Student and Academic Services Group Risk Register: May 2011

Transcription

1 Critical Possible Risks 1. Non-compliance with legislation or with, Government or professional policy, procedure, or regulation relating to delivery of services Litigation, prosecution, loss of reputation, censure by regulators, adverse publicity, financial penalties, loss of confidence of staff and students, closure of facilities and with an adverse reaction on research funding. The growing mismatch between demands and resources means that we have to take a risk management approach to compliance in some areas, with the consequence that from time to time we may get this wrong. Regular review of internal and external protocols. Staff training and the maintenance of professional development programmes. Alertness to reports of new legislation. Scrutiny of guidance from UUK and UScot. Scrutiny of legal newsletters Lawyers advice. Development and maintenance of internal knowledge and expertise and dissemination of advice and guidance. Lead: Heads of Support Service departments 2. On-line systems collapse in Admissions Service disruption to processes. Loss of potential students. Unable to confirm decisions and hence student numbers Ongoing dialogue at senior level with UCAS. Develop contingency plans to revert to paper applications and report generation. Heads of Service, SRA Director of Academic Registry Admissions Service 1

2 possible penalties for under/over recruitment at UG level. Loss of income from overseas students particularly at PG level. Manager Director of International Office Relevant College staff 3.Unsuccesful implementation, or lack of benefits realisation from the project work on SACS Student Administration disruption with impacts on the how the manages its students. Financial impact on the due to delays in assessing fees. Financial impact on students due to delays in informing the SLC and SAAS that students had registered. Likelihood: Possible SACS Governance Board actively involved to ensure success. Contingency Plans are in place for all business owners. Reversion to paper systems if necessary. Oversight by the Deputy / Director of Planning Director of Academic Registry Financial impact on the due to inability to achieve planned savings. Reputational damage and impact on student recruitment. unable to make its SFC and HESA returns. 2

3 4. Misalignment of SRA and International Office strategies for student recruitment with needs of Colleges Failure to recruit to targets and failure to maximise potential income. Duplication of effort and proliferation of support posts in Colleges. Budget reductions leading to downward spiral. Effective communications between SRA, International Office, Vice Principal and Colleges. Clear articulation of College needs and monitoring of progress towards targets. Effective planning. Heads of Service, SRA Director of International Office 5. Insufficient administrative support for teaching Quality Assurance and Enhancement measures 1 and academic policy development (including implementation of the revised Academic Committee structure) Poor/failing evaluation of our processes by the QAA. Damage to reputation. Failure to keep academic policy up to date. VP Academic Enhancement, Director of Academic Standards & Quality Assurance, Academic Policy Manager oversight. Improvements to system of UG and PG programme reviews. Director of Academic Registry Possible increase in appeals and complaints. Reduced effectiveness of academic governance Insufficient dissemination and therefore poor implementation of academic policies and decisions. Review of academic policy business case and strategic refocussing of work priorities has been undertaken. Academic Affairs has been restructured and is now known as Registry Academic Services. As part of the restructuring there has been a refocusing of roles 1 NB The level policy responsibility of the Vice-Principal Academic Enhancement and the Director Academic Standards and Quality Assurance for this area of activity is acknowledged 3

4 and responsibilities of all staff with new job descriptions being agreed. A team of two full time Academic Policy Managers, 0.5 FTE Academic Policy Officer and 0.5 FTE Administrative. In conjunction with the Senate Committees Convenors goals have been identified and work rates have already increased. 4

5 6. Insufficient administrative support for ELIR 2011 Poor / failing evaluation of our processes by the QAA. Damage to reputation. Additional resources have been assigned to this area of activity in preparation for ELIR in Details given above Director of Academic Registry 7. Failure to provide adequate support to planning systems. Bad decision-making. Sub-optimal use of resources. Adverse impact on reputation. Senior management time wasted. Ongoing core activity of GaSP. Director of Planning Alertness to complaints from users of the service. Addressing student management information and business continuity issues, e.g. by working with SACS. Input to development of web based resource to provide information on student support following L&T Committee task group on academic and pastoral support and Induction Working recommendations. 8. Failure to establish processes to operate the new managed migration legislation under Tier 4 and failure of the EUCLID SMS IT Interface Non-compliance with legislation leading to penalties, loss of HTS Status and licence down-rated or lost. Damage to reputation. Communications strategy. New system now live. National Recognition Information Centre used to check sample credentials. Directors of the International Office and Academic Registry Implementation responsibility largely MMITSG to monitor and review implementation of new sytem. 5

6 Lose ability to recruit. international students leading to loss of income. IO Director on the UUK group to develop and influence policy. lies with Colleges Existing international students have to leave. Manual inputting of CASs by admissions staff creating a massive administrative burden. HR and IO continue to lobby the UKBA and work with partners for a positive outcome. UKBA may intensify efforts relating to international recruitment and admissions activity. 9. Failure to provide a high quality student experience Damage to reputation, recruitment, retention and ultimately to institutional financial health. Student services leaflets published to improve student understanding of our services. Student services website live. Individual services undertake regular surveys of their services. Heads of Departments Co-location of Careers, Counselling and Disablility in the Main Library. Review of student services leaflets being undertaken. Student services KPIs. 10. Failure to successfully implement the merger with eca Damage to Reputation. Financial Impact; loss of funding, reduction in student applications. Ongoing planning across all impacted areas in the. Lead: Heads of Departments 6

7 Critical Rare Risks 11. Failure to implement appropriate processes and procedures to meet the requirements of the new Research Excellence Framework Loss of funding. Loss of reputation. Undertaking detailed work to inform consultation responses submitted to SFC. Ongoing work with ISG to develop data and publications repositories. Director of Planning participates in Brunswick RAE Committee of Russell. Lead: Director of Planning Director IS Applications Division/ Director of Library Services/ College Registrars/ database owners Implementation of PURE to support REF. 12. Failure to comply with the new migration legislation in relation to recruitment of new staff in SASG and use of TPR/QQR externals Non-compliance with legislation leading to civil and/or criminal penalties and licence down-rated or lost. Damage to reputation, fines and/or imprisonment. Compliance with HR processes regarding identity information. Heads of Departments 13. Development and Alumni systems failure (specifically ThankQ and the MyEd alumni portal) Disruption to work. Potential lost data. Damage to relationship of existing donors. Database development and backups and IS Disaster Recovery plans. Lead: Director of D&A Deputy Director, Operations, in D&A Review procedures on regular basis and ensure coordination with IS Disaster recovery plans. 7

8 14. Travel disruption caused by e.g. volcanic ash cloud, natural disaster, civil unrest; prevents students from entering or leaving the UK Possible clawback for funded places and loss of income from overseas students. Potential penalties by the UKBA for students not leaving the UK. Monitor the position noting matriculation periods. Lead: Heads of Departments Promote Advice for Staff and Students. 15. Mis-handling of ethical issues (e.g. in fundraising, student recruitment, student services) Damage to Reputation. Loss of confidence of donors, students, applicants, other stakeholders. Develop and observe ethical policies. Heads of Departments Review procedures periodically. Potential legal action under, e.g. Bribery Act. 16. Fraudulent activity or embezzlement of Funds within Development Trust, Development & Alumni or other areas handling significant sums Damage to Reputation. Lack of confidence of donors. Liability of Trustees. Loss of Income. Trust Financial systems and reports. External and Internal Audit. Segregated duties within Development & Alumni Director D&A Heads of Departments Regular review of fraudprevention measures. Yearly conversations with external auditors about monitoring accounts to identify fraud. 8

9 Moderate Likely Risks 17. Inadequate time and resources to complete, review and improve core activities and over-reliance on a few key staff members Danger of breaching statutory obligations. Miss opportunities for simplification or spread of good practice. Inefficient use of resources. Inadequate dissemination, review and updating of policies. Student appeals and complaints. Impact: Moderate Likelihood: Likely Regular briefing meetings and meetings with staff. Bids for adequate resources. Workload capacity planning and training. Many staff work longer and at a level above that contracted. This is not sustainable and should not be relied upon. Review of policies. Lead: Heads of Departments Review current activities and purposes and budget time and resources accordingly. Do cost/benefit and risk reviews of new activities before beginning them. Make those taking decisions which place additional burdens on SASG aware of this. 9

10 Moderate Possible Risks 18. Inadequate resource management/ planning Failure to deliver effective and coherent services. Disruption of activities. Loss of confidence within staff and students. Loss of reputation. Impact: Moderate Regular meetings between the Business Manager, Heads of Support s, Heads of Services and regular liaison between senior managers. Carefully managed departments. Welfare Consultative. Lead: Heads of Departments Outcome of the Review of Academic and Pastoral Support for Students will help determine further actions. Improved use of the web to document information. Ineffective knowledge management, e.g. because too much information is insufficiently documented. Team working and task rotation. In GaSP, all non-trivial tasks documented on the intranet. 19. Inadequate management of relationship with students and student representatives Lack of feedback leading to poor service delivery. Loss of reputation, adverse publicity leading to loss of students and staff. Disruption of institutional governance. Impact: Moderate Student representatives on key committees. Student support office and support for EUSA office bearers by permanent EUSA staff. Regular meetings between students and staff. Lead: Heads of Departments Raise awareness and promote good practice. Review committee memberships periodically. Develop internal communications strategy. 10

11 SASG Risk Summary Impact Slight Moderate Critical Disastrous Likelihood Probable Likely 17 Possible 18, 19 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Rare 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Measures of impact and likelihood are those used in the s Risk Register: 11