Common use of Monitoring and evaluation arrangements Clause in Contracts

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The University will seek to embed the monitoring of these measures within our existing governance, executive and deliberative structures, as well as developing specialised mechanisms for evaluating the success of certain core activities (such as project delivery). The Board of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding progress against the University’s key performance indicators (both at main Board meetings, and within Policy and Resources Committee). The Audit Committee has oversight of monitoring mechanisms, in their totality, and will approve (and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity in the spheres of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, our existing management and committee structures allow for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, with the University Executive, and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversight. The University has developed regular faculty and departmental planning meetings, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, and which use the same forms of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developed, and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, with student membership of the Board of Governors (and its key sub-committees), Academic Board, Quality and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retention. The University has established a number of means of monitoring student progression and engagement, which are drawn within a wider-ranging programme of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR). The aims of STAR are to:

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. Strategic development of widening participation is a whole University responsibility led by the University Executive Board through the Pro-Vice Chancellor (PVC) for Learning and Teaching. The PVC chairs the Learning and Teaching Committee and its three sub-committees on behalf of Senate, including the Admissions and Outreach Sub-Committee. As a member of the University Executive Board, the PVC for Learning and Teaching ensures that strategic thinking about widening participation is at the heart of University strategic developments and reflections. This Board also includes the PVCs with responsibility for driving forward University strategies in each of the University‟s five faculties (Arts and Humanities; Engineering; Medicine, Dentistry and Health; Science and Social Sciences). This strategic leadership structure ensures that widening participation is articulated within the Faculty learning and teaching strategies and practices. The University will seek monitor activity and evidence of impact in a number of ways. To date, Student Services teams have worked alongside Learning & Teaching Services (LeTS) staff to embed implement robust procedures for monitoring the monitoring activity that is delivered both by central teams and by individual faculties and academic departments. This will continue and will be strengthened by the recent integration of these measures LeTS into the Student Services structure. In addition, in developing its Access Agreement for 2012 and beyond, the University has committed resource to the development of an academic Widening Participation Research Unit. This will allow for quantitative and qualitative research into the long term impact of our widening participation initiatives to be undertaken by research experts. Results of such research will be published as a way of sharing good practice within our existing governancethe sector. The evidence will also feed into continuous improvement of the activities and programmes we deliver. The unit will contribute and oversee short term research and evaluation activity, executive to provide a more consistent and deliberative structuresformal approach to impact assessment and continuous improvement. On an ongoing basis, quantitative data will be used to measure outputs (e.g. number of participants, number of activities, number of schools and colleges involved) to assess the level of activity undertaken against the numerical targets we set. We will also use a range of evaluation techniques to measure the effectiveness of individual activities and longer term widening participation programmes as well as developing specialised mechanisms for evaluating a way of measuring the impact of the work we undertake. This will include paper and electronic surveys of participants and attitudinal surveys of participants on intensive programmes. Data will be monitored and tracked to longitudinally assess the long term progression and success of certain core activities (such as project delivery). The Board of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding students who participate in outreach programmes and/or progress against the University’s key performance indicators (both at main Board meetings, and within Policy and Resources Committee). The Audit Committee has oversight of monitoring mechanisms, in their totality, and will approve (and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity in the spheres of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, using admissions and progression data from the University‟s internal student records system. Progress will be monitored through our existing management own internal governance structures and committee structures allow reported to the Office for appropriate monitoring Fair Access on an annual basis. Monitoring of individual progress against targets and milestones set out in the Access Agreement will be undertaken by the Admissions and Outreach Sub- Committee of Learning & Teaching Committee, which formally reports to the University‟s Senate. Primary EXPANDED  Interactive web-based resources for all primary schools across South Yorkshire.  Professor Fluffy sessions on and off campus targeting pupils and parents.  Classroom mentoring for literacy and numeracy. Primary teachers have been involved in developing the resources that will be rolled out across South Yorkshire. Their expertise with regard to what will work with this particular target group has been invaluable. a) Aimhigher South Yorkshire data shows that the attainment and progression rates of young people in South Yorkshire have improved significantly in recent years. Our contribution to this is difficult to measure because there are so many contributing factors, but we would anticipate that the extensive programme of activities we have contributed has played a key role in these improvements. b) The Institute for Effective Education at the University of York is undertaking a research project following the “Find Your Way” cohort of Excellence Hubs. This is a long term research project but initial findings are that the participants; enjoy working collaboratively as a group, prefer interactive hands on activities, with like being able to visit a range of HEIs, prefer activities that are held during the University Executiveschool day, and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversight. The University has developed regular faculty and departmental planning meetings, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, and which use the same forms of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developed, and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, feel that working with student membership of the Board of Governors (ambassadors is beneficial and its key sub-committees), Academic Board, Quality and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal keen to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retention. The University has established a number of means of monitoring student progression and engagement, which are drawn within a wider-ranging programme of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR). The aims of STAR are to:receive more information about HE options as early as possible.

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The Access Agreement, Widening Participation Strategy and WPSA will be monitored through the strategic plan and annual operating statement and through annual reports to the Senior Management Team. Regular reports will also be made to the University will seek to embed the monitoring of these measures within our existing governance, executive College’s Learning Enhancement subcommittee which has a particular responsibility for learning enhancement and deliberative structures, as well as developing specialised mechanisms for evaluating the success of certain core activities (such as project delivery)student achievement. The Board of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding progress against Senior Management Team and the University’s key University College Council annually review HESA student data, including the performance indicators (both at main Board meetings, and within Policy and Resources Committee)tables for widening participation. The Audit Committee has oversight Fees and Financial Support Group and the department of Student Support will also play a key role in monitoring mechanisms, in their totality, activities. Evaluation will take place across the Widening Participation themes and will approve (and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes stages of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity student lifecycle outlined in the spheres of quality assurance Access Agreement and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across detailed in the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, our existing management and committee structures allow for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, with the University Executive, and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversightWP Strategy. The University College has recently developed regular faculty and departmental planning meetings, a WP database which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, and which use the same forms of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionallyis linked to its Unit-E student records system. We also have a developed, and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, with student membership The rationale behind this decision is recognition of the Board need to evaluate effectively the impact of Governors (future WP activities. This will enable analysis of evaluation questionnaires, including quantitative and its key sub-committees)qualitative data, Academic Board, Quality attitudinal and Standards Committee shifts in perception and Learning longitudinal studies. These methodologies will enable the University College to track future WP students throughout their student lifecycle and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) will be monitored regularly by the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retentionWP team. The University has established College will evaluate the impact of WP activity through a number of means and WP activity will be reviewed regularly alongside the new WP strategy and Action Plan. The University College will assess the outcome of outreach work with young people in schools and colleges contrasting both target schools and those with whom there is a special relationship, e.g. where the University College sponsors an Academy School. It will be included in the First Impressions survey, the post induction student survey, to ascertain the nature and extent of previous contact with the UC through outreach activity. Further work will look at adding an additional data field to application and enrolment forms to capture such information. The intention will be to also monitor the performance of students recruited as a result of WP activities. Progression and retention statistics will be monitored as will impact of support measures through the annual programme monitoring and business planning processes. Differing methodologies will be used to assess the impact of interventions, such as questionnaires to collate core data on the participants and attitudinal shifts pre and post event, focus groups with current HE students, case studies to capture student success and also data from target and partner schools and colleges and progression data to access impact of interventions. Evaluation will include: Regular review of application, enrolment, retention and completion data Questionnaires to event participants Student tracking Evaluation through outreach activities and tracking and monitoring work First Impressions Survey Unit-E student progression data HESA performance indicators DLHE (for student employability) The outcomes of the evaluation process will be used to keep the activity and engagementexpenditure on the Access Agreement under review and to engage in an ongoing process of refinement. Table 5a - Statistical milestones and targets relating to your applicants, entrants or student body (e.g. HESA, UCAS or internal targets) Please select milestone/target type from the drop down menu Description (500 characters maximum) Baseline Baseline year data Yearly milestones/targets (numeric where possible, however you may use text) 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Commentary on your milestones/targets or textual description where numerical description is not appropriate (500 characters maximium) State School (HESA Table T1a) maintain percentage of young full time first degree entrants from state schools at above 95% 2009/10 95.90% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% UCP Marjon attracts the majority of its learners from state schools and confirms that it is committed to remaining above the HESA benchmarks LPN (HESA Table T1a) Maintain percentage of students from lower participation neighbourhoods. 2009/10 16.50% 16% 16% 16% 16% 16% As this level is already above benchmark UCP Marjon will look to maintain the position NS-SEC (HESA Table T1a) Maintain percentage of students from NS-SEC 4,5,6,7, which are drawn within a wideris currently above benchmark 2009/10 34.10% 37% 37% 37% 37% 37% UCP Marjon confirms that it is committed to at least matching the locally adjusted HESA benchmark. Mature Maintain benchmark percentage of mature students from under- represented groups in HE 2008/09 14.30% 13% 13% 14% 14% 14% UCP Marjon confirms that it is committed to at least matching the locally adjusted HESA benchmark. Non continuation: All (HESA Table T3a) Achive the benchmark for full-ranging programme time students 2008/09 10.00% 11% 10.50% 11.00% 12% 12% UCP Marjon confirms that it is committed to at least matching the locally adjusted HESA benchmark. Other (please give details in the next column) Maintain high level of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR)student employability 2008/09 93.70% 94% 94% 94% 94% 94% Latest DLHE return shows 96.4% of respondents who completed courses in 2010 were in employment or further study six months after completion of course. The aims of STAR University College has the highest employability rae among SW institutions. University College Plymouth St Mark & St Xxxx Where your arrangements are to:the same as for other courses, we would encourage you to cross-refer to your main agreement wherever possible, rather than seeking to replicate information from that main document here.

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The We will continue to monitor the above targets on an annual basis, as part of the re-submission of the Access Agreement. Evaluation of our core and collaborative outreach, using quantitative and qualitative methods, will be conducted both internally and potentially as a combined research project with our HEI partners. Recognising that successful widening participation at Bath will require new approaches and a sustained strategic overview, the University will seek continue to embed support the monitoring WP Research Group, established in 2012, to explore, evaluate and monitor local strategies, work with partners where this can help to develop our expertise and undertake funded research in widening access to increase our capacity in this area. We are active members of these the Western Widening Participation Research Cluster (formerly the Bristol Widening Participation Research Cluster14) which provides opportunities for sharing good practice, undertaking local collaborative projects and preparing bids for externally funded research. A Research and Evaluation post was created in 2013 to evaluate activities, analyse existing data and undertake new research to support the fair access and social mobility agenda. From 2016-17 we plan to expand the University’s capacity in this area by establishing a fund to support doctoral studentships focused on research in aspects relevant to widening participation work. Our outreach evaluation plan was established around four main elements: collection of learner data to monitor engagement of our target groups; formative and summative evaluation of activities to assess their impact and enhance their effectiveness; tracking students taking part in high intensity activities to assess longer term impact; and small scale qualitative projects with learners in key year groups to provide in-depth understanding of the barriers and to inform future outreach activities. As a result of this work the University has developed an innovative, theoretically based Framework for evaluating interventions which has been assessed by active researchers at the University and warmly received in the sector. In order to better assess the long term impact of our outreach activity and the success of our collaborative activities such as the Universities Outreach Partnership we have subscribed to the Higher Education Access Tracker (HEAT) service. Measures of effectiveness in relation to supporting the retention and achievement of students from under-represented groups will continue to include completion rates, academic achievement, participation in extra-curricular activities and development, progression to graduate-level employment and/or postgraduate study, and whether they would recommend this institution to other students from under-represented groups. A mix of quantitative and qualitative measures within our existing governanceare being developed, executive monitored and deliberative structuresreviewed throughout the individual student's experience, so that individual adjustments can be made, as well as developing specialised mechanisms broader lessons learned. This includes specific investigations such as: the evaluation of activities to enhance induction and first year experience; degree attainment for evaluating Black and Minority Ethnic Groups; and the success impact of certain core activities (such as project delivery)placements on degree attainment and employment destination. The Board 14Bath, Bath Spa, Bristol and UWE Bristol New data collection systems designed to increase our understanding of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding progress against the University’s key performance indicators (both participation patterns at main Board meetings, Faculty and within Policy and Resources Committee). The Audit Committee has oversight of monitoring mechanisms, Departmental level were established in their totality2012, and will approve (be monitored, to check our progress, develop appropriate targets, and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measuresalso to inform the development of subject- based outreach strategies. We aim will closely monitor the participation and retention rates of mature students (over 21, and over 25); those with vocational qualifications; care leavers; those from black and minority ethnic groups; and students with disabilities to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that evaluate the Board has oversight effectiveness of our performance outreach and admissions strategies in achieving reaching these groups. We will also monitor and research the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting situation with regard to the outcomes progression of under- represented groups to postgraduate degrees. Research for the various projects HEA found that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity while social class alone was not a significant factor in the spheres decision to continue beyond a first degree other factors were: “family experience of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across higher education had an important effect on the University)respondents’ decisions. Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, This was further conflated with some ethnic groups.”15 Over time this could result in a new social divide which would be detrimental to our existing management and committee structures allow aim for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, with the University Executive, and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversighta diverse student population. Research in this area will focus on identifying strategies to encourage wider participation. The University has developed regular faculty is at the forefront in developing strategies to evaluate its admissions and departmental planning meetingswidening participation activities, and actively engages with national discussions through ongoing research activity and contribution to sector bodies working in this area. The Director of Student Recruitment and Admissions is a member of the recently-established UUK Social Mobility Advisory Group, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure has been tasked with advising Government on developing the social mobility aspirations of the Green Paper. He is also co-chairing the Practitioner sub-group that has been tasked with identifying effective and scalable activities and interventions already operating to improve access, retention and success in the sector. The Director’s re-election as well as operational goalsUK Chair of the Higher Education Liaison Officers’ Association, and which use appointment to the same forms Advisory Board of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developedSPA (Supporting Professionalism in Admissions), and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, with student membership of the Board UCAS Council and involvement with a range of Governors educational charities targeting access and student success (Teach First/Futures programme, Target Oxbridge/Rare BME access programme, Xxxxxx Trust/Xxxxxxxxx Commission access programme) provide opportunities for the University of Bath to input and its key sub-committees)influence development of national access, Academic Board, Quality admissions and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retentionoutreach policy. The Head of Widening Participation is leading an evaluation and research consortium NERUPI (Network for Evaluating and Researching University has established Participation Interventions) which currently includes the universities of: Bath Spa, Exeter, Oxford, Oxford Brookes, Sheffield, Hertfordshire and Plymouth with strong interest from a number of means of monitoring student progression and engagement, which are drawn within a wider-ranging programme of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR)other institutions. The aims Head of STAR are to:Widening Participation has a number of publications in this area and is a member of the editorial board of the journal ‘Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning’. She is a member of the HEAT Steering Group and convenor of the UALL (Universities Association for Lifelong Learning) Widening Participation and Access Network, working closely with the related SRHE (Society for Research into Higher Education) Network to offer a range of high profile events and activities.

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The widening participation agenda, retention rates and success across the student lifecycle are overseen by the University’s Student Access and Progress Committee. The Committee, chaired by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education) and with representation from the Guild of Students, receives and considers regular reports and analysis of institutional performance in a range of areas (such as continuation rates, student equality benchmarks, HESA Performance Indicators, student experience surveys, outreach activity evaluation, etc.). In addition, the University Education Committee, also chaired by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education) and with representation from the Guild, receives an annual progress report, approves OFFA reporting and considers the annual report from the Academic Skills Centre. Within the University’s Outreach team there is a dedicated Officer with specific responsibility for evaluation; this post works closely with Outreach Officers and with Aimhigher on the evaluation of activities. The Outreach Evaluation Strategy for 2015-2018 supports our commitment to evidence-based practice in widening participation and outreach as well as to facilitating a culture of learning and continuous improvement. We are committed to generating evidence-based information from timely and robust evaluations to inform and support our outreach work. The overall aim of the Evaluation Strategy is to provide a framework for producing high quality evidence-based monitoring and evaluation information to support learning, improvement, innovation, accountability and strategic decision-making. The key objectives of the strategy are as detailed below. • Support the generation of evaluation evidence to improve fair access to higher education by: o understanding what we do; o identifying what approaches work in promoting fair access and social mobility; o identifying where we can improve to increase the effectiveness of our widening participation policies and interventions; and, o supporting strategic decision making and allocation of resources. • Provide direction on our approach to evaluation to ensure information generated is robust, relevant and useful. • Provide a framework for future evaluations and link them to strategic decision-making by setting out the key focus areas for evaluations and the main evaluation questions they will seek to embed address. • Provide a plan for outreach evaluations over the next 3 years, which will be reviewed and updated annually. We have a comprehensive evaluation programme for our Access to Birmingham programme, including monitoring of applications through from acceptance and tracking students to graduation and employment. Aimhigher West Midlands undertakes comprehensive evaluation of the impact of its interventions, with reference to control and experimental groups. Tracking suggests that engagement in Aimhigher during Key Stage 3 and 4 generates increased aspiration towards higher education, improved KS4 attainment and increased progress to higher education (HE). The proportion of Aimhigher-engaged Pupil Premium learners attaining 5 GCSEs at A* - C, including English and Maths, exceeded that of regional Pupil Premium learners over the four years 2011/12 to 2014/15. The progression of Aimhigher beneficiaries into HE is tracked via HESA data. Aimhigher learners formerly receiving Free School Meals (FSM) are more likely to enter HE than non-Aimhigher FSM students (31.6% in 2014 and 36.7% in 2015). By comparison, regionally 22% of former FSM students entered HE in 2014. Aimhigher learners from POLAR3 Quintile 1 postcodes also enter HE in greater proportions than their peers (40.0% in 2014, compared to 12.4% regionally, and 32.40% in 2015, compared to 13.4% regionally). There is evidence of increased volatility in national GCSE attainment and progression to HE trends. National research1 suggest Key Stage 4 curriculum reform will disproportionately impact on the attainment for disadvantaged learners, and January 2017 UCAS data showing a marked (2/3rd) reduction in the year-on-year growth in application rates of 18 year olds witnessed since 2012. As a result we intend to maintain our current ambitious milestones for both the GCSE attainment and HE progression of Aimhigher beneficiaries. The Realising Opportunities Pilot project has undergone extensive evaluation looking at the outcomes for learners and the wider impact of the partnership. This continues to inform the future of the scheme. We continue to develop our Evaluation Strategy with respect to the range of financial support we provide. This is focused on two main areas: work to understand patterns of spend and how the money is used, along with work to understand the impact of the money provided on retention and success. The work will draw on the OFFA toolkit. Our students and staff are key to achieving excellence and to delivering the objectives outlined in our Strategic Framework 2015-2020. Our linked Equality Scheme recognises the need to encourage each and every student to flourish whilst removing barriers to success. Equality is central to our mission to be a global force in teaching and research, and our Deputy Pro-Vice Chancellor for Equalities leads our institutional development in this, reflecting that commitment. The University’s Equality Scheme 2016-2020 has been developed around themes of inclusiveness, attainment, flexibility and embedding. As part of the development of the objectives we consulted with students to identify actions they felt the University should take to improve equality, and we have sought to address this feedback in our objectives. Progress against objectives is reviewed annually as part of the Equality and Diversity Assurance Report to Council. The University has been taking action to address the attainment gap between BME students and white students achieving a first or upper second class honours degree. We have delivered innovative mentoring and employability schemes for BME students, providing them with practical skills and role models for success in the workplace. The BME ambassador scheme, an initiative part-funded by the HEA, involves students engaging with staff in Schools and Departments to consider actions that can be taken to improve BME student inclusion, representation, engagement and to promote race equality. This project has been widely cited across the UK HE sector as an example of good practice in engaging and listening to BME students. We will continue to focus on developing this area of work and will be partners with Manchester University and Manchester Metropolitan University in a HEFCE Catalyst funded project as part of this. A website dedicated to supporting the success of BME students was launched in 2014/15, and a supporting online platform for staff launched in 2016 that captures the monitoring and evaluation of these measures within the impact of ambassador activity. The BME student ambassadors continue to work with School Equality co-ordinators to identify issues that impact on their experiences, and have developed action plans for activities that make a positive difference. There are over 200 BME students who are ambassadors and 10 College student leads. Following the launch of the online portal, the project will be evaluated in July 2017. The ethnicity attainment gap is a sector-wide issue and forms much of the focus of work with students on equality issues in universities today. This is an area of activity that we will continue to pursue in relation to our existing governancework towards the ECU’s Race Equality Mark. We are expanding this work to identify and address differences in completion rates and attainment amongst other groups, executive such as LGBT and deliberative structurestrans students, mature students, disabled students and those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds, and identify equivalent interventions. Around 6% of all University of Birmingham students have dependents. The University is one of only a handful that collects this information at registration and we are therefore now able to monitor the progression and retention of student parents. Since 2010, the University has helped support student parents establish a Guild Association, produce a pregnancy, maternity and paternity policy, and work towards a more inclusive curriculum that recognizes the needs of students with caring responsibilities. From 2015/16 we have further enhanced the support offered to student carers identified above at (d), and developed a new University Policy for Student Parents, Guardians and Carers (effective from 2017/18). LGBT students have been supported by a mentoring scheme that was launched in 2012 called ‘Come Out, Stay Out’. In 2016 there were around 60 professional mentors, most being University staff, supporting over 28 student mentees. Around 3% of students identified as LGBT in 2016, whilst over 30% did not select the option to tell us their sexual identity at registration. Students are encouraged to disclose, and information is available at registration to explain the benefits of informing the University. We have developed trans-inclusive practices, including the provision of gender neutral facilities, the recording of personal information and through the publication of transgender guidance, and we are developing activities to improve understanding amongst our wider community of trans issues. To support the development and promotion of religious literacy and integration on campus the University has worked with a number of community organisations including local mosques and religious schools. The University’s Good Campus Relations Group comprises of members from community groups and works towards the promotion of understanding and representation of different faith groups. The University has an excellent data collection and analysis system and, as part of its annual review of academic programmes, ensures that Schools consider the recruitment and performance data of students in the protected characteristics and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Schools report issues emanating from the data to the University’s Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee, chaired by the PVC (Education); the Committee then monitors how the Schools work towards making improvements. This process is supported through targeted Student Equality Reports, which are disseminated to Schools outlining any identified issues. We are fully committed to ensuring that anyone with the aspiration and ability can gain access to the University, as well as developing specialised mechanisms progress and achieve success regardless of any disability. As a result of the proposals around the reduction in funding and support by the Department for evaluating Business, Innovation and Skills in the success form of certain core activities (such as project delivery)the Disabled Students’ Allowances from 2016/17 onwards, a panel of specialist and senior staff, chaired by the Director of Student Services, was convened. Following this work the University continues to develop its approach to deliver a more inclusive education environment and also identified an additional £500k to support disabled students where that support now falls outside Disabled Students Allowance. The Board challenges of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding progress against the University’s key performance indicators (both at main Board meetings, creating a physically accessible campus have been highlighted by students and within Policy and Resources Committee). The Audit Committee has oversight of monitoring mechanisms, in their totality, and will approve (and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity staff in the spheres of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of Equality Scheme consultation as a key priority for the University, and we have undertaken significant work to improve accessibility across campus. During 2016 we developed a forum for students and staff to raise accessibility issues and to comment on campus developments to ensure the diverse needs of our existing management and committee structures allow for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, community are reflected. We have worked closely with the University ExecutiveGuild’s liberation associations and Guild officers via the Equality Executive Group to ensure we have student input on equality issues. We have worked to embed the principles of Xxxxxx XXXX, and we outperform the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversight. The University has developed regular faculty sector for female representation in Maths and departmental planning meetings, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, Engineering (37.2% and which use the same forms 20.6% respectively against sector figures of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developed, 34.1% and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, with student membership of the Board of Governors (and its key sub-committees16.4%), Academic Board, Quality and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with 2015, we took the next step in developing our proposal equality principles and practices by embarking upon the work required to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) achieve the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retention. The University has established a number of means of monitoring student progression and engagement, which are drawn within a wider-ranging programme of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR). The aims of STAR are to:ECU’s Race Equality Charter.

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The We will continue to monitor the above targets on an annual basis, as part of the re- submission of the Access Agreement. Evaluation of our core and collaborative outreach, using quantitative and qualitative methods, will be conducted both internally and potentially as a combined research project with our HEI partners. Recognising that successful widening participation at Bath will require new approaches and a sustained strategic overview, the University will seek continue to embed support the monitoring WP Research Group, established in 2012, to explore, evaluate and monitor local strategies, work with partners where this can help to develop our expertise (e.g. Bristol’s Widening Participation Research Cluster15) and undertake funded research in widening access to increase our capacity in this area. 15 xxx.xxxxxxx.xx.xx/xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/xxx/xxxx-xxxxxx/xxxx/ Our outreach evaluation plan has four main elements: collection of these learner data to monitor engagement of our target groups; evaluation of activities to assess their immediate effectiveness; tracking students taking part in sustained activities to assess longer term impact; and small scale qualitative projects with learners in key year groups to provide in- depth understanding of the barriers and to inform future outreach activities. The Widening Participation Research Group coordinates a number of participatory action research projects designed to explore and address areas representing significant barriers to widening participation, fair access and student success. In order to better assess the long term impact of our outreach activity and the success of our collaborative activities such as the Universities Outreach Partnership we have subscribed to the Higher Education Access Tracker (HEAT) service. Measures of effectiveness in relation to supporting the retention and achievement of students from non-traditional backgrounds will continue to include completion rates, academic achievement, participation in extra-curricular activities and development, progression to graduate-level employment and/or postgraduate study, and whether they would recommend this institution to other students from non-traditional backgrounds. A mix of quantitative and qualitative measures within our existing governanceare being developed, executive monitored and deliberative structuresreviewed throughout the individual student's experience, so that individual adjustments can be made, as well as developing specialised mechanisms broader lessons learned. This will include specific investigations such as: the evaluation of activities to enhance induction and first year experience; degree attainment for evaluating Black and Minority Ethnic Groups; and the success impact of certain core activities placements on degree attainment and employment destination. New data collection systems designed to increase our understanding of participation patterns at Faculty and departmental level were established in 2012, and will be monitored, both to check our progress against targets, and also to inform the development of subject- based outreach strategies. We will closely monitor the participation and retention rates of mature students (such as project deliveryover 21, and over 25); those with vocational qualifications; care leavers; those from black and minority ethnic groups; and students with disabilities to evaluate the effectiveness of our outreach and admissions strategies in reaching these groups. We will also monitor and research the situation with regard to the progression of non- traditional students to postgraduate degrees. Research for the HEA found that while social class alone was not a significant factor in the decision to continue beyond a first degree other factors were: “family experience of higher education had an important effect on the respondents’ decisions. This was further conflated with some ethnic groups.”16 Over time this could result in a new social divide which would be detrimental to our aim for a diverse student population. Research in this area will focus on identifying strategies to encourage wider participation. The Board strategy for widening participation is an integral part of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding progress against the University’s key performance indicators (both at main Board meetings, Education Strategy which is overseen by the Pro-Vice Chancellor Learning and within Policy Teaching. Operational activities relating to widening participation will be shared and Resources Committee)monitored by the Widening Participation Operational Group. The Audit Committee has oversight Our management structures will be strengthened by the appointment of monitoring mechanisms, in their totality, a new Director of Student Recruitment and Admissions who will approve (oversee the outreach and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes fair access activities of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity in the spheres of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, our existing management and committee structures allow for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, with the University Executive, Widening Participation and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversight. The University has developed regular faculty and departmental planning meetings, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, and which use the same forms of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developed, and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, with student membership of the Board of Governors (and its key sub-committees), Academic Board, Quality and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retention. The University has established a number of means of monitoring student progression and engagement, which are drawn within a wider-ranging programme of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR). The aims of STAR are to:Admissions and

Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. Strategic development of widening participation is a whole University responsibility led by the University Executive Board through the Pro-Vice Chancellor (PVC) for Learning and Teaching. The PVC chairs the Learning and Teaching Committee and its three sub-committees on behalf of Senate, including the Admissions and Outreach Sub-Committee. As a member of the University Executive Board, the PVC for Learning and Teaching ensures that strategic thinking about widening participation is at the heart of University strategic developments and reflections. This Board also includes the PVCs with responsibility for driving forward University strategies in each of the University’s five faculties (Arts and Humanities; Engineering; Medicine, Dentistry and Health; Science and Social Sciences). This strategic leadership structure ensures that widening participation is articulated within the Faculty learning and teaching strategies and practices. The University will seek monitor activity and evidence of impact in a number of ways. To date, Student Services teams have worked alongside Learning & Teaching Services (LeTS) staff to embed implement robust procedures for monitoring the monitoring activity that is delivered both by central teams and by individual faculties and academic departments. This will continue and will be strengthened by the recent integration of these measures LeTS into the Student Services structure. In addition, in developing its Access Agreement for 2012 and beyond, the University has committed resource to the development of an academic Widening Participation Research Unit. This will allow for quantitative and qualitative research into the long term impact of our widening participation initiatives to be undertaken by research experts. Results of such research will be published as a way of sharing good practice within our existing governancethe sector. The evidence will also feed into continuous improvement of the activities and programmes we deliver. The unit will contribute and oversee short term research and evaluation activity, executive to provide a more consistent and deliberative structuresformal approach to impact assessment and continuous improvement. On an ongoing basis, quantitative data will be used to measure outputs (e.g. number of participants, number of activities, number of schools and colleges involved) to assess the level of activity undertaken against the numerical targets we set. We will also use a range of evaluation techniques to measure the effectiveness of individual activities and longer term widening participation programmes as well as developing specialised mechanisms for evaluating a way of measuring the impact of the work we undertake. This will include paper and electronic surveys of participants and attitudinal surveys of participants on intensive programmes. Data will be monitored and tracked to longitudinally assess the long term progression and success of certain core activities (such as project delivery). The Board of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding students who participate in outreach programmes and/or progress against to the University, using admissions and progression data from the University’s internal student records system. Progress will be monitored through our own internal governance structures and reported to the Office for Fair Access on an annual basis. Monitoring of progress against targets and milestones set out in the Access Agreement will be undertaken by the Admissions and Outreach Sub-Committee of Learning & Teaching Committee, which formally reports to the University’s Senate. Primary EXPANDED Interactive web-based resources for all primary schools across South Yorkshire. Professor Xxxxxx sessions on and off campus targeting pupils and parents. Classroom mentoring for literacy and numeracy. Primary teachers have been involved in developing the resources that will be rolled out across South Yorkshire. Their expertise with regard to what will work with this particular target group has been invaluable. a) Aimhigher South Yorkshire data shows that the attainment and progression rates of young people in South Yorkshire have improved significantly in recent years. Our contribution to this is difficult to measure because there are so many contributing factors, but we would anticipate that the extensive programme of activities we have contributed has played a key performance indicators (both role in these improvements. b) The Institute for Effective Education at main Board meetingsthe University of York is undertaking a research project following the “Find Your Way” cohort of Excellence Hubs. This is a long term research project but initial findings are that the participants; enjoy working collaboratively as a group, and within Policy and Resources Committee). The Audit Committee has oversight prefer interactive hands on activities, like being able to visit a range of monitoring mechanismsHEIs, in their totality, and will approve (and maintain) any such prefer activities that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure held during the school day, feel that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity in the spheres of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, our existing management and committee structures allow for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, with the University Executive, and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversight. The University has developed regular faculty and departmental planning meetings, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, and which use the same forms of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developed, and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, working with student membership of the Board of Governors (ambassadors is beneficial and its key sub-committees), Academic Board, Quality and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal keen to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retention. The University has established a number of means of monitoring student progression and engagement, which are drawn within a wider-ranging programme of projects titled ‘Student Progression and Transition’ (STAR). The aims of STAR are to:receive more information about HE options as early as possible.