University of Salford Collaborative Partnership Approval

UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD

COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIP APPROVAL (V1.2)

Procedure for Collaborative Partnership Approval

Stage 1: Initial Proposal

All academic partnerships must obtain Stage 1 approval from the relevant School Executive Group confirming that the proposal aligns with the School’s strategic and operational plans and that there are resources available to develop the proposal and progress it through the approval process.

It is the responsibility of the Academic Business Development Office (ABDO), with the assistance of the Lead School, to complete this Stage and for international proposals submit this Initial Proposal to International Operations Group (IOG) for its approval. At this Stage International Operations Group will also decide whether, as part of the independent assessment of the proposed Partner, a site visit to the Partner is required. Following approval by IOG the Stage 1 proposal is then submitted to the School Executive Group (SEG) for approval. For UK proposals Stage 1 is considered by School Executive Group only.

Stage 2: Strategic Alignment, Business Approval and Due Diligence

All academic partnerships must obtain Stage 2 approval from Academic Development Sub-Group (ADSG) confirming that the proposal takes into consideration the institutional strategic fit and business case within the University’s Strategic Plan and to ensure that due diligence has been completed and confirmed prior to proceeding to academic quality approval at Stage 3.

It is the responsibility of the Academic Business Development Office (ABDO), with the assistance of the Lead School and the University’s Professional Services, to complete and submit this Stage to Academic Development Sub-Group (ADSG) for its approval.

When submitted to ADSG the Stage 2 proposal should include copies of the approved Stage 1 document and all relevant supporting appendices.

Stage 3: Academic Quality

All academic partnerships must obtain Stage 3 approval from Academic Standards and Quality Assurance Committee (ASQAC) confirming that the proposed Partner’s quality processes: management and organisation structures; relevant staff, physical and learning resources; are able to support the partnership. It also ensures that the appropriate quality assurance processes are in place between the School and the proposed Partner.

It is the responsibility of Academic Business Development Office (ABDO) with the assistance of the lead school and the Quality Enhancement Office (QEO) to complete and submit this Stage to Collaborative Partnership and Programmes Sub Committee (CPPSC) for approval.

When submitted to CPPSC the Stage 3 proposal should include copies of the approved Stage 1 and Stage 2 documents together with all relevant supporting documentation.

References

A list of references to key documents and useful sources of information is provided at the end if this document.

Quality Enhancement Office 1 of 43 CPA / V1.2 University of Salford Collaborative Partnership Approval

Stage 1: Initial Proposal

This stage is to be completed by the Academic Business Development Office (ABDO) with the assistance of the Lead School.

Please refer to Collaborative Provision Policy and Procedure V1.4 (1).

1.1 University of Salford (UoS)

School(s)

Lead School

School Name Collaboration Proposer Email (e.g. Dean, Associate Dean) Phone Academic Lead Name (e.g. Programme Leader, Academic Email Link Tutor) Phone ABDO Name Lead Proposer Email

Phone ABDO Name Project Support Email

Phone Type of Partnership (See CP Procedure (1)) Partnership Approval Status (Confirm whether or not this is a new partner to UoS. If not then give details.) Type of Proposed Activity (e.g. research / franchise / validation / articulation, progression.) Proposed Start Date (month / year)

1.2 Academic Partner (Proposed)

Partner Institution Name

Address

Email URL

Vice-Chancellor / Name Principal / CEO Role

Phone Partner Institution Name Contact Role

Phone Type of Education Provider (e.g. FE, HE, private, state-funded, university, college, company) Country Ranking (e.g. Times (3), QS (4), Ranking Web of Universities (5)) Is the Partner listed on UK NARIC? (NARIC (6))

Unique Partner ID (If available)

Partner Reputation (Brief details of how the quality assurance of the Partner is assured.)

Partner Schools / Faculties (List the Partner’s Schools / Faculties.)

Partner Areas of Research (List the Partner’s key areas of research activity.)

Student Population (Undergraduate, postgraduate, research.) UK Partners (Has the organisation collaborated with, or is it currently collaborating with, any other UK HEIs? If yes give details.) International Partners (Has the organisation collaborated with, or is it currently collaborating with, any other overseas HEIs? If yes give details.) Ethical and legal compliance (Is there a high level of risk of bribery, corruption, slavery or human trafficking in the country in which the Partner is located?)

1.3 The Proposed Partnership

Brief outline of proposed Partnership Rationale for Partnership including alignment to School and University Strategic Vision Identify the key benefits of the Partnership

Identify key potential risks of the Partnership, their likelihood and impact. (Factors to be considered include: location of Partner, level of risk of bribery, corruption, slavery or human trafficking, Partner’s level of previous HE and collaborative experience, scope of collaboration, non-delivery by the Partner, mitigation, etc.) Details of how this Partnership would fit with International Strategy at UoS Details of whether this Partnership is intended to be solely with the Lead School, with two or more Schools or Institution wide. (List the Schools)

Estimated financial benefits of Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 this Partnership. (ABDO to liaise with Finance to Income (£) include UoS projected income, expenditure, surplus and Expenditure (£) contribution over a five year duration of the partnership.) Surplus (£)

Contribution (%)

1.4 Approval and Notification

Confirmation that estimated financial benefits have been agreed by Finance

Name: Date:

Following completion by ABDO for international proposals the Stage 1 proposal must be submitted to International Operations Group (IOG) for initial assessment against the University’s strategic priorities and approval to undertake due diligence and site visit. If not proceed directly to School Executive Stage 1 submitted to IOG by Academic Business Development Office (ABDO)

Name: Date:

International Operations Group (IOG) Conditions, Recommendations, Observations of IOG.

IOG to confirm here (with rationale) whether a site visit is required. (Criteria to be considered in establishing whether or not a site visit is required include: the status of the proposed partner institution; whether it is a new or existing partner; its experience of HE Collaborative Provision; its approach to ethical and legal compliance within its business and the risk level of the proposed provision.)

Proposed source(s) of funding for the site visit.

Approved by International Operations Group

Name: Date:

School Executive Group (SEG) has confirmed that:

 The Partnership is aligned with School Strategic Objectives

 Staff and financial resource is available for development and approval process

 The Operational Plan has been updated accordingly Comments, Recommendations, Observations of SEG.

Approved by Dean of School (or Nominee) on behalf of School Executive Group

Name: Date:

Following Approval by International Operations Group please forward to

Quality and Enhancement Manager [email protected]

• Reported for information to ADSG

• Reported for information to CPPSC

Stage 2: Strategic Alignment, Business Approval and Due Diligence

This stage is to be completed by the Academic Business Development Office (ABDO) with the assistance of the Lead School in consultation with University’s Professional Services.

Please refer to Collaborative Provision Policy and Procedure V1.4 (1).

2.1 University of Salford (UoS)

Location (Does the University already operate / or has it operated in this location?) Overlap with other UoS Schools (Provide detail of any input / overlap with other Schools including a summary and outcome of any consultation.)

2.2 Academic Partner (Proposed)

Full Legal Name of Partner Trading Name (if different from above) Registered Address Location of study (if different from Registered Address)

Commentary on appropriaten ess / academic standing / reputation of the proposed partner. (Include reference from any current/previo us UK partner(s)) Ethical and legal compliance (Has the Partner demonstrated its commitment to conducting its business and employment practices in an ethical and legally compliant manner, without bribery, corruption, slavery or human trafficking? The evidence collected should be proportionate to the level of risk.)

2.3 The Proposed Partnership

Proposed Programme Title(s) (including final award) Programme Approval Status (New / Existing)

Mode(s) of Study (Indicate those applicable.) Programme Delivery Details (Indicate proposed commencem ent dates and projected student numbers.) Student Numbers (Evidence to support proposed delivery pattern and projected student numbers.) Entry Requirement s (Indicate standard entry requirements. ) Language of Study (Specify whether delivery and assessment will be in the home language or English for each level of study.)

Variation from approved UoS awards (Will the proposed delivery vary from the programme as delivered at UoS? If so provide a brief outline of any variation from approved award required for the suggested delivery.) External Review (Will a new external examiner be appointed to cover this activity? If NO, please provide details of which external will cover this activity and evidence of their agreement to the extra workload.) Are there any requirement s of any Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs) to be taken into consideratio n? (If so give details.)

In-Country Recognition (Will the final awards be recognised as equivalent to local HE awards by the national body for recognising overseas academic awards?) Are there any specific in-country requirement s which would affect the proposed Partnership? If so give details. (e.g. Government requirements or Quality Assurance Agency restrictions.) Potential impact on existing UoS partnerships .

2.4 Resources

Please provide details of the extent to which UoS services are to be provided to, or required by, the Partner institution, its staff and its students. (Delete as appropriate.)

Student Staff

Provision of UoS ID card YES NO YES NO

Access to UoS Library Resources YES NO YES NO

Access to UoS IT services YES NO YES NO

Access to UoS email account YES NO YES NO

Access to Blackboard VLE YES NO YES NO

Use of other UoS facilities including askusand services (Please specify YES NO YES NO below.)

Programme Specific Resources (Summarise any human, technological or physical resources required by UoS or the Partner to support the delivery of the programme.)

Access to UoS Resources (Summarise any cost implications associated with providing these above resources.)

Student Registration Code (Probably RE or RX depending on level of access to UoS resources. Please refer to Registration Status Codes (7)) Student Number Control (SNC) (if relevant)

2.5 Risk Assessment

Initial Risk Assessment (State risk level as determined by initial risk assessment, Appendix 10)

Commentary on initial risk assessment

Other Supporting Arguments (Provide any other arguments and evidence in support of the proposal.)

Commentary on business case for the proposal

2.6 Approval and Notification

Legal Due Diligence

Comments (if any) on the legal due diligence report (Appendix 1).

Legal Services does/does not support the proposal. (Delete as appropriate.) Name: Date:

Financial Due Diligence Comments (if any) on the financial due diligence report (Appendix 2).

Financial Services does/does not support the proposal. (Delete as appropriate.)

Name: Date:

Finance Costings Comments (if any) on the financial costing model (Appendix 3).

Finance does/does not support the proposal (Delete as appropriate.)

Name: Date:

Library Resources Comments (if any) on the library resource requirements (Appendix 4).

Library Services does/does not support the proposal. (Delete as appropriate.)

Name: Date:

IT Services Comments (if any) on the IT resource requirements (Appendix 5).

IT Services does/does not support the proposal. (Delete as appropriate.)

Name: Date:

Marketing & Student Recruitment

Comments (if any) relating to marketing and student recruitment (Appendix 6).

Marketing & Student Recruitment does/does not support the proposal. (Delete as appropriate.)

Name: Date:

Student Administration Comments (if any) relating to Student Administration resource requirements (Appendix 7).

Student Administration does/does not support the proposal. (Delete as appropriate.)

Name: Date:

Collaborative Partnership Review Conditions, recommendations and observations arising from Collaborative Partnership Review (Appendix 8 and Appendix 9).

Confirmed by Chair of Partnership Review Team

Name: Date:

Quality Enhancement Office (QEO) Comments (if any) from Quality Enhancement Office (QEO).

Confirmed by Quality Enhancement Office (QEO)

Name: Date:

Approved by Dean of School (or Nominee) on behalf of School Executive Group

Name: Date:

Following completion by ABDO the Stage 2 proposal, together with the approved Stage 1 document and all relevant appendices, must be submitted to Academic Development Sub-Group (ADSG) for approval.

Name: Date:

Academic Development Sub-Group (ADSG) Comments, Recommendations, Observations of ADSG.

Approved by Chair of Academic Development Sub-Group

Name: Date:

Following Approval by Academic Development Sub-Group please forward to

Stage 3: Academic Quality

It is the responsibility of Academic Business Development Office (ABDO) with the assistance of the lead school and the Quality Enhancement Office (QEO) Please refer to Collaborative Provision Policy and Procedure V1.4 (1).

3.1 Academic Links Quality Assurance arrangements will be managed by the designated Link Tutor in liaison with the School’s Associate Deans (Academic) for each area, and other members of the programme team as required. The Partner Institution will also appoint a designated Link Tutor.

Associate Dean Name (Academic) Email

Phone Academic Link Name Tutor at UoS Email

Phone Academic Link Name Tutor at Partner Email

3.2 Quality Assurance

Outline of arrangements for on-going Quality Assurance processes between the University and the Proposed Partner. (Additional information, as appropriate to collaborative provision type may be included.)

Please provide a summary and/or key points relating to each of the following aspects of the provision. Additional information may be submitted but will only be made available to members on request; please provide sufficient information for members to take an informed decision.

Admissions policies/procedures (if different from UoS policy) Availability of resources and whether they will allow students to achieve the relevant learning outcomes

Arrangements for Personal Tutoring (if different from UoS policy)

Confirmation that CVs of key programme staff are suitable

Information on staff/student ratios

Information on the student records systems (if UoS system not to be used)

Confirmation that all PSRB conditions (where relevant) are met

Arrangements for independent advice for students

Equality and diversity issues

Key issues relating to the political, ethical and cultural context (where relevant) and indication of how they will be addressed

Highlights of contingency plan should partner fail to discharge its responsibilities

3.3 Partnership Management

Please confirm that the following arrangements will be in place to support the partnership (Delete as appropriate.)

Please include any additional arrangements specified by the Lead School.

The School will organise and deliver appropriate staff training and development for staff at the partner institution prior to the first intake of students. This training will cover a range of UoS policies and procedures, including Assessment and Feedback for Taught Awards. YES NO Where appropriate, it will also help to establish a shared understanding of the ethos, culture, requirements and standards of UK HE. The UoS Link Tutor will assume responsibility for internal verification and moderation of assessments. YES NO

Staff-Student Committees will be operated by the Partner Institution with both link tutors in attendance. YES NO

The School will organise a reciprocal observation of teaching during the first semester of delivery. YES NO

The School and the Partner institution will hold Joint Boards of Study in accordance with the University of Salford’s policies and YES NO procedures. External Examiner reports will be shared with the Partner and will be scrutinised through the University of Salford’s annual reporting YES NO mechanisms. Boards of Examiners will be operated in line with the University of Salford’s procedures with both Link Tutors present and a Chair YES NO drawn from the University of Salford. If the answer to any of the above questions is ‘NO’ please provide additional details.

3.4 Partner Documentation

Please confirm that the following documents have been included with this Stage 3 submission.

(Delete as appropriate.)

The Partner’s academic and administrative infrastructures YES NO

Staff structure for the programme(s) concerned including academic and professional support staff YES NO

CVs of key programme staff YES NO

If the answer to any of the above questions is ‘NO’ please provide additional details.

3.5 Academic Quality Risk Assessment

Academic Quality Risk Assessment (State risk level as determined by risk assessment, Appendix 11)

Commentary on academic quality risk assessment

3.6 Approval and Notification Following completion by the Lead School the Stage 3 proposal must be submitted to Collaborative Programme and Partnership Sub-Committee (CPPSC) for consideration and from there to Academic Standards and Quality Assurance Committee (ASQAC) for approval.

Confirmed by Dean of School (or Nominee) on behalf of School Executive Group

Name: Date:

Collaborative Programme and Partnership Sub-Committee (CPPSC) consideration of proposal for Collaborative Partnership Academic Approval

This section is to be completed by Quality Enhancement Office.

CPPSC to confirm that the documentation submitted is satisfactory and provides evidence that the arrangements for delivering and monitoring learning opportunities with the partner institution are secure and effective. (Delete as appropriate.)

Are there appropriate levels of resources (including staff) committed to the partnership? YES NO

Do the governance arrangements for learning and support align with UoS policies and procedures? YES NO

Are there adequate safeguards against financial impropriety or conflicts of interest that might affect academic standards or quality of YES NO learning opportunities? Has the Partner institution’s legal capacity to engage with another awarding body been confirmed? YES NO

Has the Partner institution’s legal capacity to award joint awards been confirmed? YES NO

Have the appropriate due diligence checks and identification of potential risks and safeguards, including the Partner’s approach to YES NO ethical and legal compliance, been completed? Are arrangements in place to ensure that UoS retains proper control of academic standards? YES NO

Have contingency measures been identified and costed in case the Partner institution is no longer able to discharge its responsibilities? YES NO

Are appropriate arrangements are in place to ensure equivalency of academic standards of provision? YES NO

Have the requirements of any PSRBs been identified and addressed? YES NO

Have the roles and responsibilities for admitting and registering students been specified and agreed? YES NO

Have the roles and responsibilities relating to assessment been specified and agreed? YES NO

Do the arrangements for programme review conform to UoS policy? YES NO

If the answer to any of the above questions is ‘NO’ please provide additional details.

Comments, Recommendations, Observations of CPPSC.

Confirmed by CPSSC

Name: Date:

Academic Standards and Quality Assurance Committee (ASQAC) Comments, Recommendations, Observations of ASQAC.

Approved by Chair of Academic Standards and Quality Assurance Committee

Name: Date:

Following Approval by Academic Standards and Quality Assurance Committee please forward to

Appendix 1: Legal Due Diligence Report

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Legal Diligence Report confirming that legal due diligence checks regarding legal entity and powers, legal and degree awarding, constitution governance and control of the proposed partner have all been completed.

What is the corporate status of the organisation? (Provide a copy of the constitutional document for the organisation (including any amendments) with an English translation, where appropriate.) Company Number (if applicable) How long has the organisation been established in its current form? Company History (Give a brief history of the proposed partner including any previous company names.) Company Ownership (Who are the shares held by? Are there any potential guarantors?) Chief Executive Officer Full Name (or equivalent of the parent company) Date of Birth Finance Director Full Name (or equivalent of the parent company) Date of Birth Chief Operating Officer Full Name (or equivalent of the parent company) Date of Birth Vice-Chancellor Full Name (or equivalent of the academic institution) Date of Birth Deputy Vice-Chancellor Full Name (or equivalent of the academic institution) Date of Birth Registrar Full Name (or equivalent of the academic institution) Date of Birth Finance Director Full Name (or equivalent of the academic institution) Date of Birth Company Directors (Have any of the directors been disqualified? If YES please provide details.)

Organisational Structure (Is the proposed partner part of a larger organisation? If so then please provide details including diagram or explanation of the company structure to identify where the contracting party fits into the structure.) Legal Capacity (Does the Partner have the legal capacity to enter into a collaborative agreement? Please provide details and evidence as appropriate). Degree Awards (Does the Partner have its own degree awarding powers?) Intellectual Property Rights (What is proposed regarding ownership of intellectual property rights, e.g. does UoS retain ownership of all of its existing intellectual property rights as well as all intellectual property rights which it creates during the partnership? Where needed, does UoS have the right to use the Partner’s intellectual property rights?) Insurance (Does the Partner have appropriate insurance in place? Please provide a copy of the insurance certificates.) Legal History (Are there any current, pending or threatened litigation or arbitration proceedings against the Partner, any predecessor of the Partner or any member of the Partner, including its owners? Have there been any in the previous five years? This includes as a claimant or defendant, any prosecution, any investigation [e.g. by any regulatory body] or any dispute resolution procedure). Equality & Diversity (Are there any relevant issues regarding local law, with particular regard to, gender and ethnic diversity, environmental law, property rights, employment, immigration, technology and tax?) Award granting status, identifying highest NQF level (or equivalent), of Partner in UK or overseas. Please attach appropriate evidence.

External Authorisation (Does the proposed partner organisation require external authorisation [e.g. from Government] to collaborate with UoS? If so, please attach the authorisation or indicate when this will be available.) Joint / Dual Awards (If the proposal is for a jointly provided programme leading to a dual or joint award, does the partner have the legal power to make awards with another awarding body?) Current Travel Security rating (See latest CRG Travel Security (8) rating)

Confirmation that legal due diligence checks have been completed

Name: Date:

Appendix 2: Financial Due Diligence Report

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Financial Diligence Report confirming that financial due diligence checks regarding the financial stability of the proposed partner have all been completed.

Name of Proposed Partner Institution

Funding Arrangements How is the organisation funded?

Tax Status What is the tax status of the organisation?

Financial Background Has a due creditworthiness check been undertaken?

Financial Standing Is the proposed collaborative partner considered to be financially sound?

Financial Risk Is there any indication of potential financial risk? (e.g. history of early termination, non- payment or bad debts.)

Current Country Corruption rating (See latest Corruptions Perceptions Index(9))

Current Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Index rating (See latest FATF Public Statement (10))

For partners outside the educational sector confirm that the requirements of the Finance Division briefing note for Schools have been taken into account.

Comments on financial due diligence checks.

Confirmation that financial due diligence checks have been completed

Name: Date:

Appendix 3: Financial Costings Report

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Financial Costings Report confirming that the costing model for the proposal has been completed.

Financial benefits of this Partnership. (ABDO to liaise with Finance to include UoS projected income and expenditure over a five year duration of the partnership.)

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

Income (£)

Expenditure (£)

Surplus (£)

Contribution (%)

Comments on financial costings.

Confirmation that financial costings have been completed

Name: Date:

Appendix 4: Library Resources

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Library Resources Report confirming that due consideration has been given to access to the required resources to support the proposal has been completed.

Please refer to Library Support for Collaborative Provision (11) and consult your Academic Support Librarian.

Who will be providing Library and Learning Resources? If it is the partner, then this must be agreed with the partner and included in the partnership agreement. Appropriate provision must be made available at the partner and it must be understood that there is no access to UoS Library resources.

Is the programme covered by existing license agreements? If so, please give details

Are there any new or additional licensing/resource requirements? If so, please give details.

How will the cost of providing new or additional Library resources be met?

Name: Date:

Statement from Library confirming the resources required to support the proposal.

Statement from Library confirming the cost of providing the resources required to support the proposal.

Confirmed by University Librarian (or Nominee)

Name: Date:

Appendix 5: IT Resources

All Stage 2 proposals must include this IT Resources Report confirming that access to the required resources to support the proposal (including access to Blackboard, email, and any specialist software) has been completed.

Statement from Lead School identifying IT resources required to support the proposal.

Name: Date:

Statement from IT Services confirming the resources required to support the proposal.

Statement from IT Services confirming the cost of providing the resources required to support the proposal.

Confirmed by Associate Director IT Services (or Nominee)

Name: Date:

Appendix 6: Marketing and Student Recruitment

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Marketing and Student Recruitment Report confirming whether there is market demand for the proposal.

The full Market Research Report is available for inspection if required.

Target Market Please outline the target market for the new programme and the market research undertaken to support the proposal.

Key Search Terms Please identify the key search terms for the programme.

Market Size Please indicate the student demand for the programme in terms of the market size and trends and potential for growth.

Competitors Please identify the main competitors to the proposed programme.

Competitive Advantage Please outline the suggested competitive advantages of the proposed programme over similar programmes offered within country / region. Features What are the unique feature and benefits of the programme that will be attractive to students?

Entry requirements What qualifications and / or experience are required for entry to the programme?

Applicant Profile What will be the typical applicant profile in terms of age, gender, nationality, location, etc.?

Feeder Institutions Will applicants be entering the programme from any specific feeder institutions? If so, then please give details.

Graduate Opportunities What will graduates of this programme do following completion of the programme?

Labour Market Demand What evidence is there that employers / PSRBs want graduates from this proposal?

Summary and conclusions, including whether market research supports the proposal.

Confirmed by Director of Marketing and Student Recruitment (or Nominee)

Name: Date:

Appendix 7: Student Administration

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Student Administration Report confirming that access to the required administrative resources to support the proposal (including application, admission, status, notification of results and graduation) has been agreed.

Application

Admission

Registration

Status

Notification of Results

Graduation

Confirmed by Director of Student Services (or Nominee)

Name: Date:

Appendix 8: Partnership Review Report

As part of the Due Diligence process a site visit may be required to undertake an independent assessment of the proposed partner(1). For international proposals the decision as to whether a site visit is required is taken by International Operations Group (IOG) during Stage 1 of the approval process. For UK provision QEO will include a recommendation if a visit is required or not.

The site visit will normally by conducted by two members of staff and may include a member of QEO; if appropriate, additional professional service staff may be in attendance. The purpose of the site visit is to ensure that the Partner is aligned with the University’s Vision and Mission, and has in place appropriate learning resource, including student support, and appropriate quality systems. It also provides an opportunity to establish that the partner is as committed as the University to conducting its business and employment practices in an ethical and legally compliant manner without bribery, corruption, slavery or human trafficking.

Please provide details for each of the following aspects of the proposed Partner and, where appropriate, append the relevant documentation.

Review Panel

Date of Review Chair of Panel Name

Role Panel Member Name

Academic Standing and National and International requirements

The educational system of the overseas country and local area of the Partner and its effect on the Partner’s strategy/development plans.

The Partner’s position, reputation and standing in its own country and its commitment to conducting its business and employment practices in an ethical and legally compliant manner without bribery, corruption, slavery and human trafficking.

The requirements in respect of national and international recognition of awards and professional qualifications.

The Partner’s campus including any outreach or satellite centres.

Mission values, and basic philosophy

An overview of the Partner’s Mission, values and operating philosophy.

The Partner’s internal structure and managerial framework.

The number and titles of Academic Departments within the Partner.

A summary of the current course portfolio, including the range and level.

The number of full-time and part-time students.

Current and/or previous links with UoS under the following categories: staff collaboration, student exchange, articulation agreements allowing advanced entry to a UoS programme.

Plans for the future, both teaching and research including international development

Quality Assurance and the Maintenance of Academic Standards

The infrastructure for quality assurance and enhancement, including the identification of key roles and responsibilities, and the role of external moderation.

The processes for approval, monitoring and review of academic programmes.

Anny planned developments which will be relevant to this partnership.

The learning, teaching and assessment strategy for the Partner.

The admissions policy and the processes for the recruitment and admission of students.

The processes for curriculum maintenance and enhancement.

Learning Infrastructure

Library resources (internal and external) their provision and maintenance, including access to electronic books, journals etc. (Please refer to Guidance on Partner Arrangements for Library and Learning Resources (12).)

Learning facilities (e.g. classrooms, laboratories)

Disabled access to teaching / student support facilities (appropriate to country requirements)

IT facilities available to students (indicate availability within both scheduled course activities and private study).

Staff appointment policies.

Ratio of part-time to full-time staff.

Staff development policies and the link to the enhancement of teaching.

Technical and administrative support.

Management information systems to support the academic programme.

The Student Experience

Student induction

Student regulations/ordinances.

Appeals and complaints procedures.

Student support and guidance, including information given to students.

Opportunities for feedback to students on academic performance.

Mechanisms for student feedback on course operation (e.g. student questionnaires, attendance at course committees) and means by which actions taken are fed back to students.

Details of any student satisfaction data collection and processes for action planning.

Details of any methodologies to track leaver destinations e.g. graduate employment.

Summary

Conditions, recommendations and observations of Review Panel.

Confirmed by Chair of Review Panel

Name: Date:

Appendix 9: Premises Review Report

All Stage 2 proposals must include this Premises Review Report confirming that the learning and teaching environment is appropriate for the proposal.

This report should be supported by a maximum of 10 digital images illustrating the key features of the proposed premises and including: exterior of the building, including surroundings, to contextualise the narrative describing the location of the premises; exterior of building showing student access; interior of the premises showing the learning and teaching environment; interior of the premises showing IT facilities.

Lead School

Programme/s to be delivered at new premises Name of UoS Reviewer

Date of Review

Rationale Please provide a brief rationale for the new delivery venue.

Location of Premises Please provide a brief description of the location of the proposed premises including information relating to the type of area e.g. commercial / residential. Please attach digital images taken by the reviewer to illustrate.

Is the location appropriate? (Delete as appropriate) YES NO Do the premises comply with disability access requirements (appropriate to country requirements)? YES NO (Delete as appropriate) Comments relating to disability access requirements.

Is there any risk that the location may damage the University’s reputation? Very High High Moderate Low None (Delete as appropriate) Brief rationale for risk rating.

Would visiting the location in any way constitute a risk to the University’s duty of care to students or visiting staff? Very High High Moderate Low None (Delete as appropriate)

Brief rationale for risk rating.

Are the physical resources (i.e. classrooms, laboratories, etc.) adequate in quantity and quality to support YES NO teaching? (Delete as appropriate) Comments relating to the learning and teaching environment.

Do the IT facilities meet with the minimum requirements for the programme? YES NO (Delete as appropriate) Are the IT resources adequate in quantity and quality to support the agreed number of students? YES NO (Delete as appropriate) Comments relating to IT facilities.

Name: Date:

Appendix 10: Initial Risk Assessment

All Stage 2 proposals must include this partnership risk assessment. Schools, in completing the template, are expected to draw on information gained from discussions both within the School itself and with the proposed Partner

Enter a score in the relevant box: 1 for category 1; 2 for category 2; 3 for category 3.

Name of Proposed Partner

Risk Rating Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Score

Partner

Cultural and educational UK European Rest of World context

Partner status University (or public Public funded Private funded funded college/institution college/institution –UG college/institution PG & UG) only

Student English Language 1st language UK based: 2nd language Overseas based: 2nd language

Partner previous Yes, at this level Yes, at different level No collaboration with HEIs

Role of Partner Admin only Learner support for DL Teaching centre

Partner resources Large and well resourced Small but well resourced Limited resources

Learning and Teaching Clearly defined and Defined but not None Strategy implemented implemented

Quality assurance Defined and robust Adequate None systems

Partner expertise in this Already programmes Similar but at lower level None subject discipline existing or other programmes at same level in related subjects Partner staff base in this Stable Small turnover Unstable subject discipline

Partner predictions of Achievable and sensible Moderate over inflation Unrealistic numbers

Partner programme Highly favourable QAA Acceptable QAA (or No information or QAA reputation (or equivalent) report equivalent) report and/or (or equivalent) reports and/or local professional supportive British Council give rise to concerns body recognition feedback

Partner commitment to Good Satisfactory Poor ethical and legally compliant business and employment practices without bribery, corruption, slavery or human trafficking.

School experience of Relevant to proposal (i.e. Some experience but None collaboration UK experience for a UK limited / less directly proposal or overseas relevant experience for an overseas proposal) School’s quality record Very secure Secure Less secure

School’s programme Established collaborative Established but on New programme programme campus only

Award level Level 3 (or below) Level 4/5 Level 6/7

Level of Risk

Total Score

Overall Risk: 17 – 25 = Low Risk 26 – 40 = Medium Risk 41 – 51 = High Risk

Name: Date:

Appendix 11: Academic Quality Risk Assessment

All Stage 3 proposals must include this academic quality risk assessment. Schools, in completing the template, are expected to draw on information gained from discussions both within the School itself and with the proposed Partner.

Enter a score in the relevant box: 1 for UoS; 2 for UoS & Partner; 3 for Partner.

UoS UoS & Partner Responsibility Partner Total Score =1 Score=2 Score =3

D Design of the programme e si Module authorship g n Programme validation & A Module approval p p Proposal of modifications r o v Approval of modifications a l

Design & Approval Total

R Marketing, promotion and recruitment e c Setting the criteria for admission r u Selection of candidates for admission it m Consideration of claims for APL/advanced standing e n Final authority for admissions t & A d m is Enrolment of students si o n s

Recruitment & Admissions Total

P Induction of new students r o Student support g r Programme delivery (teaching) a m Where will teaching be located? m e Production of student information (including handbooks) D e Approval of student information (including handbooks) li Setting of assessments v e Assessment submission & receipting r y Marking of assessments & A Moderation of assessments s s Where will assessment take place? e Administration of assessment s

s m e External Examiner co-ordination n t

Programme Delivery & Assessment Total

UoS UoS & Partner Responsibility Partner Total Score =1 Score=2 Score =3

E The nomination of external examiners x a The consideration of student appeals m i The consideration of Personal Extenuating Circumstances n a The consideration of alleged academic offences ti o Module Examination Board n B Responsibility for Progression and Awards Board o The assessment and appeals regulations are those of… a r d P r o c The consideration of student complaints e s s e s

Examination Board Processes Total

L The employment and management of teaching staff e a Staff development and induction r n Performance review i n Peer review of teaching g & Library provision T e IT provision a c h i n g S The provision of accommodation u p p o rt

Learning & Teaching Support Total

Q The quality management arrangements are those of … u a Who will gather, evaluate & report on student feedback? lit y Programme committees M a Staff Student Liaison n a Module review processes are those of… g e Annual Programme Review report production m APR sign off and action planning e n t & R The complaints procedures are those of … e vi e w

Quality Management & Review Total

Total Risk Indicator 48 = Low Risk 49-96 = Medium Risk 97-144 = High Risk Notes / Comments

Name: Date:

References

(1) University of Salford, Collaborative Provision Policy and Procedure V1.4. (2) Quality Assurance Agency, UK Quality for Higher Education, Part B: Assuring and Enhancing Academic Quality, Chapter B10: Managing Higher Education Provision with Others. (3) Times Higher Education World University Rankings, https://www.timeshighereducation.com/search?e=404&search=world%20university%20rankings %202017%20world%20ranking%20page%200%20length%2025%20sort%20by%20rank%20sort %20order%20asc%20cols%20stats (4) QS World University Rankings® 2018, https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world- university-rankings/2018 (5) Ranking Web of Universities, http://www.webometrics.info/en (6) UK NARIC, https://www.naric.org.uk/naric/ (7) University of Salford, Registration Status Codes (8) Control Risks, https://www.controlrisks.com/ (9) Transparency International, https://www.transparency.org/ (10) Financial Action Task Force (FATF), http://www.fatf-gafi.org/ (11) University of Salford, Library Support for Collaborative Provision. (12) University of Salford, Guidance on Partner Arrangements for Library and Learning Resources.

Quality Enhancement Office 43 of 43 CPA / V1.2