Quality Handbook AQH-I1 Collaborative approval and review processes Version 7.0 June 2015 QUALITY ASSURANCE OF COLLABORATIVE PROVISION Management of Collaborative Provision – Introduction The documentation which follows describes the processes to be used in approving and reviewing collaborative partnerships. Links are also provided at the end of the documentation to additional materials which may be of use. Advice should be sought if needed from the Head of Quality in Academic Services. Collaborative provision carries a higher level of risk for the validating university than on-campus provision and this risk has to be managed to secure the quality of the student experience, the standards of the awards made and the reputation of the validating Higher Education Institute (HEI) as well as of the partner. The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Code of Practice on Collaborative Provision gives a point of reference for the steps which should be taken to mitigate such risks. Principles When seeking to collaborate with a partner organisation in the UK or overseas it is important to ensure: that the partner: has a mission and culture compatible with that of Sunderland University which offers a strategic fit between the two organisations; espouses and promotes values compatible with those of Sunderland University particularly in the areas of equality and diversity; is legally robust; has sound and appropriate governance structures; is financially secure and will be able to sustain any developments required to support the proposed collaboration; that the provision on which it is proposed to collaborate: is appropriate to the strategy and current plans of the University; is supported by evidence of a market which appears sustainable in the medium term; can be supported sustainably in terms of staffing and learning resources; and that there are clear indications that the partner will work in a positive spirit with colleagues at Sunderland to assure and enhance the quality and standards of the programme(s) including provision of: appropriate staffing, engaging with staff development as appropriate; sufficient and appropriate learning resources; Document1, v7 June 2015 Page 1 of 4 personal and academic support for students; accurate and comprehensive information for students; opportunities for students to give feedback on their experience. Processes The processes described below are intended to ensure that collaborative arrangements meet the criteria above when they are initiated, and that they continue to deliver a student experience of high quality and standards comparable with that of on-campus provision. If additional information or activities, other than those described below, are needed to ensure this, then such steps may be taken. Initial contact with a prospective partner Contact with a prospective partner arises in a number of ways, often through informal links. At this stage the initial contact will have a preliminary view as to whether a partnership is worth exploring. However, developing a collaborative partnership is a serious process which involves the University in potential risk, financial, reputational and academic, as well as offering potential opportunities. The contract with the partner is a contract with the University, not with an individual Faculty, and it is therefore very important that decisions around the development of a partnership are informed by university-level as well as faculty considerations. It is also important that prospective partners are not given inappropriate expectations about possible collaboration: it is easy for this to happen if ‘informal’ discussions are undertaken which the partner assumes have more authority than in fact they do, and it can be damaging if this leads at a later stage to the proposed collaboration being rejected at university level. For these reasons any member of staff who makes contact with a possible partner and wishes to explore this must at the earliest opportunity, inform his/her Associate Dean (AD) Recruitment and Development (for academic staff) or Director (for Service staff) . A Director of Service should pass the information to Marketing and Recruitment Services (MAR) who will liaise with the relevant Faculty(ies). If the Faculty(ies) wishes to pursue the option, before any further action is taken representatives of the Faculty(ies) and Marketing and Recruitment (MAR) should discuss it with the Executive. This will enable an early view to be taken as to whether the collaboration would be in the interests of the University and in line with its strategic plans. The Deputy Vice Chancellor (DVC) Academic will discuss the proposal with other members of the Executive; this will lead to a decision as to whether to progress negotiations. If the decision is positive the Due Diligence process will be followed as the first stage in Partnership Approval. It may be helpful to anyone making informal contact with a prospective partner to be aware of these introductory guidelines and of the documentation which will be required for Due Diligence (described within the Partnership Approval process). You should also be aware that by discussing the proposal at the earliest opportunity with the Executive you will save time in setting the Due Diligence process in motion and hence in being able to commence the collaboration. List of processes The processes described below are: Document1, v7 June 2015 Page 2 of 4 AQH-I1A AQH-I1B1 AQH-I1B2 AQH-I1C AQH-I1D Partnership Approval Annual Monitoring of Collaborative Provision – Programme Operational Review Annual Monitoring of Collaborative Provision – the Partnership Periodic Review Processes for Changes to Partnership Arrangements These are supported by appendices as follows: AQH-I1-1 AQH-I1-2 AQH-I1-3 AQH-I1-4 AQH-I1-5 AQH-I1-6 AQH-I1-7 AQH-I1-8 AQH-I1-10 AQH-I1-11 AQH-I1-12 AQH-I1-13 AQH-I1-14 AQH-I1-15 Proposal for a new Partnership Agreement Risk Analysis for Proposed Collaboration External Advisors for Partnership Approval and Review The Role of the Centre Leader Template for Centre Leader’s Annual Report Standard letter following publicity and information review raising concerns and requesting changes Template for Partner’s Annual Report on Programmes within a Subject Area Template for Associate Deans (AD’s) Annual Report on the Centre Non-submission of Centre Annual Reports - letters Request to Academic Development Committee Deputy Vice Chancellor) (DVC) for the Addition of a Further Programme to an Existing Partnership Request to ADC for the Approval of a New or Additional Site within an Existing Partnership Collaborative Partnerships – Minor Reviews and Amendments report form Request to ADC for the Termination of a Programme within a Partnership or Termination of a Partnership Annex: List of other relevant documents with web-links Document1, v7 June 2015 Page 3 of 4 Version History Version Occasion of Change Change author 1.0 3.0 Original placed in Academic Quality Handbook Implementation of the University’s new collaborative processes for September 2009 Clarification 4.0 Modifications made S Sutcliffe Date of modification September 2008 M Young August 2009 Updated document number. S Patience January 2011 Clarification of which DVC in text. Review Summer 2011 S Patience August 2011 Update of names, dates, UoS structure 5.0 Review B Ollerenshaw November 2011 Further updates re structure changes 6.0 Annual review of Quality Handbook A Carlton August 2013 Clarification of acronyms 2.0 Document1, v7 June 2015 Page 4 of 4