1. David Chesser Deputy Vice Chancellor & Finance Director 23 April 2009

3.  Data Analysis - To assess effectiveness, efficiency and value for money  Gap Analysis and Process Review - To identify and/or develop improvements to the existing effectiveness and efficiency of services  To produce proposals for the implementation of improvements

4.  Comments are generally supportive  Agreement some areas are more effective than others  Positive approach to communication  Most problems are tackled quickly and effectively  Some variation in responsiveness of the Services  Services are focussed in support of the core business  Structure of some Service Departments reflects historical development not current needs

5.  Organisation Charts and Staffing Structures reviewed by group  Some Services involved in broad range of service delivery – perhaps beyond those required by Users  Balance between Services and Schools may not be appropriate in some cases

6.  Services should provide high level professional support via high added-value core teams  Schools to provide discipline specific expertise via lower level admin support  Particularly relevant for Services closely aligned to academic activities ◦ Learning & Teaching ◦ International ◦ Research & Innovation

7. Growth 3 Years to July 2008 Enrolled students (number)+11% Income (£s)+27.4% Support and management staff expenditure+30.1% Academic staff expenditure+17.0% Total staff expenditure+22.4% Support and management staff fte148 (+12%) Academic staff fte62 (+6%)

8.  Expenditure on staff on non-academic contracts is towards the high end of the sector median  Income dedicated to staff on academic contracts is lower than the sector median – reflected in Student to Staff Ratio (SSR)  SSRs are significant contributors to league table positions  Balance changed in last 3 years – support & management grown considerably

9.  Number of Service Departments appears high compared to many other Institutions – consequence of flat management structure  Management and admin grades vary significantly across the Services – top level costs appear high in some departments  Apparent duplication between Schools & Services – thorough role analysis required  Impact of PMF & National Pay Awards substantial

10. Cross-University review projects include:  The Business Process Review  The Procurement to Pay Initiative  The Management Information Review  Review of Teaching and Learning services These activities are likely to be integrated during implementation of Stage 2 recommendations

11.  Two stage recommendation approach ◦ Stage 1 effective immediately ◦ Stage 2 longer term, further analytical work required

12.  Pre SDP meetings with all Service Directors  Incorporate SER recommendations into SDP  Development of structured process of engagement (SLA’s & KPI’s)  Best practice implementation/innovation  Deans & Directors Away Day  Possible development of revenue streams and commercial enterprise

13.  SER Group continue to ensure delivery of objectives  Consider overall structure  ‘One-Stop Shop’ and co-location of Services for student facing activities  Schools to co-ordinate own admin requirements and present to SER Group  Consider separate trading subsidiaries for new activities e.g. Sports Facility & student residences  Review of committee structures

14. David Chesser Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Finance Director