Common use of Setting targets and milestones Clause in Contracts

Setting targets and milestones. 7.1.1 Xxxxx Xxxx has a strong record in attracting students from the three main groups identified as under-represented in higher education: state school students, students from NS-SEC classes 4-7, and those from low participation neighbourhoods. We understand the challenge of sustaining this in the light of the substantial increase in tuition fees from September 2012 and our institutional objective of enhancing the quality of undergraduate intake through higher entry requirements for competitive courses. 7.1.2 We are committed to maintaining high standards. The targets in Table 5 were originally proposed to be set at a level well above the HESA location adjusted benchmarks for students from state schools, low participation neighbourhoods and socio-economic classes 4-7. We believed that all of these targets were challenging when seen in the context of our 2010-15 Strategic Plan, with its key performance indicator of being placed in the top decile of UK universities with respect to the entry qualifications of admitted students by 2015. Attracting the highest UCAS tariff score students while keeping our current student diversity would be a huge achievement. It is because we recognised the challenge of maintaining our above- sector benchmarks performance in widening participation that we chose to allocate a very high percentage (30%) of the additional fees to access measures. On OFFA‟s advice, these targets have been raised even higher. In all 3 areas, these are significantly different to the demographics of students entering higher education with 3 A levels at AAB. For socio-economic classes 4-7, our target is 28.5% against a national average of 21.3% for students with AAB. This could create a conflict with the White Paper incentive of allowing universities to compete and expand through recruitment of AAB students and we would hope that the methodology for calculating location-adjusted benchmarks will be reviewed to ensure that this does not happen. 7.1.3 The proportion of first-year full-time first-degree students at Xxxxx Xxxx in receipt of the Disabled Students Allowance has increased slightly over the two- year period from 2007-08 to 2009-10. We aim to improve further on this, and to ensure that the new tuition fee charges do not impact negatively on the proportion of disabled students at Xxxxx Xxxx. We have set a target to increase the number of students in receipt of the Disabled Student Allowance over the next five years. 7.1.4 Xxxxx Xxxx has committed significant resources to supporting and improving student retention, success and employability. This is reflected in a target to improve the successful completion rate for our students over a five-year period. For this target we will use baseline and reporting data from our own Student Information System rather than HESA data, as this will allow us greater flexibility to generate and analyse detailed reports. 7.1.5 In 2012-13 Xxxxx Xxxx has allocated an additional £100,000 for outreach activities previously funded through Aimhigher. This will allow for the continuation and expansion of Xxxxx Xxxx‟s summer school, masterclass, curriculum support and school visit programmes. Measurable outcome-based targets have been set for these activities. As the £100,000 directly replaces resources previously funded externally there are only modest increases in the number of students involved in these activities. However, we recognise the importance of increased engagement with schools in a period of turbulence and uncertainty, and our experience suggests that it is continual innovation that is more important than simple volume measures for participation. We have, for example, recently become a co-sponsor for a University Technical College. This is not something that is likely to impact on any of the targets in the Access Agreement, but it something that we believe is important.

Setting targets and milestones. 7.1.1 Xxxxx Xxxx has QMUL reviewed its targets for the 2016-17 Access Agreement, and agreed a challenging new set. We have chosen to maintain most of these, and extend them to 2020-21. We have set four new targets: one to reflect a new collaborative project with the Xxxxxx Trust, one that is based on offers made to participants in our summer-school programmes, and two to reflect our programme to work to support student progression. The targets and milestones are set out in Tables 7a and 7b of the 2017-18 Resource Plan. 7.1.2 We have a strong record in attracting students from the three main groups currently identified as under-represented in higher education: state , including state-school students, students from NS-SEC classes 4-7, and those from low participation neighbourhoodsdisabled students. We understand the challenge of sustaining this in the light of the substantial increase in tuition fees from September 2012 and our institutional objective of enhancing the quality of undergraduate intake through higher entry requirements for competitive courses. 7.1.2 We are committed to maintaining high standards. The targets in Table 5 were originally proposed to be set at a level well above the HESA location adjusted benchmarks for students from state schools, low participation neighbourhoods and socio-economic classes 4-7. We believed that all of these targets were challenging when seen in the context of our 2010-15 Strategic Plan, with its key performance indicator of being placed in the top decile of UK universities with respect to the entry qualifications of admitted students by 2015. Attracting the highest UCAS tariff score students while keeping our current student diversity would be a huge achievement. It is because we recognised recognise the challenge of maintaining our above- above-sector benchmarks performance in widening participation that we chose have chosen to allocate a very high percentage (30%) of the additional fees to access measures. On OFFA‟s advice, these targets have been raised even higher. In all 3 areas, these are significantly different to the demographics of students entering higher education with 3 A levels at AAB. For socio-economic classes 4-7, our target is 28.5% against a national average of 21.3% for students with AAB. This could create a conflict with the White Paper incentive of allowing universities to compete and expand through recruitment of AAB students and we would hope that the methodology for calculating location-adjusted benchmarks will be reviewed to ensure that this does not happen. 7.1.3 The targets and milestones are set out in Table 7a of the Resource Plan. We believe that these are challenging in the context of the current higher education environment and QMUL’s position as a leading research institution. They include achieving a yearly percentage increase in the proportion of students from low- participation neighbourhoods using the POLAR3 categorisation. This is particularly challenging as the re-categorisation of low-participation neighbourhoods based on the implementation of POLAR3 data has had a significant impact on HEIs that target outreach activities at students based in London, where there are now fewer postcodes in Quintile 1. 7.1.4 The proportion of first-year full-time first-degree students at Xxxxx Xxxx QMUL in receipt of the Disabled Students Students’ Allowance (DSA) has increased slightly over the two- three-year period from 20072011-08 13 to 20092014-1015. We aim to improve further on this, and to ensure that this progress is maintained in light of uncertainty over the new DSA and any further changes to tuition fee charges do not impact negatively on the proportion of disabled students at Xxxxx Xxxxcharges. We have set a target to ensure that this increase the number of students in receipt of the Disabled Student Allowance is maintained over the next five years. 7.1.4 Xxxxx Xxxx has committed significant resources to supporting and improving student retention. Recognising that DSA is the current HESA Performance Indicator for Disabled Students, success and employability. This is reflected in a target to improve the successful completion rate for our students over a five-year period. For this target we will use baseline and reporting data from retain this as our own Student Information System rather than HESA data, as this will allow us greater flexibility to generate and analyse detailed reports. 7.1.5 In 2012-13 Xxxxx Xxxx has allocated an additional £100,000 for outreach activities previously funded through Aimhigherinstitutional measure. This will allow for the continuation and expansion of Xxxxx Xxxx‟s summer school, masterclass, curriculum support and school visit programmes. Measurable outcome-based targets have been set for these activities. As the £100,000 directly replaces resources previously funded externally be reviewed should there are only modest increases be any further confirmed changes to DSA in the number of students involved in these activities. However, we recognise the importance of increased engagement with schools in a period of turbulence and uncertainty, and our experience suggests that it is continual innovation that is more important than simple volume measures for participation. We have, for example, recently become a co-sponsor for a University Technical College. This is not something that is likely to impact on any of the targets in the Access Agreement, but it something that we believe is importantfuture.

Setting targets and milestones. 7.1.1 OFFA Guidance on producing 2015-16 Access Agreements recognises that the full impact of the new fees regime on application rates, and on the number of entrants from under-represented groups, is not yet clear. It indicates that significant changes to the targets agreed in the 2014-15 access agreement are not expected, and Xxxxx Xxxx has chosen to maintain the challenging targets agreed for 2014-15. The targets and milestones are set out in Tables 7a and 7b of the 2015-16 Resource Plan. 7.1.2 We have a strong record in attracting students from the three main groups identified as under-represented in higher education: state state-school students, students from NS-SEC classes 4-7, and those from low participation neighbourhoods. We understand the challenge of sustaining this in the light of the substantial increase in tuition fees from September 2012 and our institutional objective of enhancing the quality of undergraduate intake through higher entry requirements for competitive courses. 7.1.2 We are committed to maintaining high standards. The targets and milestones are set out in Table 5 were originally proposed to be set at a level well 5a, and these are significantly above the HESA location location-adjusted benchmarks for students from state schools, low participation neighbourhoods and socioNS-economic classes SEC groups 4-7. We believed believe that all of these targets were are challenging when seen in the context of our 2010-15 Strategic Plan, with its key performance indicator of being placed in the top decile of UK universities with respect to the entry qualifications of admitted students by 2015. Attracting the highest UCAS tariff score students while keeping our current student diversity would be a huge achievement. It is because we recognised recognise the challenge of maintaining our above- above-sector benchmarks performance in widening participation that we chose have chosen to allocate a very high percentage (30%) of the additional fees to access measures. On OFFA‟s advice, these targets have been raised even higher. In all 3 areas, these are significantly different to the demographics of students entering higher education with 3 A levels at AAB. For socio-economic classes 4-7, our target is 28.5% against a national average of 21.3% for students with AAB. This could create a conflict with the White Paper incentive of allowing universities to compete and expand through recruitment of AAB students and we would hope that the methodology for calculating location-adjusted benchmarks will be reviewed to ensure that this does not happen. 7.1.3 The proportion of first-year full-time first-degree students at Xxxxx Xxxx in receipt of the Disabled Students Allowance has increased slightly over the two- two-year period from 20072010-08 11 to 20092012-1013. We aim to improve further on this, and to ensure that the new tuition fee charges do not impact negatively on the proportion of disabled students at Xxxxx Xxxx. We , and we have set a target to ensure that this increase the number of students in receipt of the Disabled Student Allowance is maintained over the next five years. 7.1.4 Xxxxx Xxxx has committed significant resources to supporting and improving student retention, success and employability. This is reflected in a target to improve the successful completion rate for our students over a five-year period. For this target we will use baseline and reporting data from our own Student Information System rather than HESA data, as this will allow us greater flexibility to generate and analyse detailed reports. 7.1.5 In 2012-13 Xxxxx Xxxx has allocated There is an additional £100,000 for outreach activities previously funded through Aimhigher. This will allow for target in Table 7b to reflect our collaborative work with the continuation and expansion University of Xxxxx Xxxx‟s summer school, masterclass, curriculum support and school visit programmes. Measurable outcome-based targets have been set for these activities. As the £100,000 directly replaces resources previously funded externally there are only modest increases in the number of students involved in these activities. However, we recognise the importance of increased engagement with schools in a period of turbulence and uncertainty, and our experience suggests that it is continual innovation that is more important than simple volume measures for participation. We have, for example, recently become a co-sponsor for a University Technical College. This is not something that is likely to impact on any of the targets in the Access Agreement, but it something that we believe is importantWarwick.