Paperless Processing – Case Study 10
Royal Holloway, University of London
28 June 2012
Following agreement at the UCAS Change User Group (CUG) that a series of case studies
demonstrating progress with paperless processing would be published on the SPA website; Matthew
Weller, Business Analyst, Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL), has provided a case study on
the paperless admissions system implemented at the institution. Thanks are extended to Matthew for his
work on this important area.
Admissions recording system in use
Volume of applications dealt with
without paper
Are all courses covered by paperless
system?
Is any printed record used?
Are courses involving interviews
included in the paperless system?
What additional support (development
time, staff, funds) are required?
Has any quantitative statistical
analysis of improved turnaround been
produced?
Application Review Centre (ARC) - UCAS module of
Banner: Ellucian
13,400 (approx) Undergraduate UCAS applications dealt
with online using the ARC and reporting during the 2011/12
admissions cycle
All undergraduate courses
The entire process is managed online including decisions
which need to be entered online. Academic departments
have the facility to print a pdf copy of the application.
Yes
Departments that interview can print off a pdf copy of the
application for the interviewers. Departments change the
status for applications that are on hold due to interviews.
Once a decision is made post interview the status is then
updated according (offer or reject).
Yes, during autumn term of the 2011/12 admissions cycle,
the admissions team where able to process approximately
twice as many applications as they were during the same
period in 2010/11.
Why we got involved?
Challenge
Affects
- Previous process was manual and paper based
- Browne Review, increase in fees and greater competition for students
- UCAS withdrawal of paper copy forms (201314 application cycle)
Applicants and Educational Agents
Impact
A successful
solution would
- Slower decisions and lack of transparency of status
Staff
- Excessive focus on manual, non value added tasks
- Lack of visibility on applicant status in the flow
- Increased risk of losing applicants (particularly the best applicants)
- Frustration amongst internal teams (lack of transparency)
- Environmental and financial impact
- Improve effectiveness and efficiency of internal processes
- Retain flexibility for central admissions or departments to make decisions
- Be flexible enough to adapt to new organisational processes
- 21st century University
Royal Holloway, Application Review Centre and UCAS






RHUL has a central admissions team responsible for processing UCAS applications on the
Banner Student records system. Application decision- making is devolved to most academic
departments, although the central admissions team does make decisions for some departments.
The Application Review Centre (ARC) is an online application that allows users to review UCAS
application data and allows Admissions Tutors to record actions against an application (e.g.
conditional offer, reject, on hold).
The ARC uses live data from the Banner student record system.
RHUL has configured the UCAS interface to load data into the student records system every
week day at 5:30am.
Actions entered by Admissions Tutors in the ARC are not fed directly back to UCAS. Actions are
checked by central admissions staff who enter the decisions onto Banner which are then
uploaded to UCAS (and visible by the applicant).
The ARC includes other non- UCAS data that is useful to admissions tutors. For example this
includes details of other supporting documentation submitted and whether the applicant has been
a student at RHUL before.
New business processes introduced





Decision- makers use data rather than the paper to review applications – RHUL no longer
relies on the paper copy from UCAS being the trigger for the process. Departments have access
to application data as soon it is loaded onto the student records system.
Departmental actions made ‘online’ – previously decisions were made on the paper application
and returned to central admissions using the internal post.
Reporting to identify departmental actions and application status:
o Departmental decisions (conditional, unconditional, reject)
o Departmental holds (interviews, gathered field)
o Admissions Requests (qualifications analysis)
o Unprocessed applications (null status)
Parallel processing of joint applications – previously paper applications were reviewed in
‘series’ which meant it took far longer to reach a decision.
Online referral process – departments can refer an application through the ARC to another
colleague for review.


Reporting to measure turnaround time and identify bottlenecks
o Date loaded into Banner
o Date action taken by Department
o Date decision entered by central admissions
Paperless applicant and student record – replacing the paper files.
Comparison of the old / new joint application process
This diagram highlights how the changes to the business processes highlighted above lead to a faster
application decision.
Benefits gained







Faster application turnaround for applicants and staff
Remote review and decision-making of applications
Consolidation of information needed to take a decision (UCAS and non-UCAS data)
Transparency regarding the location and status of applications
Smaller footprint (reduction in paper, ink and transport costs)
More effective management of student records
Solution flexible enough for changes to business process
SPA is still very keen to hear from HEIs on this matter and volunteers to provide case studies would be
extremely welcome – either from those of you who have already implemented a paperless system or
from those of you who are experiencing any particular difficulties with this significant change. We do not
underestimate the scale of this change for HEIs and hope that in the sharing of experiences and good
practice it will become less of a challenge. Please contact Annie Doyle, SPA Senior Project Officer.