Recommendations: 57, 58, 59

Recommendation 57: We recommend that each governing body should systematically review, at least once every five years, with appropriate external assistance and benchmarks: its own effectiveness and, where there is in excess of 25 members, show good reason why a larger body is needed for its effectiveness; the arrangements for discharging its obligations to the institution’s external constituencies; all major aspects of the institution’s performance, including the participation strategy. The outcomes of the review should be published in an institution’s annual report. The Funding Bodies should make such a review a condition of public funding.

Recommendation 58: We recommend that, over the medium term, to assist governing bodies in carrying out their systematic reviews Funding Bodies and representative bodies develop appropriate performance indicators and benchmarks for families of institutions with similar characteristics and aspirations.

Recommendation 59: We recommend to the Funding Bodies that they require institutions, as a condition of public funding, to publish annual reports which describe the outcomes of the governing body’s review and report on other aspects of compliance with the code of practice on governance.

9.5 These interlocking recommendations are primarily for the higher education sector to take forward. Systematic reviews by governing bodies, at least once every five years, with appropriate external assistance, have the Government’s support. The Government welcomes the fact that the Committee of University Chairmen is ready, in a revised version of its useful Guide for Members of Governing Bodies, to recommend such reviews, including of whether larger governing bodies need so many members to be effective. Publication of the outcomes of reviews of size and internal effectiveness is a matter for institutions, but they should at least be made available to the relevant Funding Council. 9.6 The reviews recommended are also to cover all major aspects of institutional performance. The Government wishes to encourage development by the funding and representative bodies of appropriate performance indicators and benchmarks which could assist governing bodies to compare their institutions with others. In their grant letters, the Higher Education Funding Councils have been asked to discuss with their sponsor departments ways in which further progress can be made. HEFCE has now set up a working group, including the higher education representative bodies, the Higher Education Statistics Agency and DfEE, to take this forward. Similar arrangements are being made in Scotland. 9.7 The Government agrees with the Committee that it is important for higher education institutions not only to review but to publish review outcomes on how they discharge obligations to external constituencies, strategies for widening access and participation, and cost-effectiveness in the use of resources. The Higher Education Funding Councils will be asked to encourage this and to monitor the sector’s progress. In this way, the hope is that the issue of making institutional reviews and the publication of their outcomes a condition of public funding need not arise. The Government will monitor the situation in the period ahead in order to assess whether the Committee’s recommendation should be revisited.

Previous Section

Next Section

Return to Chapter 9 Index