Collaborative Provision

Academic Quality Handbook

Version: 4.0

1

Version Control

Policy: Collaborative Provision: Academic Quality Handbook V4.0

Academic

Committee Review: March 2016 (following consideration by Collaborative Provision Sub-Group)

Senate: March 2016, updated March 2017

University Council: 25 April 2017

Version History:

Version 1

Version 2

Approved by Senate

Approved by Senate

June 2012

December 2012

Version 3

Version 4

Amended to reflect changes

in the University’s

governance structures

Clarification regarding the

processes for the on-going

management and

enhancement of

programmes or activities

Clarification over

proportionality

Amended to take account of

possibility of validated

programmes being

supported

Amended to remove

references to Senior

Academic Quality Advisor

Supersedes: Collaborative Provision: Academic Quality Handbook v3.0

Frequency of Review: Each Academic Year

Related

Regulations

Undergraduate And Postgraduate Taught Degree Regulations,

Postgraduate Research Degree Regulations

Key Related Policies

/ Guidance:

Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy

Enhancement Strategy

Programme Approval Handbook

Annual Review and Enhancement Framework

International Student Exchange and Study Abroad Policy

Admissions / APL Policy

Student Voice Guidance

Programme Withdrawal / Suspension Handbook

Policy owner/s: University Secretary as Chair of Collaborative Provision Sub-Group

2

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 3

2. Liverpool Hope’s Approach to Collaborative Provision ........................................ 3

3. Definition of Collaborative Provision .................................................................. 4

3.1 Taxonomy of Collaborative and Partnerships Provision ................................... 4

Collaborative Provision ....................................................................................... 5

Other types of Partnerships................................................................................. 7

4. Principles Governing Collaborative Provision ..................................................... 8

5. Key Roles and Responsibilities in relation to Collaborative Provision ................. 10

6 Approval and Review Arrangements: Collaborative Provision ............................ 11

7 Reciprocal Due Diligence ................................................................................ 12

8 Approval of a New Programme or Module ........................................................ 13

9 Supporting Non-Hope Staff .............................................................................. 13

10 Monitoring and Review .................................................................................. 13

11 The Register of Collaborative Provision .......................................................... 14

12 Withdrawal from Collaborative Provision ......................................................... 14

3

1. Introduction This document sets out the University’s framework for the development and management of

collaborative provision. It covers taught and research degree programmes undertaken in

collaboration with other institutions and/or organisations in the UK or internationally. By

operating according to this framework the University ensures that it is exercising its

responsibilities for the student experience and the academic standards and quality of

collaborative provision.

The University recognises that it has ultimate responsibility for the academic standards and

the quality of learning opportunities on programmes of study leading to its awards (as

articulated in the expectations of the UK Quality Code), wherever or however they are

delivered, and this core principle underpins the procedures set out in this policy.

The Handbook provides an overview of the procedures, processes and requirements for the:

i) development and approval of a new collaborative programme or activity;

ii) continuous quality management of collaborative programmes or activities.

The policy has been developed through the Collaborative Provision Sub-Group (CPSG) and

endorsed by Academic Committee (AC) in June 2015 prior to Senate approval (17/6/15) it was

reviewed in early 2017 It will be kept under regular review by AC, as a minimum at the end of

each academic year, to ensure that internal processes function efficiently and effectively that

the University’s approach aligns with the expectations contained in the UK Quality Code. The

accumulation of knowledge and experience as policies and procedures are being operated

will provide key evidence for review and evaluation.

Further user documentation has been developed to accompany this handbook, to help guide

staff clearly through each of the different types of collaborative proposal. This will ensure that

the processes for approval and management are clearly communicated and readily

accessible. Queries regarding the policy can be referred to Faculty Executive Officers or the

University Secretary.

2. Liverpool Hope’s Approach to Collaborative Provision Collaborative Provision through national and international partnerships is an important

element of the University’s portfolio. It offers opportunities for the University to support a wide

range of learners in a variety of contexts through partnership working. In particular it supports

our objectives in extending and strengthening external partnerships, international engagement

and the development of employer engagement. It also provides a means to cultivate an

international profile through the establishment of links with individual institutions overseas,

provides opportunities for staff and student exchange and fosters the development and

sharing of good practice in curriculum development, learning and teaching and student

support.

The University does not see collaborative provision as a means of income generation and may

consider entering into a collaborative provision arrangement where there is no ‘significant

profit’ but where a strong case for academic benefit can be made and/or where it can be

demonstrated that there is a clear mission-related responsibility. As a result of the application

4

of this principle the suite of collaborative provision at the University is modest1. Whilst the

University does not have an extensive suite of collaborative provision, the benefits of new

collaboration and the opportunities it brings to both the institution and to our students may be

substantial. However, as expressed in 4.4 below collaboration is not without risk and therefore

the University considers each proposal on a case by case basis.

Our key strategic aim in respect of collaborative provision is to develop strong, effective, high

quality, long-term, independently financially viable partnerships with a number of key partners

in the UK and overseas.

3. Definition of Collaborative Provision The term ‘Collaborative Provision’ describes a wide range of activity, involving various forms

of collaborative and partnership arrangements both nationally and internationally.

Collaborative provision, (or, as it is also known in Chapter B10 of the Quality Code,

‘managing higher education provision with others’), represents any learning opportunities

leading or contributing to the award of academic credit or a qualification delivered,

assessed or supported through an arrangement with partners other than the University.

It covers all levels of taught provision as well as collaborations involving tuition and supervision

for research degrees. The key matter in determining whether a potential collaboration falls

within the scope of this policy is whether the achievement of the learning outcomes for a

programme (or a module) is dependent on the arrangement made with the other delivery or

support organisation.

3.1 Taxonomy of Collaborative and Partnerships Provision Collaborative provision may fall into one of several categories and, depending on the type of

collaboration, different levels of quality assurance, legal and administrative support will be

required. If the type of collaboration proposed in a new venture does not fall into one of the

following categories, staff are expected to discuss proposals with their Faculty Executive

Officer, Head of Department and Deanand the University’s Legal Services Officer in the first

instance. Similarly, if Hope is approached to be the partner organisation to another HEI /

organisation, then the principles enshrined in this document in respect of strategic approval

and academic quality will apply and appropriate governance mechanisms should be

established to protect the interests of both students and the University. The following list

describes the principal types of collaboration which may be established by Higher Education

Institutions. However, it is important to note that the University actively decided against

establishing certain type of collaborative provision (Senate June 2012), and this is clearly

articulated within the relevant sections.

Note: This Handbook does not cover arrangements where students receive no credit,

qualification or are studying exclusively for the qualification of another institution.

1 A register of all collaborative activity is maintained by the University Secretary’s Office and summary details available on the University’s website.

5

Collaborative Provision

Type of

arrangement Definition Comment

Type of Agreement

Franchise

A franchise is defined by the University as an arrangement whereby the

University allows the whole or part of one or more of its own internally

developed programmes to be delivered and assessed at a partner institution by

academic staff not employed by the university, leading to an award of the

University. The University retains overall control of the course’s content, regulations, delivery, assessment and

quality assurance arrangements.

The University does not enter into Franchise agreements in respect

of its taught programmes.

Exceptionally, the University may consider

the franchising of its Research Degrees with UK based institutions who have not been

awarded RDAP.

Collaboration Agreement

Research Degrees ONLY

Validated programme

Validated Programme – a programme

of study designed, delivered and assessed by a Partner on its premises, leading to an award of the University.

The programme is validated (approved) by the University (but not delivered by

the University) and is subject to the quality assurance procedures of the

University.

The University will only enter into validation agreements where

there is an exceptional, strategic driver with a well-established and academically sound

partner

Validation Agreement

Joint Delivery

A whole, part of (for example a level) or

individual module(s) of a course is delivered and assessed jointly by the

University and the partner.

(Note this does not include the contribution of visiting speakers who

contribute to Hope programmes)

The University does not enter into such

arrangements. N/A

Dual Award

A dual award describes collaborative

arrangements under which two or more awarding institutions together provide

programmes leading to separate awards being granted by both, or all of

them.

This is a relatively common

model in Europe (often referred to as a ‘double’

award).

Collaboration Agreement

Joint Award

Joint awards involve the granting of a

single award for successful completion of a programme of study which has

been designed and delivered by two or more institutions, who have combined their degree awarding powers for the

purposes of making the award.

The University does

not normally enter into such arrangements.

Collaboration Agreement

6

Type of arrangement

Definition Comment Type of

Agreement

Serial Arrangement

The University defines a serial arrangement as occurring when a partner organisation enters into an

agreement of its own to permit a third party to deliver the arrangement it has with the University on its behalf. Under

such an arrangement the University has no direct relationship with the third

party.

The University does not enter into serial arrangements under any circumstances2. Such sub-contracting severely curtails the

ability of the University to safeguard its

academic standards.

N/A

Off-site delivery

(including Flying

Faculty)

TYPE A

Liverpool Hope credit-bearing modules or programmes delivered by University

staff outside University premises in conjunction with a partner who provides

premises and equipment, learning resources and student or administrative

support that is integral to the student learning experience.

Specific consideration must be given to the nature of the offsite

delivery

Collaboration Agreement

School Direct

School Direct falls under the category of Academic Collaborative Provision, enabling a school that has secured student numbers to work with the University to offer a school-based PGCE programme through its own alliance. It is subject to the quality

assurance procedures of the University. Through such

arrangements, the Ofsted inspection and judgement is retained by the

University.

The University has a number of models of working with School Direct

Due to the continuing involvement of staff from the University’s

Faculty of Education in School Direct

arrangements and because School Direct provision is considered by Ofsted as part of the University’s inspection,

School Direct arrangements are

managed by the Faculty of Education. This work

is overseen in the Faculty and reported

annually.

School Direct Collaboration Agreement

SCITT

A School Centred Initial Teaching

Training (SCITT) is a consortium of schools accredited to recommend

Qualified to Teach Status (QTS). For this reason, the SCITT is responsible

for the Ofsted inspection and judgement. The SCITT is approved by the University to deliver its own SCITT-designed ITT programme leading to a Liverpool Hope award. It is subject to

the quality assurance procedures of the University. SCITT arrangements are a

Dependent upon the way in which student numbers are secured by the SCITT, there may be instances where a SCITT

encompasses a School Direct arrangement

within it. Where such arrangements arise, the University works closely

with the Partner to ensure respective

SCITT Collaboration Agreement

2 It is recognised that the School Direct Initial teacher training (ITT) scheme is offered by a partnership between a lead school, other schools and an accredited training provider. The partnership between the lead school and other schools is captured within the School Direct Legal Agreement and is not considered a serial arrangement within this policy framework.

7

Type of arrangement

Definition Comment Type of

Agreement

form of Academic Collaborative Provision.

responsibilities are clearly defined

Other types of Partnerships

Type of arrangement

Definition Comment Type of

Agreement

Articulation

Articulation is a form of Entry with Advanced Standing. It is a process whereby all students who satisfy academic criteria from a specific programme (studied at another organisation) are entitled (on

academic grounds) to be admitted with advanced standing to a

subsequent stage of a programme at the University

A standard Articulation Arrangement permits credit achieved for the study undertaken at the other organisation

to be transferred (subject to a satisfactory mapping exercise) and contribute to the programme and

award completed at the University.

The University only enters into Articulation

Agreements after careful consideration and (proportionate) due diligence of the proposed partner,

including consideration of the

academic programmes

underpinning the arrangement.

Memorandum of Articulation

Off-site delivery

(including Flying Faculty)

TYPE B

Liverpool Hope credit-bearing modules or programmes delivered by

University staff outside University premises in conjunction with a partner

who solely provides premises for delivery of the programme

Specific consideration must be given to the nature/location of the

offsite delivery

Out-Centre Agreement

Also

Professional Placements

Arrangement with an external organisation to enable students to

undertake a placement for the purposes of professional development / training.

Undergraduate and postgraduate awards

linked to QTS and Social Work.

Managed at local level

School Partnership Handbook

Social Work Placement Agreement

Student Placement

Arrangement with an industry or business organisation to enable students to undertake a period of

work-related learning.

Local Approval in line with Student

Placement Code of Practice

Student Placement

Exchange Partner

Partnership arrangement to enable Liverpool Hope students to study at

European, and international, institutions for part of their

programme. European exchanges are part of the ERASMUS scheme.

In line with Student Exchange and Study

Abroad Policy.

Managed by International Team

Exchange Agreement

Understanding

This sets out a statement of intent but does not commit either body to

specific outcomes. Any programme level arrangements subsequently

Memorandum

of Understanding

8

approved will require an appropriate agreement.

Note: In respect of offsite delivery of a programme (with no elements of partner support),

Chapter B10 of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education states the following 'hiring general

rooms from another organisation would not be deemed to fall within this Chapter, but

arrangements to use specialist facilities or equipment on which students were dependent to

demonstrate specific learning outcomes would be regarded as falling within its scope '. Where

a Faculty wants to set up a partnership model that involves specialist facilities or equipment

supplied by a support provider, specific approval for this is required under this policy and this

should also be noted within the Programme Approval Event.

An offsite delivery arrangement which has no involvement from another organisation apart

from providing rooms should not be treated as collaborative provision. The offsite delivery

should be approved within the programme approval process and consideration at the event of

an Outcentre Approval. Particular attention must be paid to the learning and teaching

environment and matters of accessibility/inclusion. An agreement must still be put in place for

offsite delivery which includes, inter alia, responsibility for insurance and public liability.

4. Principles Governing Collaborative Provision 4.1 Strategic objectives: the development of collaborative academic partnerships,

locally, regionally and overseas, should reflect the values, commitments and objectives

established in the Corporate Plan.

4.2 Academic standards and quality: the University is responsible for the academic

standards of all awards and credit granted in its name and must be able to satisfy itself

that the quality of the learning opportunities offered through any partnership is

adequate to enable a student to achieve the standards required for the award.

4.3 Language of delivery and assessment: all programmes leading to an award or credit

granted by the University must be delivered and assessed in English3.

4.4 Approval, risk and proportionality: each proposed partner and partnership

arrangement is subject to formal approval in accordance with agreed criteria and

procedures agreed by Senate, together with an assessment of risk. The process for

approving potential partnerships is designed to ensure that the University can satisfy

itself about the good standing of a prospective partner and their capacity to fulfil their

intended role in the partnership arrangement, and that the necessary commitment and

resource implications have been considered in the planning of new partnerships and

collaborative arrangements. While recognising the risks involved when working with

others, the University also wishes to take advantage of the opportunities and benefits

associated with entering into collaborative arrangements, such as widening

participation in higher education, securing market advantages, and developing good

relationships with other educational institutions, employers, etc. In accordance with the

3 Except where the academic programme is a Modern Foreign Language.

9

principle of proportionality articulated in the UK Quality Code (chapter B10), the

processes for approval, monitoring and review are tailored according to the category

into which the proposed collaborative arrangements fall.

4.5 Academic and business planning: strategic approval to commence planning a new

collaborative arrangement must include both an outline of the academic programme

and consideration of key costs (staff time, travel, resources, etc.) to the University.

4.6 Funding arrangements: funding arrangements for collaborative arrangements will be

agreed with partners and reviewed annually in accordance with the principles of

openness, and bearing in mind the University’s costs, including the cost of programme

development and/or support, programme approval, registration, assessment and the

oversight and maintenance of quality and standards.

4.7 Formal agreements: all collaborative arrangements must have a formal standardised

written and, where applicable, legally binding partnership agreement, setting out the

responsibilities and obligations of the University and the partner organisation, including

the arrangements for termination or withdrawal from the partnership, and a financial

schedule. Such agreements must be signed by the relevant authorities prior to the

commencement of the delivery of the provision. Agreements are prepared centrally

and a record of all partnership activity is maintained by the University Secretary.

4.8 Serial arrangements: partner organisations are not permitted to engage in ‘serial’

arrangements, whereby the partner offers the approved provision or assigns delegated

powers elsewhere through an arrangement of its own.

4.9 Quality assurance: the University sets out quality assurance procedures for

partnership arrangements to include: approval of partners, approval of programmes

(where applicable), monitoring and periodic review of programmes and collaborative

partner arrangements. The University has established the role of a Moderator to

monitor and support specific types of collaborative programmes.

4.10 Assessment: the University ensures that the outcomes of assessment meet specified

academic standards through moderation activity and/or the appointment of external

examiners and involvement with examination boards. All assessment outcomes must

be confirmed by the relevant assessment, progression and award board.

4.11 Certificates and transcripts: The University is the sole authority for awarding

certificates for provision leading to a University award or credit, and for issuing

transcripts unless otherwise specified in the agreement with the partner organisation.

Certificates and transcripts must include the name and location of the partner

organisation (subject to any statutory or legal jurisdiction).

4.12 Staff: the University ensures that staff engaged in delivering programmes leading to

its awards or credit are appropriately qualified, and that the partner has in place

mechanisms to monitor and develop staff.

10

4.13 Information: all promotional material and public information generated by a partner

organisation relating to a collaborative arrangement is subject to approval by the

University, as per the terms of the specific legal agreement.

4.14 Where the University enters into a validation agreement, a bespoke Quality

Assurance framework will be developed and set out in a separate document.

5. Key Roles and Responsibilities in relation to Collaborative Provision Rectorate Team grant initial Strategic Approval for proposals upon receipt of the Collaborative

Provision Strategic Approval Form. This applies to those key collaborations as underlined in

the typology above (p5-7).

Senate is the University’s most senior academic decision making body. It thus provides the

strategic steer and direction for developments in the area of collaboration and partnership and

is responsible for approving all new programmes delivered by the University. Senate is also

ultimately responsible for the maintenance of threshold academic standards across the

University and the effective operation of quality assurance and enhancement procedures.

Academic Committee has University wide responsibility for all matters relating to quality

assurance and this includes oversight of Partnership and Collaborative arrangements. As part

of its role in overseeing the implementation of the University’s academic quality assurance

framework, AC monitors the effectiveness of the University’s procedures in relation to

collaborative provision.

Learning and Teaching Committee takes University-wide responsibility for oversight of all

matters relating to enhancement of Learning and Teaching and the wider student experience.

LTC will receive and consider annual review and enhancement reports on provision delivered

in partnership together with key matters raised by Faculty Quality Learning and Teaching

Committees and wider reports as appropriate.

The Collaborative Provision Sub-Group (a sub-group of Academic Committee) is

responsible to Academic Committee for the oversight of the implementation of the University’s

quality management and enhancement procedures in respect of collaborative provision

(including study abroad and exchange partners) and to provide wider guidance and advice on

the management of academic partnerships. The CPSG is not responsible for the strategic

approval of collaborative provision which shall remain the responsibility of Rectorate Team

and Senate. Furthermore, the CPSG will not scrutinise the academic content of a collaborative

programme which shall remain the preserve of the Programme Approval Procedure.

Research Degrees Sub-Committee (RDSC) takes responsibility (as a sub-committee of the

University’s Research Committee) for the quality of research degrees offered by the

University. The provision of any collaboration relating to research degrees will be routinely

reported to RDSC as well as CPSG.

Faculty Boards, or their dedicated sub-committees, provide oversight of specific collaborative

provision within a Faculty and receive the annual reports for collaborative provision associated

with the Faculty.

11

The University Secretary’s Office is responsible for the due diligence process and all legal

matters. The University Secretary also Chairs the Collaborative Provision Sub-group. The

University’s Legal Services Officer provides detailed guidance and assistance in the

development of the legal agreements.

Each Faculty is responsible for ensuring that the management and monitoring of its

collaborative provision is carried out in accordance with this Handbook and the Legal

Agreement established in respect of each episode of collaborative provision. This

responsibility will usually be carried out by the Faculty Board or one of its sub-committees.

Faculties are also responsible for the appointment of a senior member of academic staff of

the University to coordinate and oversee all aspects of the day to day management of a

collaborative programme from the perspective of the University, and to provide support, advice

and guidance to the programme team both at LHU and at the partner organisation where

applicable. They are also responsible for provision of the annual report to the University on

the operation of the programme.

6 Approval and Review Arrangements: Collaborative Provision

Academic Staff who are considering the development of a proposal for collaborative provision

should discuss the proposal with their Head of Department in the first instance and make

contact with the Dean. If the Dean considers that the proposal should be progressed then

he/she will inform the FEO.

At this early stage the FEO will liaise with the Programme Team, the University Secretary and

University Legal Services Officer, as appropriate, as their involvement may be required at

various stages in the development and approvals process.

The exact nature of the approval process in terms of information required, financial and

academic scrutiny, and, in certain cases the requirement for a formal approval visit, will vary

according to the nature of the collaboration proposed, the standing of the proposed partner

and consideration of the risks involved. The University Secretary, in consultation with relevant

colleagues, is responsible for determining variations to the standard processes in accordance

with the guidance set out in this document and the principles of effective risk management.

The approval process normally consists of 7 stages:

Stage 1: Identification of potential collaboration

Stage 2: Preliminary enquiries4

Stage 3: Rectorate Team approval to proceed

4 In the case of overseas organisations, checks may be made with the British Council and UK NARIC as to the recognition and standing of the proposed partner and its awards. For some arrangements there may also be a need to ascertain whether a licence to operate is required. In certain cases, the University Secretary may consider it advisable to bring forward aspects of the due diligence process, before completion of the preliminary enquiries.

12

Stage 4: Due Diligence

Stage 5: Partner approval visit (as appropriate)

Stage 6: Approval of the proposed programme (as appropriate)

Stage 7: Partnership agreement.

In developing the proposal for collaboration (of whatever type), the Dean will need to explain

to the University the rationale for the choice of Partner Organisation and how such

developments support the Faculty’s (and University’s) strategic aims and objectives. It is for

Rectorate Team to judge whether the venture is either low risk and in accordance with the

University’s principles governing collaborative provision (in which case strategic approval is

granted and the Faculty can proceed on to Stage Two of the process) or that the proposed

venture is of a medium or high risk, in which case additional action / information may be

requested in order for an initial decision regarding strategic approval to be provided.

Strategic Approval should normally be sought at least one calendar year before the

collaborative provision is expected to start. This is to enable the University adequate time to

ensure that all necessary due diligence, student experience and academic standards/quality

matters have been addressed. Note that should any concerns arise subsequent to Rectorate

Team approval as result of due diligence checks or other quality / governance related matter

during the development phase, strategic approval may be revoked.

Full due diligence, requiring completion of the standard due diligence form and submission by

the proposed partner organisation of relevant evidence is required for most new partner

organisations. Specific requirements are reviewed for each proposed partner in advance of

requesting completion, to take account of the nature of the proposed partnership and the

status of the partner, in order to ensure relevance, clarity and proportionality of information

required. Possible exceptions in relation to full due diligence may include: some internationally

recognised and long established HE institutions; UK Universities who hold TDAP/RDAP; NHS

Trusts, and some other governmental agencies.

Due diligence documentation is verified against a checklist for completeness by the University

Secretary and reported to Rectorate Team as having been completed. Preparations for the

partnership approval visit may be postponed or terminated if the quality of the documentation

provided is deemed to be unsatisfactory. Information will also be sought about the legal

standing of the proposed partner, its ability to enter into the partnership and any wider national

legislative and cultural requirements.

For collaborations leading to an award of the University or the award of credit the agreement

must be signed by the Vice Chancellor of the University and representative of the partner

organisation before students are admitted.

7 Reciprocal Due Diligence

The University is aware that the Due Diligence process is sensitive, both politically and

culturally. The investigation will therefore be conducted with appropriate tact and diplomacy,

particularly as it is the expectation that any future partner will be a well-established institution

with an excellent reputation. Nevertheless, a Due Diligence investigation is something which

the University is obliged to carry out and this should be made clear to prospective partner

institutions at the outset. However, in order to act in a transparent way and to encourage the

13

development of a partnership, the University will be happy to provide documents to a proposed

partner on a reciprocal basis.

Senate will be advised of all new collaborative provision agreements. This applies even in the

case where a new venture is proposed with an institution where we already have collaborative

provision. This is because each programme/subject area has its own characteristics and it is

essential to assess strategic fit at programme/subject level and to ensure apposite governance

and oversight.

8 Approval of a New Programme or Module

The approval of any new programme/module to be delivered collaboratively must follow the

University’s standard Approval processes, as set out in the Academic Quality Handbook for

Programme Approval.

9 Supporting Non-Hope Staff

Whilst the University does not franchise or accredit its taught awards, exceptionally it may

consider entering into collaboration to deliver research degrees with UK based institutions who

have not secured Research Degree Awarding Powers. In such cases, the University will

provide advice and support to the partner institution to support staff induction and on-going

training and development, by agreement and as per the terms of the legal agreement.

10 Monitoring and Review

All collaborative programmes should be reviewed and reported in line with Departmental,

Faculty and University Annual Review and Enhancement processes, as applicable to the

nature and type of the collaborative provision.

In addition, an annual report in relation to institutional level activity relating to Study Abroad

and Student Exchange is required under the University’s policy for such.

To facilitate consideration of collaborative provision across the University, the CPSG should

receive all Annual Review and Enhancement Reports (or extracts of ARE reports, as

appropriate) in respect of collaborative provision.

The sub-committee may also require additional reports and information to be provided on a

case by case / thematic basis during the academic year in order to be confident in the on-

going management of provision across the University.

All collaborative provision should be reviewed at least every 5 years, adopting a proportionate

version of the approval process. The Dean should make the case to Rectorate Team,

including presenting a financial review, and if Rectorate Team approves in principle, then

proportionate due diligence should be undertaken alongside a review of the operation of the

collaborative arrangement. A new legal agreement will be required before students can

commence/continue study.

14

11 The Register of Collaborative Provision Once the written agreement has been concluded and signed, the University Secretary’s Office

(USO) will enter the collaboration in the University's official Register of Collaborative Provision.

The information held on the Register includes, inter alia:

the name, address and nature of the partner institution;

the date of the formal agreement or contract, the dates on which it is to be reviewed,

and the dates on which it will end;

the nature of the collaboration, the programmes and awards involved;

details of individuals in the University and the partner institution with responsibility for

overseeing the arrangement;

Any changes to the details held on the Register must be reported at the earliest possible

opportunity to the USO, in particular where partners indicate an intention to withdraw from the

arrangement and/or where it is proposed to contract with a new partner. A public version of

the register including the name of the partner and the nature of collaboration will be published

on the University website.

12 Withdrawal from Collaborative Provision

Withdrawal must be carefully managed so as to ensure that academic standards and the

quality of experience are maintained for remaining students. The arrangements relating to

withdrawal may be specific to each agreement and must be clearly detailed within the legal

agreement between the partners.