It is critical that the Board spends time as a collective body discussing and deciding upon strategic and other significant matters. This is with the intention of making decision-making more agile and effective for all colleagues, and that University ‘business’ can be moved forward in the most effectively and timely way.
Items presented to the Board:
In summary, items of the following type should be brought to the Board for consideration, approval or endorsement or note (where the Board is not the final approving body).
University-level plans requiring strategic positioning and major resourcing and decisions to be taken, and performance outcomes and implications to be monitored and evaluated.
Regulations and Policies with major corporate, financial or wider financial and staff and physical/virtual resourcing implications, or significant external legislative impacts.
The Board will be the final approving point for many Regulations or Policies fitting this criteria. However, there are some policies and Regulations which require escalation into committees of Council, or even to Council. Advice should be sought from the Secretary. The Board should not be asked to approve predominantly academic or academic related regulations policy (such as relating to student entry, progressions awards, assessment, discipline etc) unless there are major resource or organisational implications.
(many of these will be incorporated into a business case item as per below)
Examples of these could be:
Where the strategic scale of the case for the investment or partnership is significant, and known or expected expenditure for major projects and partnerships and return exceeds the amount set in the Financial Regulations. See row above. The Board should not normally be asked to approve detailed:
Instead it should receive summary assurance on these as part business case or final approval proposals.
Examples of these are:
An example would be where the consultation relates to institution-wide matters (for example OfS, UKRI or USS), these should be co-ordinated by/on behalf of a Board member.
It is not expected that the Board would approve consultations at this level, depending on the significance and impact of that being consulted on, but as a minimum should receive these for information as part of its horizon scanning role.
If you are unsure if your item should be presented to the Board, please seek the views of the Secretary to the Board (Adam Dawkins) or the Governance and Regulation Officer (Gill Gibbins) who can advise on the journey of the item between various University bodies, on the basis of a clear rationale and intended content of the item. If the item is referred back it is not a signal that is not important, itw will be because it is not within the Board's remit, and a more appropriate place, or person(s) exist to discuss and decide upon it.
Items reviewed by the Board may be referred back to the Sponsor and Author for further work and clarification. Sometimes this will be:
Who to contact
- Adam Dawkins
- Gill Gibbins
Agendas and Papers
- Becky Christou
Think Tank Meetings