UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
RISK MANGEMENT
A meeting of the Risk Management Dual Assurance Group was held on 10th March at 11.30am in
John Usher, Northcote House.
PRESENT:
Chief Operating Officer, Geoff Pringle (Chair)
Lay Lead, Judy Hargadon
Director of Strategic Planning, Steve Chadwick
IN ATTENDANCE:
Strategic Planning Officer, Iain Springate
1. Notes of previous meeting
1.1 The notes of the previous meeting (RiskDA/2015/01) were received and discussed. A number
of changes were agreed:



At section 2.3, note change of date of Council risk discussion; Note that the
discussion will be at the May meeting because the Lay Lead is not be able to attend
the April meeting.
At section 2.9, remove the action as it is unnecessary; Risk Dual Assurance is
separate to Audit Committee.
At section 3.2, amend wording to clarify that the University would not normally
expect Colleges to have financial risks in the red zone of heat maps.
1.2 Action: Revise notes to take account of changes outlined above (Strategic Planning Officer).
2. Terms of Reference
2.1 The Terms of Reference (RiskDA/2015/02) were received and the changes were noted. No
further amendments were requested.
3. Risk Management Update
3.1 The COO explained that the Director of Strategic Planning was leaving the University, noting
that the University was sorry to see him go. The Lay Lead thanked him for his work on Risk
Management, and the COO explained that he would update the Lay Lead on who would lead
on Risk Management in the future once this had been clarified.
3.2 The draft Risk Management Update to be discussed by VCEG on 23rd March
(RiskDA/2015/03) was introduced by the Director of Strategic Planning. He explained that
there were four sections to the report, covering: matters arising from the last VCEG
discussion of Risk; Professional Service risks; exception reports against Corporate Risks; and
next steps.
3.3 The Director of Strategic Planning outlined the matters arising. The University
Transformation Programme risk, which had been suggested by the Chair of Council and
agreed by VCEG, was discussed. It was noted that the risks in this area were being managed
by the Transformation team, and the task was to take existing Risk Management information
around the Transformation programme, put it into the Corporate Risk format, and add to the
Register. The Lay Lead questioned why the risk would not formally be added to the Register
until the full review of risk in the summer, and suggested that new risks should be added to
the Corporate Risk Register as soon as possible after being identified. It was agreed that the
risk should be immediately added to the Corporate Risk Register, and that in future any
Corporate Risks that are identified should be added to the Corporate Risk Register for the
next VCEG Risk discussion.
3.4 Action: Add University Transformation Programme risk to Corporate Risk Register, and
include in report to VCEG for March discussion (Strategic Planning Officer)
3.5 Action: Ensure that new Corporate Risks are always added to the Corporate Risk Register for
the next VCEG Risk discussion (Director of Strategic Planning).
3.6 The Professional Services Risks were also discussed. The risks around staff capacity were
noted, and it was stressed that this reinforced the challenge of the Transformation
programme. The COO explained that the ratio of 1.4 PS staff for every academic, which was
higher than the average across the Russell Group, needed to be treated with caution. Having
multiple campuses, outsourcing arrangements and other factors made a material difference
to the ratio across difference institutions.
3.7 The Risks around assurance of data quality were discussed, and the Director of Strategic
Planning explained that these risks were not related to new issues or problems, but the
ongoing management of data quality, around which there was significant mitigation which
operated successfully. The Lay Lead asked that this be made clear in the report to VCEG.
3.8 Action: Reword section 2.1, bullet 4, to make clear the data quality assurance risks were not
about new issues or problems (Strategic Planning Officer).
3.9 The highest risks across the Professional Services were discussed. In terms of the INTO risk,
with reduced intakes, the Lay Lead noted that recruiting more international students directly
would be a key mitigation, and asked that this be reflected in the text. This was agreed.
Carbon reduction targets were also discussed, and the COO explained that an extension to
the deadline had been granted by HEFCE, and that the University could invest itself to
reduce carbon (which would be expensive), or wait to see what the state did (e.g. with
nuclear) which would affect carbon consumption. It was noted that advice from Council on
their risk appetite in relation to meeting the targets, and therefore which approach to take
would be useful. Backlog maintenance was also discussed, and it was noted that this had
been uplifted to £11m in the plans.
3.10
Action: Amend INTO exception report to note recruitment of more direct
international students as a mitigation (Strategic Planning Officer).
3.11
The exception reports against Corporate Risks were then discussed. The increase in
risk related to Labour’s policy announcement of a £6k fee was noted, including the
possibility of substantial deferrals in 15/16 in order to start a programme after the £6k fees
had been introduced in 16/17. In terms of mitigation, the COO explained that it was too late
to bring in more International students for 15/16, but the University was taking all the
International PGT it could. Other mitigations were also under consideration (e.g. discounting
the fee to £6k for 15/16 entrants).
3.12
The exception report explaining that research income and award were likely to be
below target for 14/15 was discussed. It was noted that although the University would not
achieve target, performance still showed significant growth in income, and this was whilst
competitors were not able to grow their income.
3.13
The paragraph in section 3.2 at the bottom of Page 7 which described ‘decreasing
morale and productivity of staff’ as a result of the uncertainty around the PST was noted.
The COO outlined the different ways the Transformation Team were engaging with
managers and other staff across Professional Services to ensure that they were up to date
with the programme, and suggested that the situation may have changed since the
exception report was submitted.
3.14
Action: Ask Director of RKT if the paragraph still accurately describes the situation,
and provide opportunity to update it before submitting the report to VCEG (Strategic
Planning Officer).
3.15
The Open Access sub-risk added by RKT was noted. The Chief Operating Officer
explained that this was a significant issue for Exeter, and that he was working with the
Deputy Chief Operating Officer on how best to resource this. It required skills that were
different from traditional library staff skills, and this issue was at the top of the management
agenda.
4. Review of Corporate Risk Register
4.1 The Group received the paper outlining the Review of Corporate Risk (RiskDA/2015/04). The
Lay Lead stressed that the University’s approach to Risk Management was better than she
had seen elsewhere, and explained that proposed changes in terms of categorising risks and
setting Risk Appetite, would be helpful for Council. The Director of Strategic Planning noted
that once a Risk Appetite was set by category, Council would instantaneously see which
areas involved more risk than they were prepared to accept. In addition, the principle of only
reporting in detail those risks outwith the risk appetite, or close to that, was helpful in
ensuring VCEG / Council focused in on only the areas that were problematic.
4.2 It was agreed that a paper would be presented to VCEG ahead of presentation to Council. As
part of this, the current Risk Register would be converted into the new format to show how
it would appear. The Lay Lead asked that VCEG consider Risk Appetite for different
categories of Risk, and present a draft Risk Appetite to Council to consider.
4.3 Action: Present paper to VCEG on review of Corporate Risk Register, and Risk Appetite
(Director of Strategic Planning).
4.4 Action: Convert existing Corporate Risk Register into new format (Strategic Planning Officer).
4.5 Action: VCEG to agree draft Risk Appetite to present to Council (Director of Strategic
Planning).
4.6 The Lay Lead suggested a format for the presentation to Council:




Best Practice: Focus on what Risk reporting should deliver to Council, and whether
Council feel that they receive everything that they need to. The Guide to Financial Risk
Management sets out some of the principles.
Current Practice: Outline the current Risk Management process
Gap in current practice: Explain that Council are making decisions about whether or not
to take risks in a piecemeal way looking at the individual issue under consideration,
rather than being guided by a Risk Appetite that has previously been agreed.
Risk Appetite and Tolerance: Outline the proposal and the principles behind it


Examples of Risk appetite: Use examples to show how Risk Appetite across different
categories would work; perhaps using a category where there is low appetite for Risk
(e.g. Health and Safety) and some where there is a greater potential appetite and
tolerance.
Group Discussion: Facilitate a group discussion to enable Council to agree on a Risk
Appetite, and the proposed changes to reporting.
4.7 Action: Send a draft corporate slide to Lay Lead to enable drafting of an initial slide for the
Council presentation (Strategic Planning Officer).
4.8 It was noted that Council would discuss and agree the Risk Appetite in a pre-session. The
Risk Appetite itself would need to be written into a concise paper to enable Council to
formally agree it in the afternoon session.
4.9 The Lay Lead noted the financial risk categories on the proposed risk category framework
(page 2-3), and stressed that the phrasing of the risk categories should support the notion
that staff need to bring income into the institution. Terms like ‘financial strategy’ and
‘institutional sustainability’ did not resonate with staff; there was a danger that they could
think that these areas were not relevant to their roles. The Director of Strategic Planning
explained that he would ask the CFO for some advice on the categories. The Lay Lead
suggested also asking some College Managers (e.g. Business School and EMPS) to ensure
that the language chosen was helpful in their discussions with their staff, and encouraged
the right behaviours.
4.10
Action: Gather feedback from CFO and Colleges regarding categories for financial
risk categories, and language used to describe them (Director of Strategic Planning).
5. Risk Management Policy
5.1 The draft Risk Management Policy (RiskDA/2015/05) was received. The was agreed with a
change of wording to paragraph 6, bullet two to now read: ‘Council will have the opportunity
to discuss with Senior Management how best to address key risk problems, potential
mitigating activities, and / or strategies to address a risk that has materialised’.
5.2 Action: Amend Risk Management Policy (Strategic Planning Officer).
6. Any other business
6.1 The Director of Strategic Planning noted that he was attending a Russell Group meeting on
Risk Appetite, and would feed back the information he received.
7. Date of Next Meeting
7.1 Thursday 4th June 2015
ACTION TABLE
Minute Action
No.
Owner
Status
1.2
Strategic Planning
Officer
Strategic Planning
Officer
Complete
Director
of
Strategic Planning
Ongoing
Strategic Planning
Officer
Complete
Strategic Planning
Officer
Complete
Strategic Planning
Officer
Complete – Director of RKT decided
not to amend the paragraph; the
issue remained as described.
Director
of
Strategic Planning
Strategic Planning
Officer
Director
of
Strategic Planning
Strategic Planning
Officer
Paper to go to VCEG on 5th May
2015
3.4
3.5
3.8
3.10
3.14
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.7
4.10
5.2
Revise notes of last meeting to take account of
changes requested.
Add University Transformation Programme risk to
Corporate Risk Register, and include in update
report to VCEG for March discussion
Ensure that new Corporate Risks are always added
to the Corporate Risk Register for the next VCEG
Risk discussion
Reword section 2.1, bullet 4, of Risk management
update to make clear the data quality assurance
risks were not about new issues or problems
Amend INTO exception report to note recruitment
of more direct international students as a
mitigation.
Ask Director of RKT if the paragraph regarding
staff morale in the Exception report for research
income still accurately describes the situation, and
provide opportunity to update it before
submitting the Risk Management report to VCEG
Present paper to VCEG on review of Corporate
Risk Register, and Risk appetite.
Convert existing Corporate Risk Register into
proposed new format
VCEG to agree draft Risk appetite to present to
Council
Send a draft corporate slide to Lay Lead to enable
drafting of an initial slide for the Council
presentation
Gather feedback from CFO and Colleges regarding
categories for financial risk categories, and
language used to describe them.
Amend Risk Management Policy in line with
requested change
Complete
Paper to go to VCEG on 5th May
2015
Complete
Director
of
Strategic Planning
Strategic Planning
Officer
Complete