College input into Vision-Setting at the VCEG Residential 2012
Overview
The revised planning and budgeting process, stemming from the Armstrong Review, begins with a
Vision Setting phase. The aim of this phase is to set the framework within which Colleges and the
Professional Services can do their 5-year planning. This framework comprises:



targets relating to the University’s size, shape and nature over the 5-year planning period;
key strategic priorities for the University;
planning guidance for Professional Services and Colleges.
The setting of the targets and priorities will take place at the VCEG Residential in September. The
purpose of this document is to provide a means for Colleges to feed into this process. Once the
Vision for the next five years has been agreed by VCEG, it will then be brought to the SMG
Residential for discussion around the practical implications of its implementation.
Information requested
The attached template should be used by the College to provide input into the VCEG Vision-Setting.
Before you complete the template we recommend you consider the key environmental factors
which will impact on the college over the next five years, the potential opportunities and threats
which these pose as well as your own internal strengths and weaknesses. With that analysis as
background, please provide an overview of:
1. The College’s most important achievements over the last couple of years.
2. The biggest strategic challenges facing the College over 5-year planning period1.
3. What are your greatest strategic priorities for the College over the next five years2.
4. Key messages the College wants VCEG to consider in setting the Vision3.
To provide context, the template includes a summary of the College KPIs, and the top 3 risks from
the College Risk Register.
Process
Please complete the document and return to Iain Springate ([email protected]) by 6th
September. The document should be no more than two pages of A4 (excluding the KPI and Risk
appendices). The whole document will be provided to VCEG, and where applicable to SMG, to
inform their residential planning events in September 2012. Colleges will want to discuss their
template with their DVC before the VCEG residential.
If you need any data to support your submission, have any questions or want to make suggestions
about the process itself, please speak to your Planning Officer.
Steve Chadwick
Director of Strategic Planning and Change, July 2012
1
2
3
These should be high-level strategic challenges, not operational issues. For example, “How can we improve the quality of our student
intake when three of our main competitors have openly declared their intention to grow student numbers aggressively?” or “We need
to drastically improve our assessment and feedback scores in the NSS in X and Y disciplines”, or “How can we grow research income to
£Xm while at the same time maintaining our SSR at 15:1?
For example, these might include: “Reducing our SSR from X to Y; Having at least X% of staff submitted for the next REF and at least
Y% of outputs graded at 4*; Achieve no less than Y% overall satisfaction in the NSS in all disciplines in the college by 2015”.
These could include, but not be limited to, priorities for the University to invest in over the planning period.
College:
Please name College below
Achievements
Provide a brief overview of the College’s most important achievements since the restructuring in 2010.
This will be used to remind VCEG and SMG of how much the colleges have achieved in the short time since
their establishment.





Strategic Challenges
Summarise the (up to 5) main challenges likely to be faced by the College over the next five years. These
should be high-level strategic challenges, not operational issues. For example, “How can we improve the
quality of our student intake when three of our main competitors have openly declared their intention to
grow student numbers aggressively?” or “We need to drastically improve our assessment and feedback
scores in the NSS in X and Y disciplines”, or “How can we grow research income to £Xm while at the same
time maintaining our SSR at 15:1? We will use this information to ensure that the discussions at VCEG and
SMG are sufficiently wide-ranging to ensure we address all key challenges.





Strategic Priorities
Outline what you consider to be the (up to 5) greatest strategic priorities for the College over the next five
years. For example, these might include: “Reducing our SSR from X to Y; Having at least X% of staff
submitted for the next REF and at least Y% of outputs graded at 4*; Achieve no less than Y% overall
satisfaction in the NSS in all disciplines in the college by 2015”. We will use this section to ‘sense check’ the
University’s strategic priorities in the Planning Framework.





Key Messages





Identify the key issues (up to 5) from your College’s perspective that you want VCEG to consider when they
are setting the University vision for the next five years. These could include, but not be limited to, priorities
for the University to invest in over the planning period. This section is critical in ensuring VCEG and SMG
are mindful of the college’s major concerns when agreeing the planning framework within which all
colleges and professional services will need to plan over the next five years.
UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
Planning Services
The College of Humanities - Top 10 Key Performance Indicators Table
Updated
1
28/06/12
Historic Comparative Data
(previous HESA data)
Strategic
Theme
Key Performance Indicator
Research Income per Staff FTE (£'000)
Research
12.4
13.6
-
-
p
15.3
-
Exeter Rank
in Top 10
Exeter
Group1
Exeter
Institution
Score
13.1
3rd / 13
70.6
-
-
-
2.5
-
Top 10 Group
Median
Exeter
2.0
1.5
2.1
p
1.7
1st / 13
2.2
1.6
% PGT Student Population
6.6%
8.4%
5.5%
q
8.7%
10th / 13
14.1%
5.3%
Undergraduate Entry Tariffs
444
448
474
p
463
5th / 13
459
482
90.6%
89.1%
90.9%
p
90.5%
6th / 13
82.8%
-
National Student Survey
85.1%
81.8%
82.9%
q
83.4%
6th / 10
82.4%
-
Graduate Level Destinations
66.1%
67.9%
70.7%
p
72.0%
8th / 13
74.6%
4.6%
7.2%
4.3%
q
7.0%
12th / 13
21.0%
3.9%
51.6%
-
53.5%
-
-
-
68.5%
-
2
Achievement
3
Sustainable
Future
Top 10 Group
Median
Previous
Research Assessment Exercise (RAE)
PGR per Staff FTE
Student
Experience
2
Exeter
Previous
2011/12
Internal
Estimate
Latest Comparative Data
(HESA data 2010/11 or earlier)
International Population
Earned Income
4
Notes:
1
It should be noted when looking at 'Exeter Rank in Top 10 Group' that not all of the 13 institutions within the Top 10 Competitor Group have data for every subject area. The rank in the Top 10 Group is followed by the number of Top 10 Group institutions
with data.
2 The performance figures for Research Income and PGR per Staff FTE are based on comparisons to the University's Top 10 Competitor Group. This differs from the figures provided as part of RM where a different list of competitors are used.
3 The latest NSS results are from the 2011 survey which were released in summer 2011.
4 Earned Income data at College and Department level is compiled internally, therefore a Competitor Group comparison score is not available. This KPI is based on 2010/11 data.
5 It is not possible at present to provide information on the progression KPI. This should hopefully be resolved by the end of the year.
6 Research income and PGR per Staff FTE figures are based in the latest Planning Plus 2012 2010/1 HESA data.
7 % PGT Population, Undergraduate Entry Tariffs, Achievement and International Population are based on the 2010/1 purchased HESA data.
8 Graduate Destinations data is based on the 2010/11 DLHE results.
Key:
Comparison with Previous Year
p
tu
q
Comparison with Top 10 Competitor Group
Improvement on previous year
No improvement on previous year
Better than Top 10 Group median
Equal to Top 10 Group median
Decrease in performance from previous year
Below Top 10 Group median
Annex 2: Humanities Risk Register
The College undertook a review of their Risk Register in May which will form part of the annual reporting cycle to VCEG and Council. The table below
outlines the three top risks in the College Risk Register (i.e. those with the highest net score).
Top College Risks (i.e. highest Net Risk score)
Gross risk
Net risk
Severity Probability Total Severity Probability Total
1. Cross subsidy -- this risk now replaces "the impact of government cuts" from 2010/11
as it is clear that the College is resilient enough to wear the planned reductions in HEFCE
grant however in College and institutional cross subsidy, should this become structural in
nature, represents the greatest threat to the investment plans in the College as part of its
managing its risks and achieving its ambitions; the greater the pressure on STEM/M the
greater the pressure on sustaining momentum in Humanities at Exeter; the migration of
PCMD to a new Exeter Medical School and associated costs provides an additional strain
2. The challenges of managing accurate financial planning, forecasting and budgeting
remain despite preliminary and positive progress to the new financial planning tool
Cognos; the instability of the planning environment post White Paper and some
operational and capacity issues are the primary concerns as evidenced in the current
round of "target setting"
3. In addition to the more obvious threats of poaching AAB market share from Exeter
Humanities by leading HEI competitors, there is steeply increasing evidence of staff
poaching which shall affect the student experience directly and indirectly; near
competitors in the top ten are a distinct threat.
5
6
30
5
6
30
5
5
25
5
4
20
5
5
25
5
4
20