
7. Failure to exercise proper financial
control
Consequences:
1.
Potential reduction of income from
Singapore and possible jeopardy of
the overall Faculty surplus position
2.
Significant impact on reputation
and international visibility
1.
HR polices have been devised and are reviewed and revised on a
regular basis in order to facilitate the appointment of experienced staff
to deliver the programmes in Singapore.
Yes
HR policies for staff
overseas; Staff
Committee minutes
V Johnston
Overall Status:
GREEN
2.
Development of and effective induction and acclimatisation
programme, PDR process and effective staff development programme
in place
Yes
PDR records, SAP
training records,
induction programmes
HoS, SDU
Major review of policies to take
place in Summer 2013;
3.
New governance structure has been developed and being implemented
with 2 new senior appointments to support local management and
consistent operation.
Yes
Steering Group, UEB,
Senate minutes
S Homans
Head of Academic Operations
and Chief Operating Officer
posts to be recruited in summer
2013
4.
Delivery of Singapore based NSS type survey on an annual basis and
production of actin plans to address weaknesses.
Yes
Survey results,
Steering Group
minutes
HoS
5.
Develop satisfactory financial controls on expenditure.
Yes
Financial protocol,
audit reports
R Dale
6.
Development of a coherent Health & Safety Policy across all sites
Yes
Faculty Safety
Committee minutes;
Steering Group mins
S Homans
7.
Lead person identified from each Service with responsibility for
supporting NUIS with appropriate attendance at the Operational
Group
Yes
List of responsible
staff; Operational
group notes
J Golightly
8.
Production of a Research Strategy and operational plan for NUIS
Yes
Steering Group
minutes; URC
minutes
E Mesbahi
9.
Close working with SIT on future plans and feedback to the NUIS
Board and Steering Group
Yes
Steering Group
minutes
E Mesbahi
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
KPI: Student Numbers
o
o
o
Undergraduate numbers in Singapore – 527 registered as at 27.09.13, 610 expected
Taught postgraduate numbers in Singapore – 35 registered as at 27.09.13, 45 expected
Research postgraduate numbers Singapore – 12 registered, 16 expected
Page 12 of 25
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
3
12
NET
4
2
8
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: A SIGNIFICANT INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PROFILE AND REPUTATION
SR4D Failure to maintain effective
relationships with key external
stakeholders
1.
Information provided to students and student bodies on
expected standards of behaviour.
Yes
The number of
Student
Disciplinary Cases
L Braiden
Risk owned by Ella Ritchie
2.
Liaison mechanisms with Newcastle City Council and
Northumberland County Council on MOU issues.
Yes
Monthly
University/City
Council Meetings
subgroup meetings
with NCC
E Ritchie
3.
Close working relationships established with NHS partners
with regular meetings and exchange of information.
Yes
Newcastle
Biomedicine joins
the University with
the Newcastle
Hospitals NHS
Foundation Trust
C Day
4.
Dean of Clinical Medicine and Dean of Translational Research
posts established specifically to facilitate the ongoing
relationship with the NHS.
Yes
Deans posts
C Day
5.
Proactive PR arrangements.
Yes
Number of positive
news stories
A Kelly
Triggered by:
1. Incidents involving students
2. Failure to manage NHS
partnership
3. Failure to manage PR effectively
4. Political pressures
5. Adverse publicity caused by
business relationships
Consequences:
1. Strained relationships with
Community stakeholders
2. Problems with joint working or
approval processes
Overall Status:
GREEN
1. Increasingly good
relationships over time with
city and other stakeholders
ie Northumberland County
Council
KPI: Number of Monthly Media Stories (through Google News) for selected comparators
October 2012
March 2013
Newcastle
2,740
1,370

Negative stories can be filtered out of media coverage if known about.
Durham
607
993

Leeds
1,560
925
The coverage may include items relating to overseas universities with
the same name.
Bristol
642
1,288

Warwick
1,345
977
Nottingham
2,130
1,450
There may be some key word 'aggregating' - the search engine will
sometimes collate a number of stories on one subject and only include
one link, whilst at other times, each story will have a separate link.
This appears to be random and will therefore randomly affect results.
Sheffield
2, 570
1,750
York
455
758
Progress over Time:
Problematic/Satisfactory/GOOD
RISK SCORES
Page 13 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
3
9
NET
3
2
6
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4: A SIGNIFICANT INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PROFILE AND REPUTATION
SR4E Failure to establish an
effective engagement with our
alumni.
1.
Dedicated team to manage the alumni database and obtain
information.
Yes
DARO database
Risk Owned by Ella Ritchie.
2.
Strategy for alumni relations prepared after consultation with
the Alumni Consultative Group.
Yes
Alumni strategy
3.
Appropriate mechanism for communication with the alumni
including web, newsletters, email and social media.
Yes
DARO
communications
plan
Triggered by:
1. Poor information on the
whereabouts of the alumni.
2. Failure to engage with the alumni
3. Lack of a strategy for the
development of alumni relations
Overall Status:
AMBER
Although the controls are in
place, the departure of the
Director of Development
and the issue of joining up
the work of DARO with
other services justifies an
amber rating.
.
Consequences:
1. Failure to maximise marketing
opportunities and enhance
reputation and brand
2. Reduced opportunities for student
recruitment
3. Loss of income
KPI: Alumni for whom we have an electronic or postal address
Total Population
Total Contactable
% Contactable
Alumni
161,419
108,228
67.0%
Graduate
159,974
106,955
66.9%
175
141
80.6%
1,252
1,115
89.1%
18
17
94.4%
Honorary Graduate
Retired Staff
Honorary Fellow
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
Page 14 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
4
12
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5A Failure to maintain a
financially robust pensions provision
1.
Regular actuarial valuations of both national (USS) and local
(RBP) schemes.
Yes
Actuarial Value
R Dale
2.
Strong University covenant to RBP.
Yes
PWC Report
R Dale
3.
RBP funding recovery plan to be agreed with the Pensions
Regulator
No
Funding Recovery
Plan
R Dale
Overall Status:
RED
Risk owned by Richard Dale
Triggered by:
1. Improving mortality trends
2. Failure to manage schemes
effectively
3. Sustained downturn in equity
markets
4. Failure to manage pay trends
and/or promotional drift
5. Failure to reform scheme rules
6. Early retirements creating
unfunded pressure on schemes
Consequences:
1. Significant and unaffordable
increase in the University’s cost
base
2. Requirement for contingent assets
and/or one off cash payments
3. Dispute with the Pensions
Regulator
1. Next RBP valuation due 1
August 2013, next USS
valuation due 31 March 2014.
USS position known to be
worsening –see KPI’s
2. Updated covenant report to
be commissioned by Trustees
for RBP during summer 2013
and being conducted by Ernst
and Young for USS.
4.
Regular review of RBP investment strategy and performance by
Trustees and University
Yes
Minutes of
Investment Sub
Committee
R Dale,
S Wilmot
5.
Changes in pension costs to be included as key sensitivity for
financial planning and budget setting exercises.
Yes
Annual Financial
Planning Guidelines
A Bell
3. RBP recovery plan waiting
for approval from the
Pensions Regulator.
6.
Long term strategy reviews for RBP including impact of
introduction of stakeholder pensions.
Yes
n/a
R Dale,
V Johnston
7.
Work with Employers’ Pension Forum and Russell Group to
influence management and development of USS scheme
No
USS structural
changes
C Brink
R Dale,
V Johnston
6. Auto enrolment introduced
in May 2013. Lifetime
allowances due to be reduced
from £1.5m to £1.25m in
April 2014
KPI: RBP and USS Actuarial Valuations
7. USS structural changes
introduced October 2011.
Progress over Time:
PROBLEMATIC/Satisfactory/Good
RBP: 31 July 2010 £7.3m deficit (5% of liabilities)
31 July 2012 £7.1m deficit (4% of liabilities)
USS: 31 March 2011 £2.9bn deficit (8% of liabilities)
May 2013 ca £10bn deficit (20% of liabilities)
Page 15 of 25
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
5
4
20
NET
4
4
16
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5B Failure to maintain financial
viability
Risk owned by Richard Dale
Triggered by:
1. Reduction in HEFCE funding
2. Failure to manage cost base,
notably pay inflation
3. Failure to meet student
recruitment targets (home and
international).
4. Failure in financial management
or internal controls
5. Loss of research grants or
commercial income
6. Failure to manage risk on cash
investments
Consequences:
1. Cuts in services and activities
2. Breach of banking covenants
1.
Clearly articulated and owned financial strategy which maintains
financial viability.
Yes
Financial Strategy
R Dale
2.
Clear budget ownership and accountability.
Yes
Annual Budget
Approved by Council
AC Stevenson
3.
Monitoring of quarterly accounts by FMBSG and Finance Committee.
Yes
Quarterly Accounts
A Tobin
A Bell
4.
Robust investment management policy.
Yes
Reports to Finance
Committee
A Tobin
5.
Robust capital planning and management processes.
Yes
FMBSG
R Dale
6.
Robust internal and external audit process.
Yes
Internal and external
audit reports
J Simpson
A Tobin
7.
Development of lead indicators to predict changes in environment.
Yes
New HEFCE ASSUR
report
R Dale,
S Frater
8.
Use of TRAC to drive financial sustainability.
Yes
Annual TRAC
Reports
A Bell
9.
Work with Russell Group, UUK and others to promote need for sector
sustainability.
Yes
Russell Group and
UUK publications
C Brink
R Dale
10. Work with UCEA to restrain pay increases.
Yes
Regular consultation
by UCEA with
employers
V Johnston
11. Completion of efficiency programmes notably “One university” and
“Procure to Pay”.
Yes
Project Scorecards
J Hogan
R Dale
12. Controls to meet student recruitment targets (Home and Intl.)
Yes
see SR5I/SR5J
S Cholerton
13. Agreement of future fees strategy
Yes
Approval by Senate
and Council
AC Stevenson
KPI: Financial surplus as a percentage of income
Overall Status:
GREEN
2012-13 forecast results ahead
of budget and markedly better
than 2011-12 before
exceptional items
7. Newcastle has been pilot
University for HEFCE
initiative on reporting
financial sustainability.
10. Risk (and potential
opportunity) of national pay
bargaining arrangements
ending under review by the
University
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
Target: > 4% of income excluding exceptional items
RISK SCORES
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
2013-14
5.7%
6.1%
3.6%
5.3%
3.8%
Page 16 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
5
4
20
NET
4
3
12
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5C Failure to have an
appropriate information strategy
and control of data
1.
University wide information strategy operating
Yes
Strategy approved by
Council June 2013
T Stevenson
2.
Mechanism to review processes, to assess development needs and
prioritise development resources.
Yes
Digital Campus
Steering Group
S Williams
3.
Systems established to meet requirements of Freedom of
Information Act.
Yes
Information Security
Team
S Williams
4.
Information Security policy in place.
Yes
Information Security
Policy
S Williams
5.
Data backup protocols in place and tested across university.
Yes
Data Backup
Protocols
S Williams
6.
Data assurance framework.
Yes
Formal signoff
process (approved by
Audit Committee)
S Frater
7.
Off site machine room (DataBanx) available for critical IT
systems.
Yes
Internal Audit
Report
S Williams
Risk owned by John Hogan
Triggered by:
1. Failure to define, agree and
implement information strategy
2. Failure to protect data
3. Failure of primary data centre
4. Inability to obtain management
data.
Consequences:
1. Inadequate management
information
2. Failure of support for Learning &
Teaching and Research
3. Loss of data
4. Reputation damage
5. Poor Value for Money
6. Failure to present data in an
appropriate manner that is used
for newspaper league tables
KPI: National Student Survey Q17. I have been able
to access general IT resources when I needed to.
2013: 92%
2012: 86%
2011: 82%
2010: 83%
2009: 88%
KPI: 2013 Employee Opinion Survey (2010 in parentheses)
 University computer systems are reliable 87% (90%)
 University computer systems are easy to use 84% (82%)
 Respondents can easily find help with the computer systems
when needed 84% (82%)
Overall Status:
Amber
4. But we realise that there are
operational weaknesses and
increasing national concerns
about cyber crime. These are
very difficult to address and
the controls cannot fully guard
against attacks.
KPI: Number of FOI requests received and responded to in time
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
TOTAL
Total Received Responded in Time
78
74
90
86
142
135
153
144
196
182
659
621
Page 17 of 25
% in Time
95%
96%
95%
94%
93%
94%
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
4
16
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5D Failure to respond to severe
business disruption event
1.
Health & Safety and Security staff and systems in place.
Yes
Health & Safety
Policy Approved by
Council
G
Westwater,
B McBride
2.
Local Incident Plans
Yes
The Plans
G Westwater
3.
Local Incident Business Continuity Plan
Yes
n/a
G Westwater
G Morton
4.
Major Incident and Business Continuity Plans.
Yes
The Plans
G Westwater
5.
Off site machine room (DataBanx) available for critical IT
systems
Yes
Internal Audit
Insurance Report
S Williams
6.
Full range of insurance policies in place.
Yes
Report to Finance
Committee
A Tobin
7.
Communications plans to cover building PA systems, IT
systems and Press plan.
No
n/a
J Hogan
Overall Status:
AMBER
Risk owned by John Hogan
Triggered by:
1. Major business disruption event.
2. Lack of prepared response
measures.
3. Lack of full functioning
secondary data centre
Consequences:
1. Inability to teach students
2. Inability to conduct research
3. Loss of other critical business
activity.
4. Reputational damage
KPI: Number of serious incidences.
2. Local Incident Plans are
in place. University Incident
Room located at 10 Eldon
Place is equipped and fully
operational.
3. Local business continuity
plans are in place for
virtually all operational
units.
4. Floods highlighted the
need for improved
prevention and response
measures which are being
implemented.
7. Systems now in place for
phone and email coverage.
But full review not yet
conducted.
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
2012/13: 3
2011/12: 6
2010/11: 4
2009/10: 1
2008/09: 0
RISK SCORES
Page 18 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
5
3
15
NET
4
3
12
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5E Failure of management of
major projects
1.
Robust investment review and approval process.
Yes
FMBSG Reports
R Dale
Overall Status:
GREEN
2.
Oversight of major projects by named senior officer.
Yes
Steering Group
Reports
AC
Stevenson
3.
Capital project methodology established in Estate Support Service.
Yes
Project Methodology
Guide
C Rogers
4.
Project scorecards completed monthly for all major projects with
regular scrutiny.
Yes
Scorecards
R Dale
5.
Digital Campus Steering Group overseeing progress of IT projects
Yes
DCSG agenda and
minutes
AC
Stevenson
Risk owned by Richard Dale
Triggered by:
1. Major project undertaken without
approval or management plan in
place.
2. Project management plan not
suitable
3. Major cost overruns and/or delays
4. Failure to manage Regional
European Funds in a way that is
deemed acceptable to the
Government Office.
Consequences:
1. Poor results, increased costs,
funding claw back and delays.
Regular reporting to FMBSG,
EB and Finance Committee
Progress over Time:
Problematic/Satisfactory/GOOD
KPI: Proportion of red risks from the summary scorecards that go to EB
July 2012: 0.7%
July 2013: 1.3%
RISK SCORES
Page 19 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
3
4
12
NET
2
3
6
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5F Failure to recruit, develop,
retain and reward staff of an
appropriate calibre
1.
Recruitment, retention and succession planning needs identified
by School/Institute/Service heads.
Yes
Succession planning
event chaired by VC,
Annual Plans
C Day,
S Homans,
C Harvey,
J Hogan
Risk owned by Veryan Johnston
2.
University level headcount planning.
Yes
Monthly Circulation
of headcount
R Burrow
3.
Clearly articulated and owned strategy for HR.
Yes
Strategy approved by
Council
V Johnston
4.
Staff Development Unit well established as a support service.
Yes
SDU, Employee
Opinion Survey
J Clark
5.
Comprehensive system of Performance & Development Review
(PDR) in place and fully implemented.
Yes
SAP HR quarterly
Monitoring System
C Day,
S Homans,
C Harvey,
J Hogan
6.
University level induction arrangements in place.
Yes
Induction
programme
J Clark
7.
Annual pay review process in place.
Yes
As reported to
Remuneration
Committee
G Coupland
8.
National pay bargaining structures in place.
Yes
UCEA
V Johnston
9.
Annual HR Plan for academic units including targeted recruitment
for academics.
No
To be implemented
Autumn 2013 for
2013/14 year
C Day,
S Homans,
C Harvey
Triggered by:
1. High turnover of staff
2. Difficulties in recruiting staff
3. Significant pay differentials with
other sectors
4. Lack of career development
opportunities
Consequences:
1. Reduced performance levels
2. Negative staff feedback
3. High levels of absence
4. Reduced quality of service
delivery

6. Local level induction is not
as comprehensive. Working
on improvements.
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
Employee Opinion Survey Results

Overall Status:
AMBER
In the 2013 survey by CAPITA, Newcastle University’s high scores meant they could be described as a ‘Employer of Choice,’ ranking in the
top 10 for the benchmark group
92% interviewed said the university is a good place to work, compared to 93% in 2010 and 90% in 2007. 82% interviewed said they feel able
to access the learning and development opportunities they require, compared to 79% in 2010 and 77% in 2007.
88% interviewed said they have had a PDR in the last 12 months, compared to 77% in 2010 and 73% in 2007.
Page 20 of 25
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5G Failure to maintain estate as
functionally suitable
1.
Up to date Estate development plan.
Yes
UK Development
Options Report
C Rogers
Risk owned by John Hogan
2.
3 year Major Projects financial plan approved by Council
annually (includes Long Term Maintenance).
Yes
Major Projects plan
R Dale
3.
ESS operational and monitoring procedures in place e.g.
functional suitability assessment process.
Yes
EMS Statistics
C Rogers
Triggered by:
1. Lack of investment funding.
2. Lack of agreed strategy and
competing priorities.
3. Poor cost controls and poor
Value for Money.
4. Insolvency of contractor.
5. Major asset failure or damage
Consequences:
1. Difficulties for core functions
(e.g. staff and student
recruitment, delivery of teaching
and research).
2. Reputational damage.
3. Non compliance with legislation
and possible prosecution.
4. Escalating cost and difficulty of
repairs/refurbishment if not dealt
with.
4.
Long Term Maintenance programme drawn up, based on
condition surveys and agreed prioritisation methodology,
integrated with major projects.
Yes
Approved by LTM
steering group and
FMBSG.
C Rogers
5.
Cost effective space utilisation being encouraged through space
cost allocation, space reduction plans in place.
Yes
Cost Driver Model
Faculty estate plan
C Rogers
6.
Performance indicators reported to EB quarterly and monitored
by ESS against annual targets.
Yes
Quarterly Reports
C Rogers
7.
Vetting of all contractors for solvency and competency for
major projects.
Yes
Vetting Reports
C Rogers
8.
Major project steering groups in place.
Yes
C Rogers
9.
Controls in place to manage risk of severe business disruption
through major estate incident
Yes
Scorecard Reports
to EB
The Plans
Overall Status:
GREEN
1. UK Development Options
Report approved by Council.
Flexible plan subject to
business case.
5. Governance in place.
Space Utilisation Committee
chaired by PVC. Estate
vision includes space
reduction plans.
9. Local business continuity
plans are in place for
virtually all operational
units.
G Westwater
KPI: EMS Statistics. Functional Suitability of the Estate.
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
2011/12
Condition*
84%
86%
87%
89%
89%
Peer Group Median Condition
80%
79%
81%
82%
NA
Functional Suitability**
81%
77%
79%
82%
82%
Peer Group Median Functional Suitability
86%
85%
88%
87%
NA
* % of floor space in condition category A & B.
** % of floor space in functional suitability Grade 1 & 2.
Our new targets for 2012/13 are 89% Condition and 84% Functional Suitability.
Page 21 of 25
Progress over Time:
Problematic/Satisfactory/GOOD
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
4
2
8
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5H Improper conduct of business
Risk owned by John Hogan
Triggered by:
1. Fraud
2. Entering into unauthorised
contractual situations
3. Failure to communicate policies
and procedures
4. Failure of health and safety
working practices and procedures
5. Conduct that brings the University
into dispute
6. Failure to adhere to ethical
procedures
Consequences:
1. Loss of income and exposure to
unknown liabilities
2. Potential prosecution
3. Claims against University and/or
individual officers
4. Reputational damage
5. Falling foul of the 2010 Bribery
Act
1.
Anti-fraud policies in place, including policy on whistle-blowing.
Yes
Whistle Blowing
Policy
J Hogan
2.
Internal Audit team reporting to Audit Committee.
Yes
Internal Audit Team
J Simpson
3.
Financial regulations & purchasing policies in place and policed.
Yes
Financial Regulations
R Dale
4.
Policy on gifts and hospitality in place.
Yes
The Policy
J Hogan
5.
Full range of insurance policies in place.
Yes
Report to Finance
Committee
A Tobin
6.
Safety policies and practices in place and clearly articulated through
local documents and the web.
Yes
Report to Safety
Committee
B McBride
7.
Health & Safety Strategy approved.
Yes
Report to Safety
Committee
B McBride
8.
Ethical approval systems in place with training provided and a new
ethics toolkit launched.
Yes
System part of
MyProjects
Director of
RES
9.
Ethical Policy for the Acceptance of Corporate Gifts and Donations:
Major Gifts
Yes
The Policy
Director of
Development
10. Appropriate HR policies in place.
Yes
Policies/Procedures
listed on Web
V Johnston
11. Contracts with international agents amended to take account of the
Bribery Act.
Yes
Contracts
J Terry
12. University code of ethics approved and in place
Yes
Code
J Hogan
KPI: Number of Whistle Blowing or similar accusations
2012/13: 1
2011/12: 1
2010/11: 0
2009/10: 0
2008/09: 0
KPI: Annual Assurance Returns to HEFCE ‘Material
Adverse Changes’
2012/13: 0
2011/12: 1
2010/11: 0
2009/10: 0
2008/09: 2
Overall Status:
GREEN
.
Progress over Time:
Problematic/Satisfactory/GOOD
RISK SCORES
Page 22 of 25
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
3
12
NET
3
3
9
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5I Failure to meet home student
recruitment targets
1.
Clear, approved and owned Student Recruitment Strategy
Yes
The strategy
S Cholerton
2.
Coherent and robust marketing activity (supported by strong strategic
positioning).
Yes
Annual Service
Strategic Plan/
operational plans
L Braiden
3.
UG and PG Admissions performance regularly monitored.
Yes
Quarterly Reports to
EB; Minutes of UG
Admissions
Monitoring Group
(monthly);
PG Admissions
Stakeholders’ Group.
L Braiden,
4.
Planning process for student number targets in place.
Yes
Student Planning
Annual Round
(Faculty
spreadsheets).
AC
Stevenson
5.
OFFA Access Agreement, permitted to charge over £6,000 for FT UG
Yes
2014 AA approved
L Braiden
6.
Agreed recruitment and admissions strategy in light of HEFCE
numbers controls.
Yes
Strategy is being
delivered (‘ABB+’
strategy document
and faculty quota and
WP targets)
L Braiden,
S Homans,
C Harvey,
C Day
Review of postgraduate taught provision to identify opportunities for
more flexible portfolio of PGT programmes
Yes
Monitored by
ULTSEC
S Cholerton
Risk owned by Suzanne Cholerton
Triggered by:
1. Higher tuition fees
2. Lack of understanding of the new
student support arrangements
3. Over recruitment against core quota
and inadequate recruitment of high
quality students
4. Poor performance in newspaper
league tables
5. Portfolio of programmes that does
not remain sufficiently attractive to
potential students
Consequences:
1. Reduced fee income
2. Potential to fall out of contract range
with HEFCE
3. Fines from HEFCE for over
recruitment of home students
7.
KPI: Number of Home New Entrant Students (from registration reports as at November 26 th)
2013/14 registration numbers not yet available.
Actual
2011/12
Target
2012/13
Registered
2012/13
UG
PGT - FT
PGT - PT
PGR - FT
PGR - PT
3,883
871
340
336
42
4,294
827
426
404
56
Total
5,472
6,007
Overall Status:
AMBER
This is the major focus of the
University’s senior
management at the present time.
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
3,698
765
333
343
36
Target Vs
Registered
-596
-62
-93
-61
-20
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
5
4
20
5,175
- 832
NET
4
3
12
Page 23 of 25
RISK SCORES
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
SR5J Failure to meet international
student recruitment targets
1.
Clear, approved and owned Student Recruitment Strategy
Yes
Student
Recruitment
Strategy
S Cholerton
Overall Status:
AMBER
Annual Service
Plan & monthly
reports to EB
L Braiden
Strong international
application trends. But huge
growth in China masks falls
in other markets.
Number of New
Pipeline
Programmes, (e.g.
SIT)
S Cholerton,
E Ritchie
4. Successful UKBA Audit.
Better understanding of
Home Office requirements
on attendance monitoring
This risk is likely to increase
if the Government’s policies
on reducing migrants are
implemented in line with
current discussions.
Risk owned by Ella Ritchie
2.
Triggered by:
1. Lack of University strategy
2. Failure of INTO project
3. Failure to issue CAS
(Confirmation of Acceptance for
Studies) promptly
4. Loss of UK Border Agency
licence
5. Significantly higher than target
international recruitment
6. Poor performance in newspaper
league tables
7. Changing pattern of
international student markets
Consequences:
1. Reduced fee income
3.
Coherent and robust marketing activity and strategic
positioning.
Development of new pipeline programmes delivered both in
Newcastle and internationally.
Yes
Yes
4.
Review academic performance of INTO, conversion of
students and integration of INTO staff and students.
Yes
Regular reports to
EB. Annual Report
to Council.
AC
Stevenson
5.
Procedures in place and creation of International Student
Management Group to ensure compliance with UKBA licence,
including attendance monitoring for Home Office purposes.
Yes
UKBA Assessment
L Braiden
6.
Effective structure and operation of the International Office.
Partly
Restructuring
proposals
L Braiden
INTO cumulative
performance is ahead of its
original business plan.
Restructuring of
International Office under
way but concerns about level
of resourcing to meet
business needs.
KPI: International New Entrant Student Numbers (from registration reports as at November 26 th)
2013/14 registration numbers not yet available.
Actual
2011/12
Target
2012/13
Registered
2012/13
Target Vs
Registered
UG
588
632
724
+ 92
- 215
PGT
1,761
1,902
1,687
PGR
168
221
176
- 45
Total
2,517
2,755
2,587
- 168
2012/13 International New Entrants Numbers – Top 5 Domiciles
(1)China 1,215 (2)India 147 (3)Malaysia 118 (4)USA 116 (5) Greece 94
Page 24 of 25
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
3
12
NET
4
3
12
Risk, Description and Owner
Control In
Place and
Working
Controls Required
Evidence of Control
in Place
Overall Control Status &
Proposed additional control
measures
Control
Owner
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 5: FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
Deliver Sustainability Strategy targets for ESS in the NonResidential Estate including achieving external accreditation to a
recognised Environmental Management System (EMS) covering
aspects including energy & carbon, water, waste & recycling,
transport & travel, and biodiversity.
Yes
2.
Establish and deliver Sustainability Strategy targets, action plan,
milestones and programme for Accommodation & Hospitality
Services in the Residential Estate including energy & carbon,
water, and waste & recycling.
Triggered by:
1. Failure to achieve the objectives
set out in our Operational
Sustainability Strategy
3.
Consequences:
1. Financial penalties
2. Reputational damage
4.
SR5K Failure to manage the
University in keeping with the ethos
of environmental sustainability
Risk owned by Tony Stevenson
Governance and progress against the
Sustainability Strategy Action Plan is
monitored by Environment and
Sustainability Committee (ESC),
chaired by Professor Tony Stevenson
(PVC P & R).
1.
EcoCampus
Platinum, ISO14001,
acheived July 2012;
Reaccreditation due
July 2013
C Rogers
Yes
Action Plan
submitted to ESC
and underway
M Hunter
Establish and deliver action plan, milestones and programme for
IT across the University, including developing an IT carbon
reduction plan.
Yes
Action plan created
S Williams
Establish and deliver Sustainability Strategy targets, action plan,
milestones and programme for Purchasing Services including
establishing a baseline for scope 3 CO2 emissions.
Yes
Baseline Established.
Target to be agreed
by ESC.
N Addison
Overall Status:
GREEN
3.
Green IT procurement
policy introduced; new
energy management
software rolled out across
the campus
Academic Sustainability is covered by the Sustainability Societal
Challenge Theme.
KPI’s: Environmental Sustainability
1. Target: Achieve Platinum EcoCampus award / ISO 14001. Achieved July2012. Re- accreditation Audit due July ‘13
2. Achieve a ‘First Class Honours’ award in the annual P&P Green League of Universities. Achieved 2012 and 2013.
3. Absolute reduction of 43% in scope 1&2 CO2 emissions by 2020 (2005/06 baseline). Emissions have increased from 40,687 tonnes CO2e to
45,697 tonnes.
4. Reduction in scope 1&2 CO2 emissions per m2 GIA from 92kg/m2 to 52kg/m2 by 2020. Emissions have increased from 92kg/m2 to 103kg/m2.
5. Reduce water consumption per staff and student FTE. Target: 15m 3 per staff and student FTE by July 2015. 2011/12 = 15.72m 3 – a 27%
reduction since 2005/06.
6. Maintain a general waste recycling rate above 90%. 2011/12 = 93%
7. Reduce proportion of staff driving to work to 22% by 2014. 20.5% in 2012
8. Achieve level 2 of the Flexible Framework for Procurement by July 2014. Currently level 1.
Page 25 of 25
Progress over Time:
Problematic/SATISFACTORY/Good
RISK SCORES
IMPACT
LIKELIHOOD
TOTAL
GROSS
4
4
16
NET
3
1
3