Risk Assessment and Strategic Approval of Educational Collaborative Arrangements
DUE DILIGENCE CHECKLIST
The QAA Quality Code defines ‘due diligence’ as: “enquiries relating to the governance, ethos, status,
capacity, reputation and general suitability of a potential delivery organisation or support provider to
satisfy the requirements of a degree-awarding body for an arrangement to deliver learning
opportunities”.1
The checklist below is designed for use in the sorts of enquiries that should be made, and evidence
gathered, concerning the suitability of potential educational partners. It will be used both for initial
due diligence in relation to prospective new arrangements, and for periodic due diligence checks when
a current arrangement is near the end of its term and potential renewal is being considered.
The Academic Lead should seek advice and guidance on completing this form from the Academic
Quality and Partnerships Office (AQPO). AQPO will:
 Advise further on the precise information that needs to be provided using this checklist (e.g.
the priority issues and level of information required, given the nature of the proposed
arrangement; whether any sections can be waived on the basis of existing evidence).
 Coordinate any advice or support needed from other Professional Services teams as
applicable (e.g. Finance Services, Secretary’s Office, International Office).
This document is for internal use only. While the proposed partner(s) will usually supply information
and supporting evidence, the checklist document itself should be completed by the University of
Bristol Academic Lead, and not by the partner institution(s).
Form completed by:
Name
Position
Date
Proposed Partner Institution:
Name of prospective
partner institution
Location (country)
Date of establishment
Language of instruction
(for countries where English is
not the official language)
1
QAA Quality Code Chapter B10, Managing higher education provision with others (2012)
1
1.
Profile
Please describe the partner institution’s educational/ research ethos and mission, including
compatibility with UoB’s vision and values.
Supporting Documentation (Please specify attachments provided or give weblink)
e.g. organisational Mission or Vision statement, Education Strategy, Equality & Diversity Policy.
Comments (to be completed by AQPO)
2.
Academic Standing of the Partner Institution
Please describe as applicable. The following are of particular relevance:
i. Educational Provision Offered e.g. range of UG/PGT/PGR degrees, staff and student numbers etc.
ii. Academic Standing e.g. ARWU (Shanghai), Times HE or QS world rankings
iii. Collaborative links – i.e. the overall extent and nature of partner’s collaborative activity with UK/ EU/
international partners; any other relevant current bids or collaborative proposals being developed by the
partner; if applicable, reasons for any termination of partnerships.
iv. Academic standards and quality assurance framework i.e. outline of partner institution’s internal
quality assurance systems, committees and key roles, including its processes for monitoring and review of
programmes; use of student feedback; oversight by QAA-equivalent body (if non-UK)
v. Quality of learning environment, resources and facilities (As relevant to the proposed collaboration,
including mechanisms for student support at partner institution and any site visits carried out)
vi. Accreditation requirements Where applicable, please give further details if there are any accreditation
requirements in the partner’s home country relevant to the proposed collaboration.
Supporting Documentation (Please specify attachments provided or give weblink)
e.g. Learning and Teaching Strategy, Quality Assurance Handbook, QAA-equivalent body report, Student
Complaints Procedure
Comments (to be completed by AQPO)
2
3.
Legal and Financial Standing of the Partner Institution
Please describe as applicable. The following issues are of particular relevance. For prospective partners
outside the UK, you may wish to refer to:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/overseas-business-risk
i. Legal status of institution - Including, if applicable, its legal capacity to confer joint awards.
ii. Financial standing of the partner institution - Please provide a copy of the last set of accounts if possible;
indicate if institution receives state/public funding; is there any identified risk that the partner might not be able
to meet their financial obligations under the proposed collaboration; if applicable, state any financial
contribution of the partner to the proposed activity including any grants awarded)
iii. Please indicate any health and safety, cultural, ethical or political issues of which the University
should be aware. Please include as relevant: affiliations of the partner institution; any current concerns
regarding travel to/health and safety in the partner location (e.g. any Foreign & Commonwealth Office advice)
iv. Please indicate any known current or pending official investigation, prosecution, litigation or
arbitration proceedings in which the partner institution is involved
v. Does the partner institution have an anti-bribery/ corruption policy?
vi. Does the partner institution own or lease its premises for delivering educational provision/
research? (If leasing, please give the term of the lease)
vii. Please indicate if the partner institution has appropriate insurance policies in place – particularly
employer’s liability and public liability; please confirm the level of cover and the name of the agency providing it.
viii. Please indicate the data protection laws by which the partner institution must abide.
Supporting Documentation (Please specify attachments provided or give weblink)
e.g. Annual Report and Accounts; Anti-Corruption Policy; Data Protection Policy
Comments (to be completed by AQPO)
Please return the completed form to AQPO for coordination of remaining sections:
Comments from International Office (for non-UK institutions only):
Evaluation by External Partnerships Operational Group:
In conjunction with Due Diligence risk assessment matrix.
University External Partnerships Review Group
Approved by University Education Committee June 2015
3