Mission statement
The mission of the Agency is to promote public confidence
that quality of provision
and standards of awards in higher education are being
safeguarded and enhanced.
It will do this by:
-
working with higher education institutions to promote and
support
continuous improvement in the quality and standards of provision;
-
providing clear and accurate information to students,
employers and
others about the quality and standards of higher education provision;
-
working with higher education institutions to develop and
manage
the qualifications framework;
-
advising on the grant of degree awarding powers and
university title;
-
facilitating the development of benchmark information to
guide
subject standards;
-
promulgating codes of practice and examples of good
practice; and
-
operating programmes of review of performance at
institutional and
programme levels.
Foreword
The Agency's Business plan sets out our strategic aims and objectives for the three years 2000 to 2003. It is a working document which combines with our internal annual operating plans and budgets to form the corporate basis for managing our business. We will revise the plan each year in the light of achievement of current objectives and objective setting for the future. This will ensure that we maintain an informed and responsive medium-term strategy.
The Agency's core business is to review and report on the performance of providers of higher education in respect of quality and standards. We do this at institutional level by reviewing higher education institutions' management of quality and standards, and at subject level by reviewing the quality and standards of teaching and learning in specific subjects.
In addition, the Agency advises Government on applications for the grant of degree-awarding powers and university title. It also manages the QAA Recognition Scheme for Access to HE in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and it audits academic partnerships with colleges, at home and overseas, that offer teaching leading to the award of degrees of UK institutions.
The Agency's mission is to promote public confidence that quality of provision and standards of awards are being safeguarded and enhanced. The promotion of public confidence involves the provision of public information. To this end, all our reports on institutions and their subject provision are published, both in print and on our web site.
The provision of public information involves more than reporting on performance of institutions. The reference points must also be clear and transparent. We have been, and remain, engaged in a number of major developmental initiatives, working in partnership with the HE sector and its stakeholders. Subject benchmark statements are being produced that set out general expectations about standards for the award of qualifications at a given level in a particular subject area. Twenty-two have been published so far, and another 23 will be published in 2001. Qualifications frameworks are being developed which will provide better and more transparent public information about the meaning and level of different qualifications. Over time, this should produce greater consistency and transparency in the use of qualification titles.
The Agency is thus providing a range of information designed to ensure that the public can have confidence in the quality and standards of UK higher education. This is particularly important given the transition in the nature of higher education from elite, exclusive and time-limited to mass, inclusive and lifelong. There are now new stakeholders with expectations to be met and information needs to be satisfied: young people who are the first generation of their family to go into higher education; employers recruiting for the first time in the graduate market; and mature students looking to higher education to equip them with the skills to cope successfully with a changing employment market. Employers, parents and young people need to have confidence that high standards are set by universities and colleges, that universities and colleges provide a good quality of learning experience to allow students to achieve those standards, and that the standards are achieved by students. The Agency's work complements that of the institutions themselves in making sure that these expectations are met.
The Agency also plays a role in encouraging institutions to improve their provision. Our reports set out clearly the areas where there is scope for improvement. In some cases, where provision is particularly poor, a further review will be carried out. We are engaged on a major development to publish a Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education. This will cover a wide range of areas of academic management of quality and standards, and will increasingly be used as a reference point for the reviews that the Agency conducts. The Agency also intends to synthesise and summarise the good practice lessons from the reviews it carries out and publish 'learning from' reports in 2001.
Our overriding aim over the period of this Plan is to implement successfully a revised method of reviewing standards and quality - to be known as academic review - across the UK, starting in Scotland in 2000-01 and in the other countries in the UK the following year. This will replace the hitherto separate processes of quality audit and quality assessment / subject review by one integrated process. The new process will have significant differences from the methods used so far. First, it will focus more explicitly on academic standards as well as quality, judged in the light of published reference materials - qualifications frameworks, subject benchmark information, and the Code of Practice. Second, there will be a much more effective integration and exchange of information and insight between reviews at the subject level and reviews at the institutional level. Reports on the subject reviews will inform the institutional review, which in turn will inform future subject reviews. Subject review will update continuously the picture the Agency has of an institution, and will provide audit trails to inform judgements about overall institutional systems. That picture will help to determine the intensity of scrutiny needed to report reliably in subsequent subject reviews, and to make the judgments on overall institutional systems once in each cycle. Third, the nature of the process will be different: the time spent on reviews will no longer be concentrated into a one-week snapshot, but spread intermittently over a longer period; reviewers will deal with naturally arising rather than specially assembled evidence; they will time their visits to coincide with internal review events for which the institution has to assemble evidence for its own purposes; there will be greater scope for collaboration with the professional and statutory bodies. Institutional self-evaluation and peer review will continue to be at the heart of the process. Reviewers will seek to test, and where possible verify, a self-evaluation. We are confident that this approach will enable external scrutiny to operate with a lighter but nonetheless effective touch, and that it will reduce the burden that is now perceived to fall on academic departments whose work is subject to review, whilst continuing to satisfy the information needs of all higher education's stakeholders - students, parents, prospective students, employers, government, professional and statutory bodies, society at large.
Notwithstanding the major agenda of change that we are developing and now implementing, our single biggest activity over the next 18 months will involve completing the 1993-2001 programme of subject reviews in England and Northern Ireland, inherited from HEFCE/DENI (now DFHETE). This work is carried out under contract with HEFCE and DFHETE on the basis of the subject review method we inherited in 1997. In budget terms, it represents over half of our work. Completing this inherited programme of work is still for many people their main point of contact with the Agency and can sometimes mask the change agenda we are working on at the same time.
I hope you find the Business plan informative and
helpful.
I would welcome any comments.
John Randall
Chief Executive
Introduction
The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (the Agency) was established in 1997. It is a company limited by guarantee, and a registered charity. The Members of the company are the representative bodies of the heads of higher education institutions - CVCP, COSHEP, HHEW and SCOP, but the Board is structured to guarantee the Agency's independence. Four members are appointed by the representative bodies, four by the higher education funding bodies, and six (including the chairman) are independent members appointed by the Board itself and chosen to be broadly representative of the range of stakeholders in higher education, including employers and professional and statutory bodies. A student observer attends Board meetings.
The Agency was created through the transfer of functions and staff from the former Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) and the quality assessment divisions of the Higher Education Funding Councils for England and Wales (HEFCE and HEFCW). On establishment, Agency staff were working from offices in Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Glasgow and London. In April 1998 we established a head office in Gloucester, to which the functions previously based in Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff and London re-located. In 1999 our Glasgow office moved to new premises to accommodate the wider range of functions it will manage from 2000-01.
The purpose of setting up a single quality assurance agency for higher education was set out in the report of the Joint Planning Group on Quality Assurance in Higher Education (JPG) in 1996. A single agency would be best placed to integrate the separate but complementary quality assessment and quality audit processes previously carried out by the predecessor bodies; to carry out those functions in a cost-effective way; and to promote the development and evolution of those processes to reflect the growing maturity and effectiveness of institutional quality assurance processes and reduce the weight of external scrutiny on institutions, whilst at the same time continuing to meet the needs of all the stakeholders in higher education. The Dearing and Garrick Reports in 1997, with their emphasis on the assurance of academic standards as well as quality; and the development of subject benchmark information, programme specifications, codes of practice and qualifications frameworks, have been the other main influences in setting the Agency's developmental agenda.
Subscriptions paid by individual universities and colleges, and contracts with the HE funding bodies and NHS, provide the Agency's main sources of funding.
The Business plan
The Business plan 2000-03 (the Plan) sets out the Agency's mission and the medium-term corporate objectives required to deliver that mission. It also includes summaries of the main activities to be undertaken over the plan period that will contribute to meeting our corporate objectives. Drawing on advice provided by HEFCE auditors in Autumn 1998, we have now established an annual business planning and monitoring cycle. The Business plan is updated each year in light of achievement of objectives, and objectives are set for the following year.
Strategic aims
The Business plan groups the Agency's corporate objectives within five overarching strategic aims:
-
Reviewing the awarding function and overall academic
management;
-
Reviewing the quality and standards of academic
programmes;
-
Providing the infrastructure;
-
Working in partnership;
- Working effectively.
Strategic aims
A- Reviewing the awarding function and overall academic management
UK higher education institutions are largely self-regulating bodies. Most have the powers to award their own degrees. Those powers are conferred by Parliament, by the Privy Council acting under statutory provisions, or by Royal Charter. There are many collaborative agreements also, whereby a college or organisation without degree-awarding powers offers courses leading to degrees or diplomas from an institution with degree-awarding powers.
The robust exercise by universities and colleges of the responsibilities that go with the right to award degrees is central to the UK system of quality assurance.
Through the continuation audit process the Agency audits institutional arrangements for managing the quality and standards of awards made in an institution's name, whether delivered in the institution concerned or through partnerships with other providers in the UK and overseas. The Agency also advises Government on applications for the grant of degree-awarding powers and university title, considering the applications against criteria set by Government. As the body that licenses and reviews the Authorised Validating Agencies (AVAs) which provide Access to higher education courses in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Agency also plays a role in maintaining entry standards to HE.
Corporate objectives to support achievement of strategic aim A
1 To conclude the programme of continuation audits
The programme of continuation audits will be concluded by 31 December 2001. The continuation audit process will evolve into the institutional review element of academic review.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
complete the planned programme of continuation
audits;
- complete the follow-up to all continuation audits.
2 To promote confidence in UK higher education provision overseas
The globalisation of higher education, and the increasing commercial and marketing awareness of higher education institutions, mean that a growing amount of UK higher education is delivered primarily or wholly overseas, in partnership with overseas providers and companies. To preserve the reputation of UK higher education and to reassure stakeholders overseas, it is important that provision delivered overseas is quality assured in the same way as provision delivered in the UK. To this end, the Agency audits the quality and standards of overseas collaborative provision.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
carry out our planned programme of audits of overseas
collaborative provision;
-
consider the feasibility of developing a scheme of
'kitemarking' overseas
collaborative provision.
3 To advise government on applications for degree-awarding powers and university title
Applications from colleges of higher education for the grant of degree-awarding powers or university title are referred to the Agency by Government. The Agency considers the applications, normally over the period of a complete annual cycle of academic activity, against rigorous criteria published by Government. In Scotland, the Agency uses similar processes for advising on applications for designation as a higher education institution.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
consider all applications for degree awarding powers,
university title or designation as a higher education
institution, and make recommendations to Government on each
application;
- review the operation of the criteria for degree awarding powers or university title.
4 To provide and operate a framework for the recognition and quality assurance of Access to higher education courses
Access to higher education courses are a valuable route into higher education for mature students with no prior qualifications. Access courses in England, Wales and Northern Ireland are delivered by Authorised Validating Agencies (AVAs) which are mainly consortia of HE and FE partners. Different arrangements apply in Scotland. The Agency licenses the AVAs to make Access awards and use the Access logo. In doing so the Agency is, effectively, working with the AVAs to ensure an appropriate entry standard to HE for entrants with non-traditional qualifications.
The Agency carries out a programme of AVA reviews, and publishes review reports. In concluding each review, one of six possible decisions on licensing is taken, ranging from unconditional renewal to withdrawal of the licence.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
carry out the planned programme of new and follow-up
reviews of AVAs;
-
consider all initial licence applications;
- improve public information about Access to higher education.
B Reviewing the quality and standards of academic programmes
As well as reviewing institutional arrangements for maintaining and improving quality and standards, the Agency reviews the quality and standards of teaching and learning at subject level. In 1999-2000 we carried out over 350 subject review visits in England and Northern Ireland. In 2000-01 the number will be around 420.
Each review is carried out under the subject review method inherited from the HEFCE/DHFETE (formerly DENI) in 1997 and leads to published reports, also available on the Agency's web site.
By December 2001 we will have completed the cycle of quality assessments/subject reviews in England and Northern Ireland that began in 1993. The quality assessment cycles in Scotland and Wales were completed in 1998.
The academic year 2000-01 also sees the first year of introduction of the new academic review method. This follows two years of intensive testing and piloting, involving 34 institutions and 94 academic colleagues acting as academic reviewers. The Agency published full details of academic review in April 2000.
During 2000-01 there will be 25 academic review subject reviews in Scotland. Academic review will be introduced in the rest of the UK from 2001-2002. As well as carrying out subject reviews under contract with the HE funding bodies, the Agency will also carry out prototype reviews of Nursing, Midwifery & Health Visiting and Subjects Allied to Medicine under contract with the NHSE in England from 2001-02. Discussions are continuing about review of NHS-funded provision in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
Corporate objectives to support achievement of strategic aim B
1 To complete the programme of subject reviews in England and Northern Ireland up to 2001 in higher education institutions and English further education colleges
Between 1 August 2000 and 31 December 2001 we will complete the cycle of quality assessments/subject reviews started in 1993 by HEFCE and DHFETE (formerly DENI). Academic review will be introduced in England and Northern Ireland from 2001-02.
2 To introduce progressively the new academic review method in the whole of the UK
Since 1998 we have been working with the sector and other stakeholders to develop an integrated academic review method that brings together the hitherto separate processes of reviews at institutional and subject levels. This has involved extensive consultation, testing and piloting.
The new method goes live in Scotland, and is available in Wales, from October 2000. A programme of 25 reviews in Scotland during 2000-01 will be followed by the introduction of academic review in England, Northern Ireland and Wales from 2001-02. The institutional review element of academic review will evolve from the continuation audit programme which is to be concluded by December 2001. In Scotland, we are discussing with partner organisations possible future arrangements for the review of initial teacher education and the review of undergraduate programmes in Scottish FE colleges.
Several variables will affect the number of reviews to be undertaken in 2001-03. Scope and preference enquiries relating to the subjects to be reviewed by the end of 2003 have been undertaken. These will establish the level of provision to be reviewed across the UK by 31 July 2003, and the number of reviews that the Agency needs to undertake. As well as issues of volume and timing, decisions will need to be taken about intensity of scrutiny, and hence use of resources, in the light of the initial institutional profiles and the self-evaluation document prepared for each review. In broad terms, we expect the overall volume of reviews to increase: an eight to nine-year cycle will be compressed into a six-year cycle, and we will be reviewing HE provision in more FE colleges in England.
In 2000-01 we will:
-
carry out the planned programme of academic review subject
reviews in Scotland;
-
survey HE provision in England (HEIs and FECs) and Northern
Ireland (HEIs) in the subjects to be reviewed in
2001-03;
-
set up and agree review timetables with institutions across
the UK for academic reviews in 2001-02 and 2002-03;
- train and appoint reviewers to carry out academic reviews.
In 2001-03 we will:
-
undertake the planned programme of academic reviews in the
whole of the UK (including prototype reviews of
health-related subjects in England);
- survey higher education provision in the subjects to be reviewed in 2003-06 and agree review timetables with institutions.
C Providing the infrastructure
The infrastructure and reference points required to support the introduction of academic review are provided by four related developments: programme specifications; qualifications frameworks; subject benchmarks; and the Code of practice. Each of these was trailed in the 1997 Dearing and Garrick Reports.
Programme specifications provide a vehicle for institutions to articulate in a clear and consistent way the nature and intended outcomes of particular programmes of study. Qualifications frameworks provide public information about the meaning and level of qualifications, and over time should promote greater consistency in the use of titles. Subject benchmarks set out, in broad terms, the skills and attributes that may be expected of a typical graduate in a particular discipline. The qualifications frameworks and subject benchmarks are related through qualifications descriptors that underpin the levels of the qualifications frameworks: descriptors of the honours degree level have been developed from the benchmark statements. Drawing on existing good practice, the Code of practice distils and sets out expectations of good practice across a range of areas of academic management.
Each of these developments helps to make clearer and more transparent the nature, expectations and outcomes of higher education. Each has proceeded, or is proceeding, through extensive consultation and, where appropriate, testing. Each will underpin the judgements that reviewers will make as part of academic review.
Corporate objectives to support achievement of strategic aim C
1 To develop and maintain the national qualifications frameworks
The qualifications frameworks aim to provide clear, robust and transparent information about the meaning and level of qualifications. There will be two frameworks: one for Scotland, and one for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The frameworks align at the honours degree and postgraduate levels; and draft qualifications descriptors have been developed for the honours degree level, drawing on the subject benchmark statements. Below postgraduate level, the frameworks align less easily, in light of the distinctiveness of the Scottish education system and issues yet to be resolved about the proposed foundation degree in England.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
complete the development of the frameworks and promote
their use;
-
consider the implications of the introduction of the
foundation degree in England;
- work to ensure that European developments, in light of the Bologna Declaration, are as far as possible consistent with the UK qualifications frameworks.
2 To promote the development and use of subject benchmark information
In April 2000 the Agency published 22 subject benchmark statements, developed in partnership with the subject communities. The statements do not prescribe a curriculum for degree level study in a subject; rather, they set out the attributes and characteristics that may reasonably be expected of a typical graduate in that discipline. In 2000-01 a further 23 subjects will be benchmarked and those statements published.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
work with the subject communities and the HE funding bodies
(including the bodies responsible for the funding of
health-related subjects in each of the four countries of
the UK), leading to publication of 23 subject benchmark
statements;
- evaluate the early impact of the benchmark statements, particularly their use in academic review subject reviews.
3 To promote, and publish clear information about, good practice to assist institutions in enhancing the quality of their provision
The Agency seeks to promote good practice in a variety of ways. Both its subject review and continuation audit reports provide clear statements of areas where provision can be improved. These reports are published both in hard copy and on our web site. In some cases, where there are major problems, there are established procedures for following up on quality, even by a formal second review, to protect the student experience and ensure that the necessary improvement has been made. A wide range of good practice lessons and points can be distilled from reports. We are also working on completing the Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education. Seven sections of the code have been published so far. All remaining sections will be published by Summer 2001.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
publish the remaining sections of the Code of
practice;
-
prepare reports on good practice that draw on the findings
from quality audit and
quality assessment;
-
evaluate initial reactions to the Guidelines on
preparing programme specifications
(published in May 2000).
D Working in partnership
We work with universities and colleges to achieve aims that the HE sector and the Agency share: promoting and maintaining quality and standards; promoting quality enhancement; promoting public confidence; and providing public information. Our work cannot be achieved without contributions from colleagues in those institutions: they contribute at all levels, through membership of the QAA Board, membership of benchmarking groups and Code of practice working groups, membership of committees, and participation as reviewers or auditors (over 1,200 people in 1999-2000). All the Agency's work proceeds through consultation; we have received over 2,000 responses to consultations in the past two years. This level of commitment from colleagues in institutions and partner organisations is of vital importance and we acknowledge their support.
The Agency works with a range of other bodies, including bodies representing employers and students, the NHS, subject associations, professional and statutory bodies, and funding bodies. Meeting the needs of the full range of stakeholders is a key aspect of our work. We aim to maintain the right balance between providers of HE and users of HE, for example, by providing students and employers with objective public information, without imposing disproportionate burdens on the universities and colleges.
Corporate objectives to support achievement of strategic aim D
1 To provide useful and useable public information on quality
and standards in UK
higher education
The QAA is an information organisation. The promotion of public confidence and the dissemination of public information lie at the heart of our work. We aim to provide information in accessible formats - both in hard copy and on our web site - to anyone seeking information on the quality and standards of higher education in the UK. The Agency's web site has been extensively re-developed as a vehicle for effective public communication - all published reports and many working papers and drafts are publicly available; and at current rates of access we expect to receive 8 to 9 million visits to the site over the next year. The Agency has taken account of the 1999 Segal Quince Wicksteed report on providing public information on quality and standards and has, for example, decided that each review in the new academic review method should generate a one-page summary report as well as a full report. These summary reports will be of particular assistance to external stakeholders. As well as information arising from reviews and audits, we publish information about how we work and what we have done - Higher quality and the Annual report each receive a wide distribution and press coverage.
Over the period of the plan we will publish, on annual schedules, the reports that flow from our regular activity, including:
-
subject review reports;
-
subject overview reports;
-
continuation audit reports;
-
overseas audit reports;
-
review reports on AVAs;
- academic review reports.
2 To communicate effectively the mission, functions and achievements of the Agency
The Agency places great importance on communication - both internal and external. We continue to develop our web site as a prime vehicle for data capture and effective external communication. We are also strengthening our intranet as a tool to facilitate internal communication. One key aspect of our communications policy is to ensure that we attempt to reach all those who have an interest in our work: in particular, working to ensure that we engage effectively with devolved government structures, and with regional and collaborative organisations across the UK. Another key aspect involves providing information about the Agency itself: we aim to develop our review processes in as transparent a way as possible, and make our internal planning processes as open as possible, and we report regularly to our key stakeholders on progress against the Business plan and each year's operating plan.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
publish the annual and interim reports we make to the HE
funding bodies and
representative bodies; -
continue the programme of Sounding Board meetings with the
HE funding bodies and representative bodies;
-
attend meetings of the representative bodies' Quality &
Standards Groups and the funding councils' quality
assessment committees;
-
publish regular editions of Higher quality;
- continue to develop our web site.
3 To engage effectively with employers, students, professional and statutory bodies, subject associations, regulators and other national stakeholders
The Agency works closely with a wide range of external stakeholders, including employers, students, professional and statutory bodies (PSBs), subject associations and other national stakeholders.
For example, the Association of Graduate Recruiters (AGR) and the Institute of Personnel Development have been involved in our work on progress files and programme specifications. The AGR is also represented on the working group developing the Code of practice on careers guidance, and there are employer representatives on a number of the benchmarking groups.
The subject associations have played a leading role in developing benchmark statements. The PSBs have also made valuable contributions to the benchmarking groups, both in shaping their membership and progressing their work. For example, the Engineering Council, Engineering Employers' Federation, Engineering Professors' Council and other bodies assisted in developing the benchmarking statement for engineering. Also, where relevant, collaborative reviews at subject or institutional level are carried out with professional and statutory bodies. For example, some reviews in the 1998-2000 subject round were carried out with GMC, GDC and the National Boards for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting, and arrangements have been made for collaboration in the 2000-01 reviews. A wide range of PSBs have expressed interest in the scope for collaborative review within the academic review process.
Building on our relationship with the NHSE, we have established a joint liaison committee; we are working on developing benchmarking statements in the health-related subjects (to be funded primarily by the bodies responsible for the funding of provision in those subjects in each of the four countries in the UK); and from 2001 we will carry out prototype quality reviews in England under contract with the NHSE.
With the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), we maintain a joint committee which oversees common interests in qualifications frameworks and related matters, as well as holding regular chairman/chief executive meetings between the two organisations.
The Agency's Glasgow office maintains a wide range of contacts with stakeholder and related bodies in Scotland, for example with the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) on developing qualifications frameworks, and with COSHEP and SHEFC on the development and introduction of academic review.
All student unions receive Agency communications, and there has been student involvement in working groups, for example on the sections of the Code of practice that deal with complaints and progress files. There have also been informal meetings with NUS officials on specific issues. A student observer participates in Agency Board meetings.
4 To collaborate effectively with bodies, overseas and international, whose work relates to that of the Agency
Increasingly, quality assurance has an international dimension. UK universities and colleges provide HE programmes overseas, and electronic delivery of learning materials respects no national boundaries. The need for close collaboration with organisations involved in quality assurance, wherever they are based, has become increasingly important.
The European dimension is a key part of the Agency's work. We are active in the European Network for Quality Assurance (ENQA) and in developing bilateral relationships with overseas quality assurance agencies. At international level, the Chief Executive continues to serve on the Board of the International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies (INQAAHE). We seek generally to keep a watching brief on any emerging international norms for evaluation of HE provision delivered overseas to ensure that UK interests are not disadvantaged. Through our overseas links we are also able to establish contacts with relevant government departments and quality agencies in those countries scheduled for overseas audits over the next three years. We also aim to work closely with other overseas agencies to share information for mutual benefit: in practice, much of this work is done through briefing overseas visitors to this country.
E - Working effectively
The Agency's main sources of funding are through contracts with the HE funding bodies and through subscriptions paid by individual colleges and universities. Each year, as part of our annual business planning cycle, we develop the coming year's operating plan and budget, as the basis for discussion and agreement with the HE funding and representative bodies. Contracts are signed with the funding bodies for a specified volume of work, primarily subject review activity, and subscription levels are agreed with the representative bodies, primarily to support the audit/institutional review (including collaborative and overseas) and Access dimensions of our work. Both the contracts with the funding bodies and the subscription levels paid by the sector include an element towards developmental work and the costs of the Agency's organisational infrastructure. Each of our funders has a legitimate expectation of increasing efficiency and effectiveness in our work.
Corporate objectives to support achievement of strategic aim E
1 To achieve efficiency, effectiveness and economy in all of the activities of the Agency
The Agency's business planning and budgeting process underpins much of our work in achieving efficiency, effectiveness and economy. The identification of a programme of work for the coming year, set out in a costed annual operating plan, is discussed with the funding and representative bodies. Those bodies submit our proposals to close scrutiny. The agreements reached are subsequently captured in contracts with the funding councils and subscription levels agreed with the representative bodies, to deliver the programme of work. The Agency is actively strengthening its business planning capacity by developing a range of resource strategies to ensure that it has, and makes the best use of, the resources it needs to deliver its objectives. Our proposed plans and budgets are subject to discussion and agreement with our key partners before each succeeding year's operating plan and budget are finalised, and we also provide regular financial and activity monitoring reports to those partners.
Over the period of the plan we will:
-
review and maintain our business planning processes;
-
implement and maintain strategies for information, finance
and human resources, to support the Business
plan;
-
implement and maintain a risk management strategy and value
for money strategy;
-
review and strengthen our financial regulations;
- develop our performance management systems.
2 To ensure that the Agency's organisational structures remain appropriate to the discharge of its responsibilities
The Agency is organised into four directorates: Administration, Development, Institutional Review and Programme Review. The four Directors and the Chief Executive form the Executive group. The staff of the Agency were either transferred from predecessor organisations, or have been recruited since the establishment of the Agency's head office in Gloucester. As the Agency moves to introduce academic review across the UK it will keep under review the necessary underlying organisational structures, the evolution of job roles, and the pattern of abilities and skills required of staff. The Agency has introduced a Personal Performance and Development (PPD) appraisal system as a vehicle for reviewing staff performance and identifying development needs. This will help ensure that staffing levels and skills are appropriate to the Agency's evolving needs. Identification of development needs will lead to an organisational training and development plan. The Agency is working towards recognition as an Investor in People.
Over the period of the plan we will:
- review the Agency's structure and staffing levels each year;
- develop and maintain an organisational training and development plan;
-
achieve recognition as an Investor in People.
Top