equality & diversity committee open agenda ... - soas.ac.uk · b. could become a condition of...

EQUALITY & DIVERSITY COMMITTEE

OPEN AGENDA

Friday 20th October 2017, 13:15-15:15 (SG 36)

ED 17/18 1 A Minutes

To approve: minutes of the meeting held on 15 February 2017 (Attached)

ED 17/18 1 B Action Points

(Oral Updates)

ED 17/18 1 C Matters Arising/Matters for Report

(Oral Updates)

ED 17/18 1 D Richard Poulson – update on Personal Emergency Evacuation

Plans (PEEPS) To receive: An update from the Director of Estates and Facilities

(Oral Update)

ED 17/18 1 E EDI Action Plan – Update

To discuss: A paper from the Chair [Attached]

ED 17/18 1 F Athena SWAN - update

To receive: An update from the Chair (Attached)

ED 17/18 1 G Racial Attainment Gaps

To receive: An update from the Chair (Attached)

ED 17/18 1 H Family Friendly Policy Review

To review: A paper from the Deputy Director of Human Resources (Attached)

ED 17/18 1 I Promotion Done Better Paper

To receive: An update from the Deputy Director of Human Resources (Attached)

ED 17/18 1 J OFFA Access Agreement 2018/19

To receive: A paper from the Head of Widening Participation [Attached]

ED 17/18 1 K Date of Next Meeting

15 February 2018

1

NOTE: These minutes are for information only. Any corrections to the minutes will be recorded in the minutes of the subsequent meeting of the committee.

SOAS, UNIVERSITY OF LONDON

EQUALITY and DIVERSITY COMMITTEE (EDC)

Wednesday 17 May 2017 Room 116, College Buildings

MINUTES

Members: Professor Chris Bramall (Chair) Dr Chris Ince (Ex-officio Member) Zoe Davis (Student Disability Advisor)

In attendance: Serena Yeo (Staff Learning & Development Officer) Jerry Smith (Governance & Project Officer – Minutes) Albert Rose (Equality and Diversity Officer) Kira Brayman (Ambitious Futures Graduate Trainee – Minutes) Juliet Ssentongo (Faculty of Law and Social Sciences)

Apologies:

Lutz Marten (Dean of the Faculty Language & Cultures) Sophie Harris (HR Diversity Advisor) Carol John (UCU Equality Rep and Leader of the BME Staff Group)

The Chair welcomed all Members and attendees to the meeting.

ED 16/17 3 A. Minutes of the last meeting The minutes of the previous meeting were, with some minor amendments, agreed as accurate.

2

ED 16/17 3 B. Action Points

• ED 16/17 1 D – Action to be carried forward • ED 16/17 1 E – Action to be carried forward • ED 16/17 1 F – Action in progress • ED 16/17 1 H – Action to be carried forward • ED 16/17 1 I – Action in progress • ED 16/17 1 I – Action to be carried forward • ED 16/17 2 D – Action in progress. Clarification that standing item would be on

the annual EDC agenda, rather than every meeting. • ED 16/17 2 D – The Student Disability Advisor raised the issue that there was

still not a clear egress route for those with restricted mobility from above the ground floor of the Paul Webley Wing. The procurement of evacuation chairs and training was not yet finalised by Estates, and would not be suitable for all persons without significant resources and training. The possibility of using lifts or egressing through the Senate House on the first floor was unconfirmed. Jerry to follow up for next meeting. Richard to provide an update at an EB meeting.

• ED 16/17 2 E – This item is on the agenda (ED 16/17 3 F). • ED 16/17 2 I – Action in progress • ED 16/17 2 K – Action completed, with on-going progress as a result

ED 16/17 3 C. Matters arising/Matters for Report

(i) Equality and Diversity Manager Recruitment

The committee noted that recruitment for an Equality and Diversity Manager was in progress. The importance of filling the position was emphasised, as the position would be particularly key to supporting report writing and the submission for Athena Swan. In the interim, Dr Chris Ince would fulfil the responsibilities of the post, with appointment of a permanent person anticipated in the near future.

ED 16/17 3 D. Annual Equality & Diversity Report EDC noted the Equality and Diversity Report, which was written by the former Diversity & Inclusion Manager and presented by the Chair (CB). Chris Bramall talked through the internal and regulatory purposes of the report, and the structure of the report in three sections. Chris then addressed the paper in full and welcomed comments on the report from the committee.

The following points/issues were raised: • A theme should bring together the ranging content within the report, such as

attainment gap • The report should be accessible and understandable

3

• The School’s responses to issues should be more clearly identified • Areas with positive findings should also be highlighted • Some data is presented in a way that is too easy to identify individuals or

sensitive information • The Whole School Inclusion Forum (p. 17) should be revitalized next year

Action: The Equality & Diversity Report to be redrafted to better: focus the content around an attainment gap theme, identify the response of the School to issues, and fully anonymise data (Chris Bramall and Chris Ince).

Action: Comments or issues with specific components of the report to be sent to Chris Ince or Chris Bramall (any EDC members, attendees or those unable to attend).

ED 16/17 3 E. ED&I Action Plan Update EDC noted the update on the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan, which was presented by the Chair (CB). Chris Bramall summarized the position as there having been good progress on the remaining amber items.

The Student Disability Advisor (ZD) questioned the progress status of actions 13.1 and 13.2 given the discussion on egress routes from key buildings. EDC agreed that actions 13.1 and 13.2 should be changed from a Green status to Red.

Action: Actions 13.1 and 13.2 to be changed to a Red progress status (Chris Bramall and Chris Ince).

The Equality and Diversity Officer (AR) asked whether procurement procedures complied with European regulations and the Equalities Act.

Action: Request report from Kate Price on procurement policy compliance with European regulations (Jerry Smith).

ED 16/17 3 F. Equality & Diversity Staff Training Review EDC considered the recommendations in the Equality & Diversity Staff Training Review, which was presented by the Staff Learning & Development Officer (SY). Serena reviewed the recommendations of the report, noting that the recommendation for online training would be resource heavy, but could serve to reach a larger audience than face-to-face training is currently. She also raised the issue of whether training would be mandatory or recommended, particularly for refresher courses.

EDC accepted the recommendations of the report, and made the following comments: 1. Introduce an EDI element to Executive Board and Board of Trustees member

induction a. Could be a part of any online training package

4

2. E&D Overview training required for all staff every two years a. Every four years would get better take-up and engagement b. Could become a condition of probation or promotion c. Decision whether to use online training should be a strategic decision by EB d. Online training already exists or is wanted for other areas (e.g. first aid) e. Want to avoid multiple online systems f. Prices may be other than those indicated on the recommendations g. Institutional investment in online training package would reduce overheads h. Regulations change too often to reflect in training i. Training should be around emerging issues not legislation j. How can attendance be improved? k. Could invite external speakers to Professional Services forums l. External speakers for themed workshops m. Need to pitch training and events to a high level to engage academics n. Events with internal speakers were well attended o. Include an Equality and Diversity training section on the promotional form

3. Develop and offer tailored ‘Managing Diversity’ training

a. How often would this be refreshed?

4. Develop and offer ‘Unconscious Bias’ training for all staff involved in decision-making

a. Attainment gap working group might be interested in this being available to students

b. Would students actually attend? c. Can create a false sense that training resolves unconscious biases

EDC recommended that participation in training becomes an element in the promotion process and the senior staff application for salary increases.

ED 16/17 3 G. Review of Family Friendly Policies The Equality and Diversity Officer (AR) gave an update on the status of the policies, which were being reviewed by other parties before recommendations would be presented to EDC.

ED 16/17 3 H. Date of the next meeting Next meeting will be in 2017/18, with the details to be arranged.

The Chair thanked those members of the committee finishing their terms.

5

Equality & Diversity Actions

Agenda No Item Action Owner

ED 16/17 1 D Update on EDI Action Plan

Make contact with Colleen Amos

Marva de la Coudray

ED 16/17 1 E E&D KPIs Information on what happens at promotion

stage to be presented to the committee.

Sophie Harris

ED 16/17 1 F Relocation Report HR to report back to the Committee on how the relocation proposal was

greeted by EB

Sophie Harris

ED 16/17 1 H

Flexible Seminar slots

Professor Lupke to discuss with Timetabling and report back to EDC

Fredericke Lupke

ED 16/17 2 D ED&I Action Plan Update

Female Academic Promotion to be made a standing item on EDC

agenda

Mark Harrison

ED 16/17 2 D ED&I Action Plan Update

Richard Poulson to be invited to next meeting to

give an update

Jerry Smith

ED 16/17 2 E ED&I Training Review

Paper to EB on costings (initial and refresher – on-

line and f2f)

Mark Harrison

ED 16/17 2 I Inclusive Teaching & Leaning in HE as route to excellence

Take to HoS (Academic Services) and report back

to EDC

Marva de la Coudray

ED 16/17 2 K Degrees of Racism/Attainment

Gap

Working Group is looking at this. An interim report has gone to ADC and a full report will go to Academic Board in the autumn.

Chris Bramall

6

ED 16/17 3 D Annual Equality & Diversity Report

Redraft the report to improve focus

Chris Bramall/Chris Ince

ED 16/17 3 D Annual Equality & Diversity Report

Specific comments on report to be sent to Chris

Ince or Chris Bramall

Members, attendees and those unable to

attend

ED 16/17 3 E ED&I Action Plan Update

Actions 13.1 and 13.2 to be changed to Red

progress status

Chris Bramall and Chris Ince

ED 16/17 3 E ED&I Action Plan Update

Request report from Kate Price on procurement policy compliance to

present to EDC

Jerry Smith

1

EDI action plan update: May 2017

Our strategic ED&I objectives for 2016-2020

To ensure progress in identified areas, we will prioritise the following key objectives in three main areas of our operation; - our student services, our role as an employer

and our central functions: SUMMARY TABLE

no Objectives Senior responsible officer Comments RAG

A To recruit and teach diverse students we will: 1 Collect and analyse robust data on our current and future student body Head of Planning 2 Recruit and support students from the broadest pool Director of Academic Services 3 Identify and meet diverse student needs Director of Academic Services + 4 Further develop accessible and inclusive practices in our approach to teaching

and research Pro-Directors (Learning & Teaching and Research & Enterprise)

On-going work

5 Promote an inclusive curriculum Pro-Director (Learning & Teaching) On-going work

B To be an employer of choice we will: 6 Collect and analyse comprehensive workforce data Director of Human Resources 7 Ensure equal opportunity in the recruitment, development and reward of our

staff Director of Human Resources Review to be

completed

8 Embed inclusive workplace practices that value all employees Director of Human Resources 9 Develop and deliver diversity and inclusion training at all levels of the School Director of Human Resources Paper to EDC

10 Benchmark our performance as an employer to continually improve our approach

Director of Human Resources +

C Delivering inclusive central and professional services we will:

11 Adopt a strategic approach to embedding equality, diversity and inclusion Secretary 12 Use inclusive communications and marketing Head of Marketing, Student

Recruitment and Comms On-going work

13 Provide accessible buildings and facilities Head of Estates 14 Practice responsible procurement Head of Procurement Change in statute 15 Comply with our legislative obligations Secretary

2


RAG Definition: Green: On course to meet stated target (no action needed); Amber: The target will not be met, but mitigating actions are in place to ensure delivery within reasonable timescales (monitoring required); Red: The target will not be met and corrective action is required by the project board (EB).

Area A: Recruiting and teaching diverse students No

Objective Action required Resource SRO Target Measurable Outcome Progress update

1. Collect and analyse robust data on our current and future student body

1.1 Update student diversity questions

Planning team/Diversity Office

Director of Academic Services

16/06/16 Questions to cover all protected characteristics In accordance with ECU recommendations

MyDetails successfully updated.

1.2 Annual analysis of student data


Head of Planning Annually (March)

Published analysis (to reference ‘NSS responses by domicile’)

Completed. Note ‘NSS responses by domicile’ not available as NSS responses not provided by domicile

1.3 Analysis of retention and attainment gaps


Head Planning Annual (March)

Agreed schedule of actions to address any anomalies

Analysis of retention and attainment gaps by key student characteristics completed

2. Recruit and support students from the broadest pool

2.1 Widening participation initiatives

Widening Participation Team


Annually Meeting annual Access Agreement Report requirements

All HESA targets met. A decline in disadvantaged mature students identified.

2.2 Establish student mentoring schemes to address

Widening Participation Team


21/09/16 Mentoring schemes established to improve retention and academic performance

Buddying/mentoring schemes implemented. Continuing

3


retention & attainment gaps

work on progression and attainment

3. Identify and meet diverse student needs

3.1 Review and publish emergency evacuation procedures.

Health and Safety Manager/Estates

Secretary 30/06/16

Revised guidance published on SOAS website

Review completed. Guidance on web-site. PWW evac procedures completed

3.2 Organisational health check on approach to mental health

SAaW/Director of HR/ Diversity Office/Staff Development

Registrar 10/06/16

School review completed and identified actions scheduled

Not completed. Awaiting confirmation of funding

3.3 Review rules for all students in respect of maternity, paternity and child care

Head of Registry

Academic Registrar 17/05/16 Revised rules adopted for both under and post-graduate students for new academic year

Updated policy agreed at LTQC 21/02/17.

3.4 Vulnerable students training for key staff

Head of SAAW, Staff Development and Diversity Office

Head of SAaW/ Head of Staff Development

10/06/16

Training materials finalised and programme agreed

Training delivered during terms 1 & 2 of 2016/17 academic year

3.5 Enhanced funding/resources for SAaW Team

Financial support identified in Sustainability Review

Director of Academic Services/Registrar

10/06/16

Enhanced funding agreed by Executive Board

Additional funding agreed for increased mental health and disability support hours

4. Develop accessible and inclusive teaching and research practices

4.1 Deliver DSA changes project

SAaW Disability Adviser/Learning & Teaching Development Team

Director of Academic Services/ Pro-Directors

10/06/16 Accessibility actions agreed and scheduled. To include improved accessibility of Moodle and update of e-learning materials

Work planned for term one 16/17 – update required

4


4.2 Deliver renewed guidance of inclusive teaching and assessment practices

SAaW Disability Adviser + The Learning & Teaching Development Team

Pro-Director Teaching & Learning

30/08/16

New guidance adopted and circulated to all academic staff

Inclusive practices working group established? Update required

4.3 Adopt inclusive practices in approach to research

Research Office/ Diversity Office

Chair of REF Steering Group/Pro-Director Research & Ent.

31/12/16 New research practice guidance adopted and circulated to all research staff

Update required from Chair of REF Steering Group

4.4 Address under-representation in REF

The Diversity Office

Pro-Director Research & Enterprise

31/12/16 Revised REF Code of Practice agreed. (Athena Swan action)

Action amended in light of Stern Review

4.5 Training and guidance on EDI for academic staff

The Learning & Teaching Development Team


30/08/16

Training launched to embed inclusive teaching methods

Training and guidance is included as part of the core units of the PDHEP.

5. Promote an inclusive curriculum

5.1 Comprehensive curriculum review

The Learning & Teaching Development Team?


31/12/16 De-colonising the curriculum working group established and programme agreed

Vision being discussed at department level with feedback to AB in term 3. On-going work on curriculum review with completion of History and Economics. New process for dept and

5


programme review agreed.

5.2 Ensure consideration of equality, diversity and inclusion in all curriculum review

Pro-Director Teaching & Learning/Diversity Office


10/06/16 Equality impact assessment incorporated into curriculum review process

Review of inclusivity as part of PGT Common Credit framework complete. On undergraduate level, response to Disabled Student Sector Leadership Group at May LTQC.

To be an employer of choice we will: No Objective Actions Resources

required SRO Target Measurable outcome Progress

update 6. Collect and

analyse comprehensive workforce data

6.1 Review and update staff diversity questions

HR Team/Diversity Office

Director of Human Resources

Completed

Facilitate reporting and monitoring of data relating to protected characteristics. (Athena Swan action)

Completed

6.2 Schedule actions to improve return rate on personal data

HR Team/Diversity Office/Comms


30/11/16 for first data collection exercise

Improved completion rate of staff profile data with the 80% of staff having answered profile questions by July 2018.

On-going action

6.3 Ability to record and monitor leave in respect of carer responsibilities

HR Team/IT Support


Completed

To include record of maternity/adoption leave to allow analysis in this area (Athena Swan action)

Completed

6.4 Annual pay gap report on gender, race and disability.

HR Team Director of Human Resources

Annually (April) Identify and propose actions to address pay gaps with reference to new legislation (Athena Swan action)

Completed. Report to E&D Cttee 21/10/16

6


6.5 Introduce systems to ensure equity in flexible working requests


30/4/17 System changes to record and report on requests. Instruction to managers to improve data collection on take-up and rejections in respect of protected characteristics (Athena Swan)

On-going action

6.6 Provide analysis of relocation expense requests


30/09/16

Equality Impact Assessment Report submitted to EDC

Completed. Report to EDC 21/10/16

7. Ensure equal opportunity in the recruitment, development and reward of our staff

7.1 Increase the percentage of women in senior academic and professional roles


On-going action 52% of new appointments and promotions to be female

Target date required

7.2 Increase the percentage of BME staff in senior academic and professional roles


On-going action 39% of new appointments and promotions to be BME

Target date required

7.3 Produce annual workforce profile report



Annually (March)

Review and agree content of annual report. Report presented to EDC to include including analysis of BME and gender promotion in academic and professional services. (Ahena Swan action)

Annual Report to be presented to ED Cttee 17/05/17

7.4 Review of approach to recruitment and selection to ensure equity and inclusive practice.

HR Team


31/03/17 Review incorporating Equality Impact Assessment submitted to EDC. With focus on identifying anomalies in respect of applications and appointments of BME and female applicants.

On-going action

7


7.5 Facilitate analysis of promotion and reward on HR systems


28/07/17 System capability to record and report on reward applications, outcomes and appeal data (Resourcelink)

On-going action

7.6 Produce qualitative research with (female) academic staff to discover reasons for not applying for promotion.

HR Team


31/12/16 Report identifying reasons and recommending appropriate actions to EDC. (AS action)

On-going action. External consultant to deliver programme term 3, 2016/17.

7.7 Promote internal applications and promotion to senior academic roles from underrepresented groups

Staff Development Team


31/8/2017 Initiative launched including new mentoring guidance and mentors from under- (AS action)

On-going action

7.8 Promote the career progression of professional staff to senior roles from underrepresented groups

HR Team


31/8/2017 Review of career development options for staff and assess take up by under-represented groups with actions identified. (AS action)

On-going action

7.9 Extend and promote mentoring programme for underrepresented groups

Staff Development Team


31/08/16 Mentoring programme re-launched and including consideration of reverse mentoring. (Athena Swan action)

Mentoring & pilot reverse mentoring initiative launched

7.10 Report on the impact of fixed term contracts on specific groups

HR Team


30/9/16 Report to MEDE and mitigating initiatives agreed (Athena Swan action)

On-going action – Data collected for Athena Swan and first stage of analysis complete.

8


8.

8.1 Review current support for staff returning from maternity/paternity or long term leave

HR Team


Summer 2017 Equality analysis of arrangements for supporting academic staff returning from maternity/paternity leave. (Athena Swan action)

On-going action

8.2 Carers survey to consider extending current childcare allowance to carers


31/12/16 Staff survey 05/16 and report to facilitate decision on new policy by EB. (Athena Swan action)

Completed. Superseded by strategic family friendly policy review

8.3 Implement updated flexible working policy


31/08/16

New policy implemented. (Athena Swan action)

On-going action- policy under review

8.4 EIA built into review programme for HR polices


31/12/16 HR Staff to be trained on using equality impact assessments (Athena Swan action)

Training delivered 01/17

8.5 Disability advice on MySOAS/Website



31/08/16 (on-going)

Incorporate resources and support for disabled staff on HR pages and reasonable adjustment procedure

Health & Wellbeing policy review. Draft being finalised and equality impact assessment being undertaken

9. Develop and deliver diversity and inclusion training at all levels of the School

9.1 Review EDI training options including mandatory requirements

Staff Development Team/Diversity Office


30/12/16 Updated materials adopted (Athena Swan action)

On-going action. Paper to E&D Cttee 17/05/17

10. Benchmark our performance as an employer to continually

10.1 Consider dedicated staff groups

Diversity Office Secretary 30/09/16

Internal publicity to establish staff groups to assist in identifying barriers, (incl. gender based staff group.

Completed. Insufficient response to establish

9


improve our approach

dedicated staff groups. To be revisited in 2017/18.

10.2 Survey staff on approach as an equal opportunities employer


Annually in term 2

Staff survey results to identify areas for future actions on inclusion

On-going action

10.3 Contribute to ext. accreditation


31/12/16 External accreditation (e.g. Athena Swan)

On-going action

Delivering inclusive central and professional services we will: No Objective Action Resources SRO Target Measurable outcome Progress

update 11 Adopt a strategic

approach to embedding equality, diversity and inclusion

11.1 Develop and promote a new SOAS EDI Strategy


EDI Strategy for 16/20 adopted & launched

Completed

11.2 Establish Inclusion champions across the school

Diversity Office Secretary 2017/18 Champions appointed and meeting on a termly basis

Insufficient response to establish Diversity Champions. To be revisited in 2017/18.

11.3 Induction and EDI Training for Board of Trustees

Diversity Office Secretary

17/05/16

EDI training incorporated in induction programme

Completed

11.4 Board of Trustees and EB papers to incorporate consideration of equality implications


Board & EB papers to include consideration of EDI impact

Completed

10


11.5 Initiative to promote and attract internal applications for committee membership

Staff Development Office

Secretary

1/9/17 Measures incorporated in in SDR process. ‘Buddy system’ for potential members established

Committee structure to be reviewed in light of academic restructuring. Revised date of 1/9/17

11.6 Consider mandatory EDI & UB training for Ctte members

Diversity Office Secretary 17/05/16 Training requirement agreed for all Ctte members

Proposal to Equality Committee May 2017. To be confirmed as part of EDI Training review

11.7 Submission for external accreditation

Diversity Office/HR team

Secretary/ Director of HR

31/11/17 Successful submission for external accreditation

Athena Swan team established. On-going work

11.8 Host annual Diversity Day

Diversity Office Secretary Annually (November)

Well attended Diversity Day Completed 2016. On-going work

12. Use inclusive communications and marketing

12.1 Review approach to ensure inclusive materials (i.e. content)

Comms Team Head of Marketing, Student Recruitment and Comms

16/06/16 Policy/Standards on inclusive language and imagery adopted

On-going work

12.2 Review accessibility of internal and external comms (i.e. media)

Comms Team Head of Marketing, Student Recruitment and Comms

16/06/16 Fully accessible website and intranet, and hard copy (e.g. font size, Browsealoud)

On-going work

12.3 Update and develop E&D pages on SOAS website

Diversity Office Secretary 31/04/16 Diversity webpage/MySOAS page updated. To include facility for anonymous comment, mental health awareness & carers forum

Updates completed. Further development of MySOAS on-going

11


13 Provide accessible buildings and facilities

13.1 Accessibility an intrinsic objective in Estates Strategy

Estates and Facilities Team

Director of Estates and Facilities

16/06/16 Positive commitment to accessibility in Estates Strategy

Completed. Strategy updated 02/17

13.2 Comprehensive access audits on all SOAS buildings and schedule agreed for identified actions

Estates and Facilities Team

Director of Estates and Facilities

16/06/16 Programme of Access Audits agreed and published. Subsequent actions scheduled into programme of works.

Access Audits completed. Actions arising included in on-going and planned capital projects

14 Practice responsible procurement

14.1 Incorporate EDI requirements into Procurement Policy

Procurement Team

Head of Procurement

01/08/17 Proportionate requirements of contractors to comply with SOAS EDI Strategy

Due to recent changes in Public Procurement legislation this action has been delayed.

15 Comply with our legislative obligations

15.1 Publish 3 year Strategy and Objectives to website

Diversity Office Secretary 16/06/16 Strategy and Objectives published on website

Completed

15.2 Embed Equality Impact Assessments and launch EIA training for all

Diversity Office Secretary 31/12/16 Evidence of completed EIAs published on MySOAS intranet page

On-going action. EIA training for HR staff completed. Need to review as evidence of EIAs limited.

Equality & Diversity Committee 20.10.2017 EDC 17/18 01 F

1

DRAFT SOAS Athena SWAN Action Plan 12 October 2017 Members are invited to note and comment on the draft Athena SWAN Action Plan. It needs to be submitted by 30 November 2017 High Level Objective

Success Measure

Mid-Level Objective

Success Measure

Current Actions Planned Actions Responsibility

1. Reduce the gender pay and status gap

(around 10 percent in 2016)

(A) Average pay gap reduced from 10 percent in 2016 to 5 percent by 2021

1.1 Increase the proportion of female professors

(A) At least 40 percent of all Professors to be female by 2021 (29% in 2016; implies an additional 15 female professors)

1.1.1 SOAS PROMOTIONS PROCEDURES (A) Significant female representation on School Promotion Panel; (B) Ad hoc unconscious bias training

1.1.1 IMPROVED SOAS PROMOTIONS PROCEDURES (A) Ensure that the membership of the School Promotion Panel (SPP) is at least 50% female; (B) Mandatory unconscious bias training for members of the SPP; (C) Mandatory unconscious bias training for members of professorial appointments committees; (D) Mandatory unconscious bias training refresher courses every three years.


2

1.1.2 CAREER DEVELOPMENT (A) Encouragement to any women wishing to go on Aurora courses; (B) Annual SDRs

1.1.2 IMPROVED CAREER DEVELOPMENT (A) Increase the number of women going on Aurora courses; (B) Create an Aurora alumna group; (C) Invite SOAS Aurora Alumna to mentor junior women; (D) Improve the operation of SDRs; (E) All 62 women at Senior Lecturer or Reader grade to be mentored with a view to at least 50 percent of them applying for promotion to Professor within 4 years.

1.1.3 CREATING TIME FOR FEMALE ADVANCEMENT (A) Ad hoc and inconsistent workload models

1.1.3 CREATING MORE TIME FOR FEMALE ADVANCEMENT (A) Measure and reward properly the contribution of women using a


3

(B) Modestly-funded Family-Friendly policy geared to support for regular child care responsibilities; (C) ‘Core hours’ policy for teaching and meetings

SOAS-wide workload model; (B) New Family-Friendly policy; (C) Extend the ‘core hours’ policy to cover seminars and research events

1.1.4 COMMUNICATION (A) ‘Promotion Done Better’

1.1.4 IMPROVED COMMUNICATION (A) Extend and expand ‘Promotion Done Better’

1.1.5 MATERNITY LEAVE AND PAY (A) 26 weeks of leave in addition to 26 statutory weeks; (B) time away for ante-natal care; (C) maternity leave treated as time worked for research leave eligibility and for increments; (D) additional occupational maternal pay depending on length of service; (E) additional eight weeks’ pay

1.1.5 IMPROVED MATERNITY LEAVE AND PAY (A) Review maternity leave and pay policy


4

following return from maternity leave over an 8 month period; (F) ‘Keeping in Touch’ days (right to work for 10 days without loss of pay during period of maternity leave); (G) Right to request flexible working on return from maternity leave

1.2 Increase the proportion of female lecturers

(A) At least 50 percent of lecturers to be female by 2021 (up from 2016 figure of 46 percent). Implies an additional 10 female lecturers

1.2.1 SOAS APPOINTMENTS PROCEDURES (A) Equality and Diversity training mandatory for all members of appointments committees; (B) All appointment committees to have at least one women

1.2.1 IMPROVED SOAS APPOINTMENTS PROCEDURES (A) Mandatory unconscious bias training for members of all appointments committees; (B) Ensure that the membership of Appointments committees is 50% female on average; (C) All short-lists for permanent posts to be 50% female


5

1.2.2 SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESEARCH CAREER OF FRACTIONAL STAFF (A) Limits on the amount of teaching that PhD students are allowed to undertake; (B) Financial support for conference attendance by Phd students (£500) (C) Funding for conference attendance & research for all teaching staff (not just Phd students) on fractional contracts of up to £750; (D) Appointment of a mentor for all fractional teaching staff; (E) Opportunity to take any SOAS staff development course;

1.2.2 IMPROVED SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESEARCH CAREER OF FRACTIONAL STAFF (A) Increased use of permanent contracts (see 2.1, below); (B) Increased use of teaching and research contracts – for example, appoint one year staff as lecturer rather than Senior Teaching Fellows (C) Creation of postdoctoral research fellowships.


6

(F) access to the same range of staff benefits as those on permanent contracts.

1.2.3 PROBATIONARY ARRANGEMENTS (A) a member of academic staff completing three years of probation is entitled to 2 terms of paid research leave; (B) a workload of 50 percent of the norm in year 1 of probation and two thirds in year 2; (C) all probationers have a mentor

1.2.3 IMPROVED PROBATIONARY ARRANGEMENTS (A) a member of academic staff completing three years of probation is entitled to 3 terms of paid research leave

1.3 Ensure proper banding of staff within grades

(A) 33 percent of Grade B Professors to be female by 2021 (20 percent in 2016; implies around 10 more grade B female professors)

1.3.1 SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Salary discussed at stage of appointment (B) Salaries of all professors reviewed every three years

1.3.1 IMPROVED SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Discussion of salary scale immediately after appointment interviews (B) The position of all female professors in Band A to be reviewed


7

within the next 12 months; (C) All Band A professors to be mentored about making the move from Band A to Band B

2. Reduce the precarity of female employment

(A) Reduce the proportion of SOAS staff on fixed term fractional contracts from 38% (2016) to 20 % by 2021.

2.1 Increased use of permanent contracts

(A) New SOAS procedure to be agreed with the Campus Unions

2.1.1 SOAS EMPLOYMENT POLICY (A) Consideration given to making staff permanent after two years of employment

2.1.1. IMPROVED SOAS EMPLOYMENT POLICY (A) Revised SOAS Procedure

3. Increase the proportion of women in senior management roles

(A) At least 50 percent of Heads of Department to be female by 2021

3.1 Increase the proportion of female professors and female lecturers (see 1.1. above). This will increase the pool of those eligible for management roles.

See above


8

3.2 Encourage applications from senior women

(A) At least 50 percent of candidates for HoD or director jobs to be female over the period 2017-21

3.2.1 SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Ad hoc encouragement to women to put their names forward in formulation of adverts

3.2.2 IMPROVED SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Expect any male Head of Department to be followed in post by a female Head of Department

4. Increase the representation of Trans People across SOAS

(A) A Trans person in a senior management role by 2021

4.1 Improved data collection

(A) Significant increase in the number of staff identifying as Trans by 2021

4.1.1 SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Gender status of all staff on the HR record is confidential

4.1.2 IMPROVED SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Campaign to encourage trans people to record their status

4.2 Cultural change

(A) Evidence of strong support for the new Trans policy in staff surveys

4.2.2 SOAS PROCEDURES (A) New Gender Re-assignment and Trans Equality policy recently agreed (March 2017)

4.2.2 IMPROVED SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Effectiveness of Gender Re-assignment and Trans Equality policy to be continually monitored; (B) Complaints falling within the scope of the policy to be audited, closely monitored and acted on


9

(C) Ensure that all job adverts use appropriate Trans wording

5. Strengthen the Athena SWAN process

(A) Application for a silver award in the next SOAS Athena SWAN application

5.1 Leadership

(A) Regular well-attended Athena SWAN Meetings

5.1.1 SOAS ATHENA SWAN PROCESS (A) Athena SWAN team chaired by Interim Dean (B) Athena SWAN team created for the purpose of the 2017 application

5.1.1 IMPROVED SOAS ATHENA SWAN PROCESS (A) Athena SWAN team to be chaired by a Pro-director (B) Athena SWAN team to meet at least twice annually

5.2 Action Plan

(A) Publication of an annual Action Plan

5.2.1 SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Promotion of Gender Equality carried forward by the Model Equality and Diversity Employer Group (MEDE), which reports periodically to the Equality and Diversity Committee

5.2.1 IMPROVED SOAS PROCEDURES (A) Annual Athena SWAN action plan to be drawn up and implemented

5.3 Reward and Recognition

(A) Large number of staff expressing a desire to be involved in the

5.3.1 SOAS POLICY (A) Athena SWAN team membership and leadership taken into account

5.3.1 IMPROVED SOAS POLICY (A) Recognition in workload model


10

Athena SWAN process

during the promotion application process

Equality & Diversity Committee 20.10.2017 EDC 17/18 01 G

1

Racial Attainment Gaps at SOAS: An Update Chris Bramall October 2017 1. Introduction This paper provides an update on attainment gaps at SOAS, some national context and a series of recommendations from the Attainment Gap Working Group, which met during 2016-17. EDC is invited to comment on the recommendations. The next step will then be to formulate an Action Plan. 2. National Attainment Gaps National data for 2015-16 were compiled by HESA at institutional level and published in Wonkhe (August 11th 2017). Tables for black and Asian student attainment in terms of first class degrees are shown below: Table 1. The Black Attainment Gap by HEI in Terms of First Class Degrees, 2015-16

Note: ranked by difference between white and black students.


2

Table 2. The Asian Attainment Gap by HEI in Terms of First Class Degrees, 2015-16

Note: ranked by difference between white and black students. As this Wonkhe article notes, these data take no account of differences between HEIs in terms of prior attainment, class and parental background etc. Nevertheless, these headline comparisons hardly portray SOAS in a favourable light. 3. Departmental Level Analysis at SOAS ADC has previously seen aggregated data for racial attainment gaps for SOAS. Since my last report, I have also looked at attainment gaps by race at a departmental level. I looked at data at the module level ie I compared the median module mark of BME students with those of white students. The data (supplied by Planning) are for undergraduates during the academic years from 2011/12 to 2014/15, and therefore provides a big set of data. The analysis reveals that:

(a) Attainment by white students was higher than that for BME students in all departments but one. The gap ranged from 0 to 7 percentage points. The racial attainment gap therefore seems to be a cross-SOAS phenomenon.

(b) For black students only, an attainment existed for all departments. The departmental

gaps for white compared with black students were typically bigger than for the whole BME student category, ranging from 2 to 13 points. However, we need to treat these data with caution at a departmental level. The number of black students for even the bigger departments over the period is small, and therefore the size of the attainment gap is heavily influence by the attainment of a small number of BME students.


3

4. Prior Educational Attainment and Degree Outcomes at SOAS There is a clear relationship between entry tariff and degree class. For example, 13 percent of those with an entry tariff of less than 300 were awarded a First, whereas 41 percent of those with 539 points or more achieved a First. Table 3. Proportion of Students by Degree Class and Entry Tariff (percentages) Entry Tariff First II.1 II.2 Third or Below No of Students < 300 13 62 21 5 87 300-359 13 69 15 3 255 360-419 21 66 12 2 371 420-479 29 61 9 1 274 480-539 30 62 7 1 138 > 539 41 49 8 2 99

Source: HESA data for 2012/13 to 2015/16, courtesy of Planning However, the relationship is not entirely straightforward. As Table 4 shows, Chinese students on average had a higher entry grade than white students, yet white students achieved on average a higher degree class. In other words, Chinese students have typically done worse at SOAS than one would have expected given their entry qualifications. Table 4. Entry Tariff and Degree Class by Race (indices; white = 100) Entry Tariff Degree Class No of Students Black 88 82 86 Other Asian 93 87 362 Chinese 106 89 45 Other 95 92 201 White 100 100 460

Source: HESA data for 2012/13 to 2015/16, courtesy of Planning 5. Summary of the Racial Attainment Problem at SOAS 5.1 There is a large racial attainment gap at SOAS. Table 5. Degree Classes at SOAS by Race, 2012-2016 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

BME White BME White BME White BME White BME White First 10 22 15 29 16 29 12 28 15 31 Upper Second 65 67 65 58 61 60 64 57 61 58 Lower Second 22 11 17 11 19 10 18 13 19 9 Other passes 2 0 3 3 3 2 5 0 5 3

Source: Equality and Diversity Report 2016. 5.2 We cannot generalize about the performance of BME students at SOAS; for example, the performance of black students was considerably worse than that of most other BME categories. However, white students performed on average better than every other ethnic group. This is apparent both in terms of overall degree classes and module marks.


4

Table 6. Undergraduate Module Marks by Race, 2011/12-2014/15 Ethnicity No. of

modules No. of

students Median

internal mark Distance from total median

White 18184 2410 65 2 Other mixed 2459 338 64 1 Refused 1542 204 64 1 White and Asian 737 111 64 1 White and Caribbean 391 58 63 0 Chinese 2563 290 62 -1 Indian 1803 222 62 -1 Bangladeshi 1434 212 61 -2 Other 2964 398 61 -2 Pakistani 2767 362 61 -2 Arab 423 57 60 -3 Other Asian 2584 318 60 -3 African 2121 307 59 -4 White and African 342 52 59 -4 Caribbean 319 58 58 -5 Unknown 354 54 57 -6 Other Black 157 27 54 -9

Source: UEL final report, p. 21. Figure 1. Degree Classes by Race, 2012/13-2015/16

Source: Planning data based on HESA return (courtesy of Omar Ceron)


5

5.3 A racial attainment gap existed in all SOAS departments during the period 2011/12-2014/15. 5.4 In SOAS and as in many other UK HEIs, a considerable proportion of the racial attainment gap can be explained in terms of non-institutional factors:

(a) differences in prior attainment (A level grades or equivalent); (b) parental background (in terms of class and participation in higher education.

5.5 Notwithstanding 5.4, there is clear evidence of institutional failure. There are three types of evidence for this:

(a) part of the racial attainment gap cannot be explained statistically in terms of the explanatory variables on which we do have data (though there are other factors which are hard to quantify and which may explain some of the gap - for example, societal racism); (b) the Degrees of Racism report commissioned by the SOAS SU provided extensive qualitative information suggesting biased treatment of different racial groups at SOAS; (c) detailed analysis by Planning suggest that that some BME categories do worse than others at SOAS even after allowing for differences in prior attainment. This seems especially true of Chinese students (see Table 4, above).

5.6 Academic research for the UK HEI sector suggests three types of institutional failures, all of which probably apply at SOAS:

(a) Levels of institutional support for BME students are inadequate — this might cover spending on health and well-being, the operation of the pastoral tutor system, mentoring, as well as direct financial support via bursaries, scholarships and fee remission; (b) Relations between academic staff and BME students, and between BME and white students affect outcomes — there is considerable evidence that (for example) black students who went to predominantly black schools find it hard to interact at university with both white students and other BME students. These relations between students, and relations between staff and students, are driven by various types of bias, whether conscious or unconscious; (c) Curricula and forms of assessment are problematic — curricula are not inclusive. They are more geared towards the interest and aptitudes of white students. Traditional exam-based assessment also favours white students.

6. Recommendations from the Attainment Gap Working Group The Attainment Gap Working Group was established by ADC in autumn 2016 with members drawn from across SOAS (academic and professional services) and jointly-chaired by the SU sabbaticals. Its establishment owed much to the SU-commissioned report Degrees of Racism, which provided qualitative data on the student experience for ethnic minorities at SOAS. The remit of the Group was to look at attainment gaps at SOAS, and in particular at the poor experience and attainment of BME students. It makes the following recommendations to address these issues: 1. Adopt a KPI which focuses on the black student attainment gap because black students are the most disadvantaged group. A first step here might be to set the target of ensuring that Black students do as well as the BME average at SOAS within three years;


6

2. Appoint an institutional lead with responsibility for meeting the key performance indicator; 3. Development a strategy designed to achieve the KPI and ensure that strategy is adequately resourced; 4. The Director should make a public commitment to eliminating the racial attainment gap at SOAS; 5. Improve understanding across the staff and student bodies of the existence of attainment gaps by race; 6. Encourage all academic and professional service to recognize that they are capable of racism; 7. Introduce mandatory unconscious bias training and ensure that staff are up-to-date in their training. One way to do this is to make such training a requirement for promotion and the payment of senior staff increments; 8. Commission research on how SOAS's colonial legacy has shaped the SOAS present; 9. Collaborate with institutions in MENA, Asia and Africa which have conducted research on race equality in education with a view to decolonizing the curriculum; 10. Commission a counterpart to the SU study Degrees of Racism which looks at how white students and staff construct issues of attainment and race. Use focus groups for this purpose; 11. Construct a KPI for BME staff at SOAS [already have this]; 12. Construct and monitor BME KPIs by programme; 13. Introduce a mentoring scheme for BME students [already agreed to do this for first year students]; 14. Initiate a push to ensure that all staff up-date their record via MyView so that we have accurate data on ethnicity at SOAS; 15. Develop workshops for staff and students (which learn from the Consent workshops) which address gender, ethnicity and transgender issues; 16. Introduce a question on module evaluation questionnaires which asks about the colonial dimension of the module's curriculum; 17. Undertake an audit of SOAS's complaints procedure. Focus on complaints relating to race and gender, and how such complaints are handled; 18. Historical data on module marks should be collected and made available to staff across departments; 19. Blind marking should be introduced for all assignments, except perhaps for those which have a very low weight; 20. Publish data annually on the SOAS attainment gap by ethnicity, both in terms of average module mark and degree class;


7

21. In order to encourage staff to decolonize their curricula, add a question to the module questionnaire asking whether the module convenor has discussed the syllabus with students at the end of the module; 22. Define SOAS's expectation of 'an inclusive learning and teaching environment'; 23. Incorporate programme-specific study skills into every first year degree programme. These skills should focus on the specifics of how to achieve a First class mark on the programme, and not more general study skills; 24. Ensure that PDHEP modules studied at SOAS by staff incorporate elements focusing on the specific needs and problems faced by BME students in class discussions; 25. Incorporate training on how to recognize mental health problems amongst students for all new staff members; 26. Make binding the implementation of learning agreements advised by Student Advice and Well-Being; 27. Investigate the best means of communicating with students, whether electronically or in other ways; 28. Clarify the responsibilities and duties of all academic and professional service staff who provide advice and guidance to students. It is especially important that departments provide clear and unambiguous guidance on who to contact, and that a distinction is made between how students may raise concerns (which might involve a discussion with the HoD or departmental manager without the identity of the student raising the concern being revealed to the module convenor) and how they can make a complaint (which would require the student to identify him or herself); 29. Ensure that tutors and other staff in student advisory or support roles are equipped with appropriate skills; 30. Produce a comprehensive guide to all forms of academic, welfare and administrative support for all students. Make it available online and as hardcopy; 31. Academic staff need to be more welcoming and approachable in office hours. They also need to explain their office hour policy eg is it 'open door'? 32. The role played by staff as personal tutors needs to be recognized and incorporated into a workload model; 33. Increase the number of opportunities for students to support each other academically via a peer support network; 34. Increase resources for Student Advice and Wellbeing, especially in the light of national evidence suggesting growing mental health problems amongst young people.

Equality & Diversity Committee 17.10.2017 ED 17/18 01 H

Family friendly provision at SOAS

EDC is asked to review the recommendations in the report and agree which are the priority areas for the School.

Executive Summary Following extensive discussion and consultation over the past three academic years about family friendly provision at the School, a series of recommendations have been proposed to improve and develop the SOAS offering. These recommendations have been discussed with the trade unions and MEDE and it is suggested that a wider consultation with staff is carried out, following agreement in principle from EDC.

Recommendations & Next Steps EDC is asked to review the recommendations and agree which are the priority areas for the School. Financial approval for any recommendations that have a financial implication will be required from Executive Board.

Financial Impact Known costs:

• Occasional out of hours payments: Capped budget of £10,000 per annum • Emergency care payments: Capped budget of £10,000 per annum

Estimated costs:

• Enhanced Maternity Leave and Pay Policy: Recommending a new tier of maternity pay, for staff with 38 weeks’ service: estimated cost £4,424 per person. During the period 2014-17, only one person would have been eligible.

• Enhanced Shared Parental Leave Policy: £10,641. During the period 2014-17 period no member of staff applied for Shared Parental Leave.

These costs will require financial approval by Executive Board before the proposals can proceed.

Risks The main element of risk concerns the unpredictable level of demand for Child Care Allowance payments, once the scheme is promoted to staff. The scheme is currently uncapped. The risk may be mitigated by the proposal to lower eligibility, to G8 staff and below. Some staff may also find that after tax, the allowance is of no real benefit and not pursue their applications. If applications for Shared Parental Leave have a significant upturn as a result of enhancing the payments, this could present additional cost to the School. However, in the absence of an Enhanced Shared Parental Leave and Pay Policy the School may be vulnerable to claims of indirect/direct discrimination by male staff, although case law continues to be unclear in this area.

Equality implications The proposals in this paper seek to benefit staff with caring responsibilities which tends to fall on female staff. The proposal to introduce Enhanced Shared Parental Pay and Leave Policy seeks to encourage more male staff and same sex partners to take Shared Parental Leave. The proposal for out of hours payments and emergency care payments are aimed at staff with caring responsibilities for children, people with disabilities, adults and the elderly. The proposals also aims to support

female and BME staff in attending learning and development activities and address barriers to career development, due to caring responsibilities.

1. Background to the Family Friendly Review

1.1 Previous SOAS Equality, Diversity and Annual Reports and Equality Pay Gap Reports have shown the under-representation of female and BME staff in senior academic and professional services management roles.

1.2 By means of the School’s MEDE group, we are also working towards being a Model Equality and Diversity Employer.

1.3. Given the very high proportion of working men and women who are parents, it makes sense from a societal and employment perspective to develop an effective framework to support their need to balance work and childcare. We are also experiencing a cultural shift where it is evident that more working fathers want to be more involved in bringing up their children. Another less recognised, but rapidly increasing, type of caring responsibility experienced by employees is eldercare – the ageing population is the major demographic shift affecting society and the workplace. Employers that put in place a cohesive set of policies and initiatives to help working parents and carers to achieve a good balance between the demands of work and family life are likely to reap considerable benefits in terms of better levels of employee well-being, engagement, commitment, loyalty, retention and productivity. 1.3 A report written by Professor Friederike Lüpke (2015), provided information on career barriers faced by female academics and female staff in general, partly due to child care commitments. It is also recognised that the School currently does not offer any provision (over and above statutory) to support staff who have adult dependents.

1.4 In response to the report, the SOAS Equality and Diversity Committee agreed that a survey should be undertaken amongst staff to identify the barriers they faced and the need for:

• Child care allowance (currently offered for a maximum of 6 years – regardless of the number of children- at the rate of £25 per week for 44 weeks per annum)

• Emergency care payments (no current provision) • Occasional out of hours payments (no current provision)

1.5 In response to the findings of the survey, the Equality and Diversity Committee agreed that the School should discontinue the Child Care Allowance Scheme and instead set up schemes for staff needing emergency care payments and occasional out of hours payments for child care.

1.6 UNISON objected to the cessation of the Child Care Allowance on the basis that this would negatively affect low paid staff.

1.7 It was agreed that a decision on the Child Care Allowance Scheme would be paused pending a review of the full range of SOAS Family Friendly Polices, to avoid a piecemeal approach to enhancing the SOAS family friendly provision.

1.8 The Family Friendly Policy Review was completed in May 2017. The review included maternity, paternity, adoption and ordinary and shared parental leave provision at SOAS.

1.9 The review paper has been to consultation with the trade unions, and the Model Equality and Diversity Employer group.

1.11 The changes proposed will support the School in becoming an employer of choice and enable SOAS to provide more flexible working arrangements and improve work life balance.

2. Summary of recommendations of the review paper

2.1 The review recommends a range of interventions and initiatives.

Those which have a financial implication are listed below. EDC is asked to review the recommendations and agree which are the priority areas for the School.

A summary of all the initiatives proposed is contained in the summary table.

a) Retain the existing Child Care Allowance but reduce eligibility to G8 and below. The current Childcare Allowance budget is £36K per annum but is uncapped.

The change in eligibility will enable those staff below the higher rate tax threshold to continue to benefit from this allowance. The allowance is payable for a maximum of six years and employees can choose to allocate the allowance between multiple children as they feel appropriate b) Provide occasional out of hours payments: Introduce a new capped budget of £10,000 per annum to fund this scheme.

These payments are aimed at staff who need financial support to attend occasional out of hours activities linked to career enhancement, such as attending evening conferences and seminars, research presentation opportunities, representing SOAS.

• Maximum of two payments, each of £100 per, year per staff member. • The funding is for staff with dependent adults or children. • Once the fund has been exhausted, no further grants would be awarded.

It is proposed that, in addition to the two, £100 capped payments, there is provision within the scheme for staff who wish to apply for a higher level of funding, e.g. staff who require child or elder care as a consequence of having to go abroad on SOAS business at short notice. A decision on eligibility would be made based on the strategic priorities of the School.

c) Provide emergency care payments: Introduce a second new capped budget of £10,000 per annum to fund this scheme.

These payments are aimed at providing staff with a payment to arrange emergency adult and childcare support when their existing arrangements have fallen through at short notice.

• Maximum of two payments, each of £100 per year, per staff member. • The funding is for staff with dependent adults or children. • Once the fund has been exhausted, no further grants would be awarded.

d) Provide up to 14 hours paid time off for emergency child care and carer’s care (pro rata for part time staff): No additional direct cost but indirect cost of staff not attending work.

e) Maternity Leave and Pay Policy: Recommending a new tier of maternity pay, for staff with 38 weeks’ service: It is proposed that employees with less than 52 weeks’ service but greater than 38 weeks’ service will receive half the Occupational entitlement normally received at 52 weeks’ service, i.e.12 weeks full pay, 4 weeks half pay and 23 weeks at the statutory rate.

We have estimated that this change would increase the Occupational Maternity Pay Cost by £4,424 per eligible person. During the period 2014-17, only one person would have been eligible for the proposed new tier of maternity pay.

f) Adoption and surrogacy leave and pay policy: Limited financial implications arising from the recommendation to have financial parity with the maternity leave policy. In the period 2014-17, no members of staff applied for adoption leave.

g) Shared Parental Leave and Pay: Limited financial implications arising from the recommendation to have parity with maternity and adoption leave and pay. In the period 2014-17, 1 person had applied for Shared Parental Leave.

Sophie Harris Deputy Director of HR

Provision Statutory provision SOAS exisiting provision Proposed change Additional cost of the proposed What is the business case for Maternity 90% of average pay for 6 weeks followed

by Statutory Maternity Pay for 33 weeks.Employees with 52 weeks’ service are entitled to enhanced maternity pay: 18 weeks’ full pay, 8 weeks half pay, 13 weeks Statutory Adoption Pay. Staff returning to work after maternity leave will also receive an incentive payment of one additional week’s pay per month for the first eight months.

1. In addition to the exisiting provision, employees with less than 52 weeks service but more than 38 weeks service to receive 12 weeks full pay, 4 weeks half pay and 23 weeks on statutory maternity pay, 13 weeks unpaid maternity leave. 2. Develop a Family Friendly Mentoring Scheme. 3. Provide 3 workshops on: Preparing for maternity leave; Post maternity coaching; New and expectant Dads/partners at work; 4. Allow employees who have been on maternity, adoption or shared parental leave to carry forward annual leave they have not been able to take.

Additional cost of offering enhanced maternity leave at 38 rather than 52 weeks' service. Cost of workshops.

The proposal is of low cost to the School but could have a significant impact for staff as it removes the cliff edge for entitlement to occupational pay. The business case for workshops is to support and encourage female returners and female progression at SOAS. The workshop for partners is to help promote inclusive care practices.

Adoption 90% of average pay for 6 weeks followed by Statutory Adoption Pay for 33 weeks.

Employees with 52 weeks’ service are entitled to enhanced adoption pay: 18 weeks’ full pay, 8 weeks half pay, 13 weeks Statutory Adoption Pay. Staff returning to work after adoption leave will also receive an incentive payment of one additional week’s pay per month for the first eight months.

To mirror above provision for maternity. As above. As above.

Paternity Two weeks’ pay at the statutory rate. Entitlement to attend two antenatal appointments.

Qualifying employees are entitled to two weeks’ paternity leave at full pay. No changes proposed to entitlements. Suggestion of 1. Publicise the provision of paternity and ordinary leave to ensure staff are aware of their rights; 2. Collect and promote ‘human interest stories’ of people who have taken the leave to reduce stigma, especially men and LGBT partners at SOAS to make an explicit statement of support to staff who choose to take leave and what they can expect from the department whilst they are on leave and the support they will receive when they return from leave.

Not applicable Not applicable

Childcare/carer's provision Reasonable unpaid leave to deal with an unexpected event involving a dependant.

The School provides some financial assistance to employees who are required to pay childminder or nursery fees for their children. Currently, allowances are payable for a maximum of 6 years for one child or a maximum of 2 years for 2 children and ending once child begins primary school. All staff are eligible, including men and women, to apply, providing they have completed their probation period. Payments are available up to £25 per week for a child, for a maximum of 44 weeks. Part-time employees are entitled to a pro-rate payment. The allowance is a benefit in kind and employees are liable to pay income tax on the payment received.

1. Change eligibility criteria for Childcare Allowance to staff on G8 and below only. Honour existing arrangements and introduce new eligibility criteria to new applicants only. 2. Proposal to introduce a fund for 'occasional out of hours payments' to cover the cost of child and adult care where staff want to attend career development events outside of normal working hours (all staff). Up to £100 can be applied for by staff for care on each occassion. 2. Proposal to introduce a fund for 'emergency care payments' (all staff). Up to £100 can be applied for by staff for emergency care provision on each occasion. It is proposed that, in addition to the two, £100 capped payments, there is provision within the scheme for staff who wish to apply for a higher level of funding, e.g. staff who require child or elder care as a consequence of having to go abroad on SOAS business at short notice. A decision on eligibility would be made based on the strategic priorities of the School.

£10,000, capped cost towards 'out of hours payments' and additional £10,000 capped cost towards emergency care payments. The additional cost could be mitigated to a degree by the proposal to limit eligibilty to childcare allowance to those on G8 and below.

The review of Childcare Allowance took place in recongition of the fact that caring needs are wider than only children and only regular care. In addition, the School is seeking ways to remove barriers to career development and progression for female staffwith caring responsibilities. At present, the Child Care AllowancePolicy only provides funding for pre-school children. There is no funding availablefor ‘occasional care’. There is also no funding for staff with caring responsibilitiesfor an adult. A School wide survey found that staff in general have a need for occasionaland emergency care, as well as regular adult care and child care provision for preschoolage and school age children.

Shared parental leave Statutory rate for maximum of 39 weeks (but any maternity/adoption pay already taken must be subtracted).

Statutory provision only Match materity and adoption provision. Additional cost of providing enhanced payments.

Challenges the norm for new working mothers, helps support career progression and development for women, supports the development of a culture of working fathers.

Ordinary parental leave 18 weeks' unpaid leave for employees who are the parents of children aged under 18.

No change No change Not applicable Not applicable

Compassionate leave Reasonable unpaid leave to deal with an unexpected event involving a dependant.

Following the death of a close relative, an employee will be granted up to three days paid leave, although this may be extended to up to five days at the manager’s discretion. Where appropriate, an employee may be granted up to one day of paid bereavement leave to attend a funeral of a close friend or other relative.

No change Not applicable Not applicable

Dependent's leave Reasonable unpaid leave to deal with an unexpected event involving a dependant.

Statutory provision only Proposal to introduce 14 hours paid time off for emergency care for all staff.

Additional cost to the School of 14 hours paid time off for emergency dependents care for all staff.

Widening support not just to parents but to carers.

Career break No statutory provision The School offers an 'unpaid leave' policy for leave up to one year. No change Not applicable Not applicable

Equality & Diversity Committee 20.10.2017 EDC 17/18 01 I

SOAS Promotion Done Better Report 2017

EDC is asked to note the attached Report and provide comment/guidance on issues raised in the report and recommendations.

Executive Summary SOAS Human Resources (2017) engaged an external academic to design and deliver a programme to explore the reasons why female and BAME staff are disproportionately less likely to progress at SOAS and to provide a report on his findings. This report summarises the findings from his engagement with SOAS female and BAME staff and provides a series of recommendations. The report has been discussed at MEDE and a draft action plan is being developed.

Recommendations & Next Steps EDC is asked to comment on issues raised in the report and on the recommendations, prior to the report being presented to EB.

Financial Impact No immediate implications.

Risks The Public Sector Equality Duty (Equality Act 2010), requires SOAS to take action to advance equality of opportunity where it considers there may be a negative impact of its employment practices on groups with a protected characteristic. Failure to comply with the duty could result in legal sanctions against SOAS.

Equality implications The recommendations in the report seek to address the concerns of female and BME staff in recruitment and selection and general employment practices, but will also benefit staff with caring responsibilities, staff with disabilities and staff in general by having more transparent employment and development opportunities.


1

‘Promotion Done Better’ at SOAS for women and staff from BAME backgrounds Report.

“SOAS is committed to creating and maintaining a School-wide culture of respect as part of its commitment to Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Under the Public Sector Equality Duty (Equality Act 2010) SOAS also has a legal duty to foster good relations between those with one or more of the 9 “protected characteristics” and others.” Respect@SOAS Policy, February 2017

1.0 Summary 1.1 ‘In May 2017, SOAS Human Resources invited Dr Ossie Stuart to

design and deliver a programme to explore the reasons why female and Black Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) staff are disproportionately less likely to progress at SOAS even though there are robust equality and diversity (E&D) policies. The programme, ‘Promotion Done Better’, consisted of a series of workshops to work with members of these groups to understand why professional progress is lower and what barriers they might confront.

1.2 The methodology consisted of holding six two-hour long workshops,

three of which were for female staff and three for BAME staff. Interactive workshops allowed Dr. Stuart to gain an understanding of the barriers they face and their individual experiences in order to develop a set of recommendations for improvement. Seventeen female staff attended their three meetings, while eleven BAME staff attended theirs.

1.3 To summarise the findings: staff from both groups found the equality

and diversity policies ineffectual and rarely followed by managers. For instance, BAME staff reported that the formal career assessment and job evaluation procedures used at SOAS, such as the Higher Education Role Analysis (HERA), placed staff at a distinct disadvantage, especially those who do not speak English as a first language or who have taken alternative educational routes.

1.4 Female staff highlighted the ‘old school nature of SOAS’ and the

traditions and practices that permitted and rewarded misogynist behaviour. This reduced confidence in staff of decisions taken by both junior and senior management.


2

1.5 Both groups highlighted the lack of information available to understand how to achieve internal staff development and a reluctance on the part of managers to provide adequate feedback regarding the reasons why an application for a job vacancy had failed. Furthermore there was a lack of consistency across departments; some were more inclusive and welcoming than others.

1.6 While staff believed that there was a commitment to improved equality

and diversity at the highest senior levels at SOAS, they did not believe it was shared by senior and middle management and especially by senior academics. They considered these groups to be wedded to vested interest and the old ways of doing things.

1.7 Greater transparency in decision-making as well as a greater

involvement of staff from all levels is the only way staff believe that change could really happen.

1.8 Please see the Key Recommendations at the end of this Report.


3

2.0 Background to the Promotion Done Better Programme 2.1 Gus John’s ‘SOAS Staff Seminar’ report (2014) highlighted a profound

lack of confidence among BAME and women employed at SOAS to equally thrive, develop and reach the highest echelons of SOAS as other groups employed at the School.

2.2 In addition, the SOAS Equal Pay Gap Report (2016) highlighted the

existence of gaps in pay between male and female staff and between staff from BAME backgrounds and white staff. Pays gaps disadvantage female and BAME employees at SOAS. The most significant pay gaps between BAME and White staff occur at Grade 10 and Professor Merit Band B.

2.3 In 2014 there were only 2 female Professors at the Merit B level, out of

the 15 professors at SOAS. The Equality Pay Gap Report found that women at Grade 10 have a shorter length of service and, consequently, take longer to progress through the pay scales than men.

2.4 Furthermore, staff in Grade 10 do not receive automatic annual

increments but must request them or be nominated. This subjective approach was thought to contribute to the experience of women when compared to men at SOAS.

2.5 BAME staff feel the equality and diversity agenda is not a high enough

priority at the school, for senior management. 2.6 Moreover, there is a lack of accountability across the School for how

the equality and diversity agenda and polices are applied. 2.7 This is the context in which the ‘Promotion Done Better’ at SOAS for

female and BAME staff programme should be understood. 3.0 The Project and methodology: 3.1 The School recognises that disproportionality is something that should

be addressed as a matter of priority. It further accepts that any proposed solutions must involve both female and BAME staff. The programme ‘Promotion Done Better’ was developed in light of this recognition.

3.3 Its goal was simple: to ask female and BAME staff to identify the

barriers that impede career development; and, to propose solutions


4

that could inform any SOAS initiative to enhance equal opportunities for these very important groups that are part of the staff team.

3.4 The key questions explored were:

1. Why SOAS is a great place to work? 2. The reasons why female and BAME staff think their progress is

limited at SOAS because of who they are. 3. Issues raised by academic staff. 4. What staff identified SOAS could do to enhance equality and

diversity at the School.

3.5 Data and data collection 3.6 The bulk of data that informs this Report is in the form of qualitative

data collected from group discussions and anonymised notes from the meetings.

3.7 The quantitative data comes from the post-programme questionnaires. 3.8 The Participants 3.9 Seventeen female staff attended the three meetings for women.

Eleven BAME staff attended theirs. The majority of participants were professional services staff. Two managers participated and less than five academic staff participated.

4.0 THE FINDINGS 4.1 Female and BAME staff differences 4.2 Female and BAME staff share many of the findings identified albeit for

different reasons. However, some of the findings were unique to one group or the other. Where this is the case, the issue that relates to a specific group will be flagged as unique to that group.

1. Why SOAS is a great place to work at? 5.0 “I enjoy working at SOAS because it has given me a clear insight in

the way people live their lives so differently to mine. I doubt I could


5

have been as inclusive and tolerant of other people and their perspectives without working here. I am really grateful for that.”

5.1 Although the negative often gets attention, it is important to remember

that there are very compelling reasons why people choose to work at SOAS. Without highlighting these reasons this report would be unbalanced.

5.2 Most of the participants consider SOAS to be a unique place of

learning that offers advantages few universities and colleges replicate. The reasons they gave for choosing to work at SOAS include:

• Free speech

• Good academics

• Good community and global perspectives

• Good public events

• BAME and female Director

• People from different backgrounds

• Holidays

• Pay/Perks

• Office environment

• Freedom to express social and political viewpoints

• A small University

• Vibrant environment that one can explore different cultures

• Exposes you to your own prejudices

• Training and time to research 5.3 For the vast majority of the participants, SOAS is an open, tolerant,

friendly environment that accepts difference and encourages intellectual rigour. It is also a small community where people can get to know each other and feel they have a place.

5.4 Staff from both groups reported how proud they felt working at SOAS

because of what the School represents. It is important to remember this when reading this Report. In many ways, the criticisms and frustrations listed in the findings of this report reflect the expectations


6

staff have of SOAS as an open international School that appears to embody diversity. This report reflects their disappointment when they discover that as employees at SOAS this is not always their reality.

2. The reasons why both female and BAME staff think their

progress is limited at SOAS because of who they are 6.0 A Lack of Transparency and Communication 6.1 “I did not get that promotion; okay I accept that. What I do not accept is

the lack of feedback for the reasons why, despite many requests. You invariably think it’s because you are black and they can't justify the decision, especially when you see the ones who are always promoted are white.”

6.2 Both female and BAME groups felt there was a lack of real

transparency and communication across SOAS. Examples include: the difficulty in getting information on career development; management provided such information only reluctantly; information about training or career opportunities and new posts are rarely shared and seem to be for those ‘in the know’. For BAME staff, in particular, this lack of transparency made it impossible to make objective career development decisions. When they did apply for job vacancies, they always seemed to fail and rarely received feedback on the reasons why they were unsuccessful.

6.3 Some departments handle information better than others. In these

cases, the lack of transparency over decision-making was emphasised. For example, some managers in some departments were happy to offer flexible working opportunities that benefited women with childcare or other caring obligations. While in other departments flexible working is considered a privilege to be earned. Staff from both groups could not understand why there is such discrepancy and difference in practice across departments.

6.4 There is a consensus that the lack of transparency and clear pathways

make it feel as if career development was more down to luck and background rather than ability: “If your face does not fit, forget it.”

6.5 A Lack of Confidence in management 6.6 “I was asked to act up and I was happy to do so. While I did so, there

were no complaints about my performance, in fact I had to work twice as hard to cover both of my jobs. So, imagine how I felt when they


7

recruited someone with less experience than me without a word of explanations or thanks for what I did. Not valued, not rewarded, I will never do that again.”

6.7 Participants in both groups spoke about their lack of confidence in

management decisions at SOAS. These views were expressed as follows:

• Non-transparent procedures (closed doors). Too often managers make decisions without consultation or explanation.

• Lack of staff guidance on career development. All staff recognise that SOAS is a small school and progress limited, but still they would value support to develop their careers.

• Lack of consistency across departments. Why is it that it is easier to progress in some departments rather than others.

• Stagnant progress. Feeling, ‘stuck in the mud’. Again, it was accepted that SOAS is too small to promote everyone, but even when such opportunities did come around there was little support or encouragement for internal staff members to apply.

• Many female and BAME staff feel undervalued (under-rewarded). Those who did act up or cover for others on leave, often reported a lack of appreciation or even awareness of the extra work they undertook.

• Lack of pastoral care. Female staff feel that family life is never considered as being important when extra demands are placed upon them.

• Lack of equal treatment: privileges for some, not for others. BAME staff feel that SOAS is not a fair place. Although there are few senior BAME managers, none have been promoted from within the School. The academic focus neglects regions and people of African origin which reinforce feelings of marginalisation and not being valued within the School.

• Lack of consistency in decision-making was highlighted by both groups. Neither group felt that decisions, whether it was about recruitment, or flexible working, were consistent across the School; and that such decisions were not consistent with the equality and diversity policies.

• Box-ticking by managers rather than substantive action. Both groups thought managers are more interested in maintaining the status quo


8

rather than supporting female and BAME staff to reach their potential.

6.8 For women the lack of communication and clarity about procedures

undermined their confidence because it increases the chance for subjectivity when compared to men.

6.9 Decisions about childcare leave or access to flexible working are

significant for female staff because they are indicators of how much or little women are valued by SOAS. The fact that female staff often had to fight for both tells its own story and indication of how issues of work/life balance are not being considered by some managers. For female staff, inconsistencies between managerial practice and decision-making undermines their confidence.

6.10 BAME staff: “A number of times I have had to watch a white recruit

come into our office beneath me and win promotion after promotion that I cannot achieve and then end up as my boss. It makes my blood boil that SOAS doesn't practice what it preaches.” This isn't a place where black people can thrive.”

6.11 Many BAME participants echo the female concerns that there is a lack

of transparency and that this erodes confidence in management, School policies and their application. For some this also meant that they felt they were being held to a higher standard than white staff by some managers. With limited opportunities for internal promotion in such a small School, competition between staff for the few places that come available is fierce. BAME staff feel that they will invariably lose out and have to look outside of SOAS for career development and promotion opportunities.

3. Issues raised by academic staff.

7.0 “The bullying culture within academia impacts upon women in

particular. Academia is gendered. What I mean by this is that the way academics are expected to work, socialise and get things they want is all geared towards male environment in which women have to fit. The reality is that women are still expected to fulfil certain non-academic roles and tolerate the unacceptable bullying behaviour of the academic environment.”

7.1 Female academics stressed that the crisis management approach to

meeting targets and deadlines massively impact upon family life. As female academics have pointed out, their senior academic colleagues


9

often use the threat of, for example, a department closing down to oblige academics to extra work hours that are not always necessary. This reinforces a male approach to academia that does not take into consideration the work/life balance that female academics, especially single mothers, have to juggle.

7.2 The best example of this is to be told that it is a “choice” to have

children and a family. This implies that female academics cannot complain if they do not have any time to write the papers to qualify for promotion.

7.3 As academics, women soon discover that a work/life balance is

discretionary, not a right. 7.4 Many female academic staff choose part-time working to fit around

their childcare responsibilities. By doing so, their route to promotion from within SOAS in later life will be blocked simply because of their lower number of publications.

7.5 Moreover, as witnessed even by the author of this report, male

academics can, at times, be dismissive and arrogant towards professional staff colleagues, the majority of whom are female.

7.6 This paints a picture of an old-fashioned academic world where

patriarchy and where you have to be a male academic to be successful still permeates the academic culture at SOAS. Obviously, it is not as profound as it once was. Nevertheless, to be a female academic at SOAS continues to be a challenge and may explain the under-representation of women at senior levels at SOAS.

8.0 The HERA evaluation and BAME staff 8.1 “For me the biggest barrier to progress at SOAS is the HERA process.

You effectively have to justify your own role or why you should be considered for regrading without any idea how to do this. Without guidance or guidelines as to what is being looked for, how is it possible for staff to be sure they are being assessed fairly? For me, as a black member of staff, this is a very important question.”

8.2 Criticism of HERA was universal among BAME staff, especially given

their lack of confidence in management at SOAS. They argued that the lack of transparency in the way SOAS evaluates job roles leaves too much room for subjective analysis.


10

8.3 For BAME staff, not knowing how to complete the HERA, and how their performance is assessed placed them at significant disadvantage when compared to white staff. For some, English was not their first language and for others their education was not completed until much later than their white peers. This type of assessment that places heavy emphasis on the written word and the requirement to express oneself skilfully disadvantages BAME staff in particular.

4. What staff identified SOAS could do to enhance equality and

diversity at the School. 9.1 A key part of the programme was to provide female and BAME staff an

opportunity (1) to identify the barriers they confront that limit the opportunities for career development, and (2) to suggest how SOAS could support staff do promotion better.

9.2 Their recommendations are divided into four parts.

Part 1: Staff representation Part 2 Increased transparency Part 3: Career development support Part 4: The Pay Gap and Academic recommendations

10 Staff Representation 10.1 Both groups thought that female and BAME staff representation did

not work as well as it could. For BAME staff in particular, the view was that the ‘BAME staff network’ focuses too much on the social and cultural needs of staff and, as such, it is the wrong vehicle for the BAME staff representation they seek.

10.2 Instead, both groups proposed:

• Establish role specific working groups of female and BAME staff that should have clear terms of reference and goals and objectives. That this network would dissolve once it achieved its objectives.

• Establish female and BAME Staff networks to share useful ideas between staff and HR, perhaps similar to the current mentoring forum that is arranged by Staff Development, where there are regular meetings for staff interested in being mentors/mentees (more on mentoring below).


11

• Staff of African origin, felt that their views and opinions were not as prominent in BAME discussions as they would like. Therefore, they suggested a separate African origin, BME, workgroup should also be established for specific tasks.

11.0 Increased transparency 11.1 All staff who participated were very concerned that they should be

aware of what would happen next and how to make the changes identified.

11.2 Participants recommended the following:

• The participants wanted HR to ensure that the themes identified result in constructive actions on how they can be improved.

• An action plan that takes forward the issues identified, with a clear timescale that is communicated to staff, so that they can see the progress being made.

• Participants want to meet Dr Ossie Stuart to present the full report with them face-to-face.

• Participants would like presentation(s) on what is being offered at SOAS to support staff e.g. HR policies, as there is a lack of knowledge and awareness of a number of SOAS policies and procedures.

• It was felt important that there should be a "meet up session" of the groups in a few months’ time to review progress.

• Some staff also thought it was important that the whole SOAS community should be involved in driving initiatives identified. This should not be seen as solely a female and BAME staff issue.

12.0 Career development support 12.1 BAME staff in particular suggested a mentoring scheme for

underrepresented groups to be very important. 12.2 They suggested that:


12

• SOAS must look at ways to increase BAME and female staff chances for promotion. Perhaps a mentoring and guidance service. This will allow people to keep current with job and training opportunities when they arise, to navigate career development within SOAS and as a result to boost confidence.

• They consider that this project is only just the beginning and that there should be follow up to see how each participant was doing. As part of this, mentoring would be a useful tool to help each person progress.

• Some staff suggest that the current Staff Development Mentoring forum should be audited to establish its effectiveness for BAME and female staff. They suggest there should be a targeted approach to mentoring and that underrepresented groups should be prioritised in any new scheme.

13.0 The Pay Gap and Academic recommendations 13.1 That there is a negative BAME and female pay gap, indicates that

SOAS Equality and Diversity policies are not as effective as they should be. In addition, that BAME participants highlighted the lack of transparency in how to achieve promotion and that female academic staff are disadvantaged by a challenging academic work ethic that ignores work/life balance further illustrates the ineffectiveness of such policies.

13.2 Recommendations made by participants include:

• Tie the Promotion Done Better outcomes to the current SOAS recommendations from the ‘Pay Gap Survey’

• That Dr Ossie Stuart advise SOAS on measures to ensure that SOAS promotes both female and BAME staff and sets targets for realistic outcomes during the current restructuring.

• An acknowledgement that female academic staff, especially those with caring responsibilities, are disadvantaged by the prevailing work ethic within academia at SOAS.

• Creation of a process for internal promotion that runs alongside the external promotion process.

• A wider set of assessments to assess suitability for academic staff internal promotion.


13

• Clear pathways to promotion for research and part-time staff, especially female staff within this group.

• Creation of new methods for part-time staff to increase their fraction and income as they develop in their roles and responsibilities.

14.0 CONCLUSION 14.1 This Report has had the difficult task of summarising the, at times,

critical views of SOAS female and BAME staff who participated in the 2017 Promotion Done Better programme. Nevertheless, the purpose of the programme and this Report is to provide a snapshot of the views and insights of the participants and their views about why career development barriers exist for certain members of staff at the School and to suggest remedies where problems and failings have been identified.

14.2 This Report has not been able to capture everything that was said,

however, one clear theme has emerged. Female and BAME staff are frustrated by the lack of progress to a fairer and more inclusive SOAS and expect this to change. They simply do not experience the public pronouncements on progress in equality and diversity claimed by the School.

14.3 The issue of a lack of progression in career development for female

and BAME staff is an organisational issue and not a personal one. If the programme ‘Promotion Done Better’ and this Report help to contribute to the changes all staff would like to see, then they have done their job.


14

Appendices: Key Recommendations:

1. This Report and its findings should be seen and commented upon by all participants before its publication.

2. Any commitment to act upon these findings must be endorsed by the

Trustees of the School.

3. Internal recruitment process and accountability for both academic and professional staff must show how they arrived at their decisions and this must be published.

4. All part-time female academic staff should be offered career

development support, especially regarding opportunities for research and the publication of papers.

5. All future research proposals must include evidence of consideration of

work/life balance of researchers.

6. The evaluation of job roles (HERA) and other performance related assessments should rely less on proficiency in written English and more on practical skills performance of staff.

7. Establish a regular audit of relevant staff benefits, such as, training

opportunities, work experience and job opportunities, formal and informal that exist at SOAS. These should be collated and updated on a quarterly basis and the information made available to all staff.

8. As SOAS is a small School, internal promotion will not be available to

everyone. Therefore, new ways should be explored to increase the responsibilities and pay of long-term middle and junior level professional staff who are at the top of their pay scale, but cannot progress further.

9. Without professional staff, SOAS could not function, yet some

academics appear to adopt a “them and us” approach to working with these key members of staff, many of whom are female and from BAME backgrounds. Not only is this counter to “SOAS Core Values”, it perpetuates and silently condones discrimination, especially sexism and racism. It should become a contractual obligation for all academics


15

to treat all staff with courtesy and respect and a failure to do so considered a disciplinary issue.

10. Finally, working groups of female and BAME staff should be

established to monitor the implementation of agreed changes. These groups should work closely together and have clear terms of reference and aims and objectives. These working groups should dissolve once the objectives have been achieved.

Equality & Diversity Committee 17.10.2017 ED 17/18 01 J

OFFA Access Agreement 2018/19

The Office for Fair Access (OFFA) require institutions to submit access agreements for 2018/19 outlining the steps that will be taken to improve widening participation and access

across the student lifecycle. The agreement was submitted to OFFA in May 2017, and approved in August 2017.

EDC are asked to note our access agreement for 2018/19.

Executive Summary This covering note is for the SOAS Access Agreement 2018/19 which was submitted to the Office For Fair Access (OFFA) on Monday 8th May 2017. This Access Agreement was written following consultation with the Students’ Union and OFFA Steering group. OFFA have asked institutions to respond in their agreements to key national priorities as outlined by the DfE (Department for Education). These include: • Raising attainment in schools and school sponsorship • Outcomes for students across the student lifecycle • Collaborations across the HE sector and engagement with national programmes • Targeting of specific groups such as white working class boys

Key features for 2018/19: • SOAS has improved its performance against a number of benchmarks in access

and participation. However further work is needed in the area of student progression and success.

• SOAS will commit 29.7% of our higher fee income to measures that improve access, progression and success for students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds

• SOAS outreach also supports participants to progress to selective HEIs, with an annual average of 35% of our outreach attendees who apply to SOAS but don’t come here ending up placed at a Russell Group institution

• Every student with a household income of less than £25,000 will receive financial support over the course of their undergraduate degree programme

This access agreement has been approved by the OFFA Steering Group and Executive Board.

Recommendations n/a

Financial Impact n/a

Risks There is a statutory requirement for institutions to submit access agreements to OFFA.

Equality implications Institutions have been asked to consider how equality and diversity links with widening participation, particularly in relation to groups protected under the Equalities Act. This is evidenced in section 6.

Marva de la Coudray

Head of Widening Participation Academic Services Directorate October 2017

1

SOAS

Access Agreement 2018/19

Headlines:

• SOAS University of London is the leading institution for the study of Asia, Africa and the Near and Middle East. The vision for the next 100 years will continue to be underpinned by internationalism, justice, diversity and equality

• It evidences its continuous commitment to widening participation and fair access through its core values, and embeds this commitment through several high level institutional strategies

• SOAS has improved its performance against a number of benchmarks in access and

participation. However further work is needed in the area of student progression and success. Its strategic approach in this access agreement therefore encourages engagement and success at every stage of the student journey

• We will commit 29.7% of our higher fee income to measures that improve access,

progression and success for students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds

• SOAS outreach also supports participants to progress to selective HEIs, with an annual average of 35% of our outreach attendees who apply to SOAS but don’t come here ending up placed at a Russell Group institution

• Every student with a household income of less than £25,000 will receive financial support

over the course of their undergraduate degree programme

• The SOAS Students’ Union has been fully engaged in developing the approach outlined in this access agreement

2

CONTENT

1. Introduction

2. Fees, student numbers and fee income

3. Assessment of performance

3.1. Assessment of performance using HESA benchmarks

3.2. Summary of performance and focuses for 2018/19

4. Strategic approach in widening participation and access

4.1. Attainment raising in schools and colleges

4.2. Student lifecycle

5. Evidence informed expenditure in widening participation and access

5.1. Evidence based approach to targeting

5.2. Contributions to the national landscape in social mobility

5.3. Monitoring and evaluation

5.4. Financial support

6. Targeting specific groups

6.1. White males from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds

6.2. Students from black and ethnic minority backgrounds

6.3. Disabled students

6.4. Mature students

7. Targets and milestones

8. Consulting with students

3

9. Information to students

4

1. Introduction SOAS University of London is the leading institution for the study of Asia, Africa and the Near and Middle East. SOAS uniquely combines language scholarship, disciplinary expertise and regional focus. It has the largest concentration in Europe of academic staff concerned with Africa, Asia and the Middle East. As SOAS commemorates its centenary with the opening of Senate House North Block, it continues to solidify its importance in the UK and abroad in understanding the world, and excelling in teaching, learning and research. The vision for the next 100 years will continue to be underpinned by internationalism, justice, diversity and equality. It is within this framework that SOAS evidences its continuous commitment to widening participation and fair access. Our focus is that all SOAS students leave with the ability to challenge and interpret the world, connect communities and culture, and change and impact the world. This is even more so the case for students from backgrounds underrepresented in Higher Education (HE). This access agreement is informed by and aligns closely with other institutional strategies such as the developing SOAS strategy which aims to produce high quality graduates who can understand and engage with the world, and develop well rounded individuals who can make a difference. Further to this the new SOAS Teaching, Learning and Student Experience Strategy will focus on delivering inclusivity at every stage of the student journey and ensuring equal outcomes for all students. The focus on success and outcomes is further embedded within the Equality and Diversity Strategy which highlights the attainment gap for students with protected characteristics as a key area of work. This close integration with high level strategic documents and their performance indicators ensure a whole institutional approach which embeds wider participation and access at every level of the institution. SOAS’ approach for 2018/19 has been refined to take into account our ambitions for the next 5 years, and evidence gathered from evaluation on our approach to access and participation. Further to this we are responding to key developments within the HE sector including supporting school attainment and tackling differential degree outcomes for students from black and ethnic minority groups. The strategic approach taken has resulted in an improvement in our access and student success performance against targets. We remain committed to our revised and refined targets and milestones which will ensure we continue to make progress for some of the hardest to reach groups. SOAS will continue to target our outreach, student support/retention activities and financial support at the most underrepresented students, and improve our evaluation and monitoring strategy to ensure we are best able to measure impact and deliver outcomes.

2. Fees, student numbers and fee income SOAS proposes to charge a single undergraduate tuition fee of £9,250 for all degree programmes for new home/EU entrants in 2018/19. There is no justification for differential fees between programmes. Fees for students on year abroad programmes will be no higher than £1,385. The fee will increase with the Government’s permitted rise each year in line with the regulations.

5

3. Assessment of performance 3.1 Assessment of performance using HESA benchmarks SOAS is committed to increasing the participation of students from a variety of backgrounds. We recognise our contribution to the improved participation rates of the most disadvantaged students across the sector during the past 5 years, and continue to assess our performance against HESA widening participation of underrepresented groups to provide a robust measure using external, sector wide indicators. These measure the proportion of students from state schools, lower socio-economic groups, lower participation neighbourhoods and those in receipt of DSA. We also measure our performance in retention using the non-continuation benchmark. The graphs below shows the HESA performance indicators for widening participation and non-continuation for over a 5 year period:

Since 2011/12, we have steadily increased the proportion of students from state schools above the benchmark, and at a faster rate than the UK average. The overall trend is upwards. We will maintain our efforts in recruiting young students from state schools.

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

85.0

90.0

95.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Graph 1: Percentage of Young People from State School or College

Location-adjustedbenchmark

SOAS Participation

UK Average

Linear (SOASParticipation)

Linear (UK Average)

6

We continue to increase the proportion of young students from lower socio-economic groups, and have remained significantly above our benchmark since 2011/12. This performance indicator will be removed going forward as HESA will no longer publish this information. During 2018/19 we will develop a robust measure for indicating socio-economic background in line with the sector. Further information on this can be found in section 6.

We have increased our proportion of students in receipt of DSA above the benchmark since 2012/13. The overall trend has been upwards. We will maintain our efforts in this area of work.

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Graph 2: Percentage of Young New UG Entrants (Class IIIM, IV, V)


SOAS Participation

UK Average


Linear (UK Average)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Graph 3: Percentage of All UG in reciept of DSA

Benchmark

SOAS Participation

UK Average


Linear (UKAverage)

7

In 2012/13-2013/14, there had been a trend for underperformance in meeting this benchmark, however in 2014/15 we met the benchmark for proportion of young students from low participation neighbourhoods (LPN). For 2015/16 we have not met this benchmark by 0.5%. We will continue to increase our efforts to make significant improvements in young LPN representation.

Whilst the UK average of students from this group has slightly fallen from 2014/15, we have significantly increased the proportion of mature students from low participation neighbourhoods. However we have failed to meet our benchmark. There is concern about the impact of the fall in mature students in the sector. We will increase our efforts as part of our commitment to make significant improvements in mature student LPN representation.

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Graph 4: Percentage of Young from Low Participation Neighbourhoods


SOAS Participation

UK Average


Linear (UK Average)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Graph 5: Percentage of Mature from Low Participation Neighbourhoods


SOAS Participation

UK Average


Linear (UK Average)

8

The non-continuation rate for young students has been falling since 2009/10, and therefore have an overall downward trend. However we have not met our benchmark for 2014/15 and will invest in improving retention of younger students.

Our non-continuation percentage for mature learners is above the UK average and above the HESA benchmark. We have identified this as an area for concern and will continue to invest in support for mature students.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0Pe

rcen

tage

Year

Graph 6: Non-continuation: Young entrants (%)

Youngbenchmark

Young SOAS

UK Average

Linear (YoungSOAS)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Graph 7: Non-continuation: Mature entrants (%)

Maturebenchmark

MatureSOAS

UK Average

Linear(MatureSOAS)

9

Our overall non-continuation rate requires improvement. We are above the benchmark and above the UK average. Although there is a slight downward trend, we need to continue to invest in support measures that improve the success rate of all students.

3.2 Summary of HESA performance and focuses for 2018/19 The analysis of our performance against HESA benchmarks provides a robust measure of success in access and student success at SOAS. The picture is mixed with areas which show a good level of progress towards meeting the benchmarks provided by HESA, and areas which require significant improvement in order to meet the benchmarks and UK averages outlined. The assessment of the graphs above identifies two areas of focus for access and student success work:

• Increased efforts needed to exceed the benchmark for young and mature students from low participation neighbourhoods

• Significantly increased efforts to reduce the non-continuation rate of all students, in particular mature students

Further to this there is a need to establish a measure for the analysis of students by socio-economic groups. We are currently looking into a range of measures including the use of household income, IMD or ACORN data.

4. Strategic approach SOAS is a world-renowned specialist institution focusing on Asia, Africa and the Middle East. As such we have academics and students with a passion and expertise in some of the most interesting and exciting regions in the world. Our work in widening access draws upon this passion, niche and specialism to create engaging, innovative and academically rigorous outreach and student success programmes. Our aim is to work with students to become global citizens who can understand and engage with the world.

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Non-continuation: Overall (%)

Overallbenchmark

Overall SOAS

UK Average

Linear (OverallSOAS)

10

The strategic approach taken is embedded within the developing SOAS Strategy which has two key aims focused on students. Firstly, to produce high quality graduates who can understand and engage with the world. This means providing students with an international experience or exposure and helping students gain a global perspective – both of which are fundamental to our widening access approach which has cultural knowledge and exchange as a key feature. Secondly, to develop well rounded individuals who can make a difference so students leave SOAS with a sense of purpose and responsibility, and with a thirst for life-long learning. These are core considerations in our approach where fulfilling academic and personal potential, and providing equality of opportunity in career and further study prospects are crucial for students from backgrounds underrepresented in higher education. This will be further embedded as the new Teaching, Learning and Student Experience strategy is developed where we seek to encourage engagement and success along every element of the student journey. Further to this the new academic restructure which will be implemented in 2018/19 will deliver embedded discipline focused student support at a School level, and ensure widening access and student success is fully embedded in the governance, structure and strategies across every School at SOAS. Therefore our access activities focus on:

1. Inspiring and encouraging students from the most underrepresented groups to engage with and interpret the world around them

2. Providing support and guidance in assisting students at all educational levels to achieve their academic and personal potential

3. Delivering a cohesive and seamless student experience

Further to this, we are concerned about the progression and success of our students where we aim to: 1. Ensure we fairly and transparently assess the academic potential of students regardless of their

background 2. Increase the proportions of students from underrepresented groups progressing from year one to two

of their undergraduate programme 3. Improve the degree outcomes and careers destinations of students from widening participation

backgrounds. These focuses are further reflected in section 5 which outlines our evidence based approach to expenditure, and section 6 on how we target specific groups. SOAS will increase investment in long term outreach and student success activities by redirecting funding from financial support. The coordinated and focussed approach to access, student success and financial support is described in section 3.4.

4.1 Attainment raising in schools and colleges

SOAS works extensively with schools and colleges across London, and is increasing its profile of widening access work into other parts of England. We currently engage with over 100 schools, and work most closely with those that are in the top 30% of most disadvantaged schools using our school priority formula. Two thirds of the schools we work with are ‘repeat engagers’ working with us at least twice a year. This forms the basis of close collaborative working at both school and pupil level to increase attainment. Working with schools to support educational attainment is the key focus in our widening access activities where collaboratively supporting teaching and learning outcomes across sectors ensures a joined up approach to student transition. Below are some examples of cohorts and programmes which focus on raising attainment where there is significant disadvantage and underrepresentation: • SOAS funded Team Up to recruit and train SOAS students to deliver 12 tuition sessions to small groups of

Year 10 pupils typically on the C grade borderline in either Maths or English. Participants in the programme raised their attainment in evaluative baseline assessments by 20%.

• SOAS Scholars: Thinking Globally! is a two-year project designed to raise pupils’ attainment in the sixth form by increasing participants’ breadth and depth of knowledge, self-awareness and confidence, and by developing study skills and time management techniques

11

• SOAS is a partner university of the Brilliant Club, collaborating to deliver the launch and graduation trips which are a core feature of the programme, and providing SOAS PhD students to deliver tutorials to groups of high-performing pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds in Key Stages 2, 3, 4 and 5. Over two-thirds of those tutored by SOAS researchers went on to produce work of a standard associated with the next Key Stage up in development.

• Tailored study support for History A-level students at Morpeth School consisting of a masterclass, study skills support and assisted use of SOAS library resources, with all participants meeting or exceeding their overall target grade in the relevant module.

• The Languages Challenge targets students in Years 8, 9 and 10 and provides opportunities to use and develop their oral and written language skills, build vocabulary and improve memory. These skills are strengthened through collaborative tasks where students also develop their team work, communication, planning and monitoring skills.

• The Step On programme, aimed at supporting Year 12 students to make successful transitions to A-level study, includes a programme of study skills development sessions alongside an ab-initio language course. Participants are encouraged to identify short and long term learning goals; complete a reflective learning diary; evaluate and review how best to manage their time; complete a skills audit and reflect on what mindset they have adopted, often unconsciously.

The main aims of these programmes are to raise attainment and support transition by supporting pupils to develop their metacognitive skills, increase their subject knowledge and study skills, boost their confidence and resilience, and their ability to reflect upon and develop their own progress. SOAS has established models of school partnership which are based on subject level support to raise attainment with target schools. Our experience shows that schools are increasingly engaged and interested in the type of partnership arrangement that is embedded in the curriculum. This work will be scaled up to increase the number of subject-level school agreements. The model outlined above of collaboration for the delivery of a module within the A-level History course at Morpeth School forms the basis of a template we will put in place with several schools in a variety of subjects in order to similarly help raise attainment for disadvantaged pupils. In addition, we have drawn up plans to enter into broader partnerships with schools to enfold our one-off activity with younger students into a broader framework alongside extended programmes to increase attainment and progression. Crucially, the benefits of such engaged partnerships can be noted by the increased retention rates of students who study at SOAS having been supported in school or college. An increasing number of HEIs have responded to the Government’s expectation of increased engagement in attainment raising in schools by establishing new schools or sponsoring academies. These have a range of motivations including improving the social capital of a local area, addressing institutional underperformance and meeting local employer needs. The majority of HEIs who have set up new schools or sponsored academies are large-sized and have a broader disciplinary base which provide the necessary resource and management to this significant area of work. Consideration should be given to develop a flexible and institution-specific approach which takes into account the size, shape and discipline of the HEI. Our established programme of work in raising attainment shows that small group, high intensity programmes have the most significant impact on student outcomes, and that these activities targeted at the most disadvantaged target schools, increase underrepresentation at SOAS. As a small institution, delivering these types of programmes through the mechanism of academy sponsorship requires careful consideration due to the impact of shifting resources from our widening access work. Although we have no current plans to sponsor an academy, during 2018/19 we will undertake a scoping exercise to investigate the possibility of co-sponsorship. This will include sharing practise with other similar-sized or discipline focused institutions. In addition we will increase investment in access to resource an expanded number of school partnerships, and to deepen our existing school partnerships. This will provide a stronger evidence based for developing plans in our 2019/20 access agreement.

12

4.2 Student lifecycle SOAS is committed to supporting the success of all its students and helping them realise their aspirations. Our degree programmes are unique and diverse in their content and regional focus. It is therefore crucial to provide support at all points in the student life cycle – from pre-entry to after graduation, particularly to those from underrepresented groups. The assessment of our access and student success performance indicates that SOAS need to put in place further measures to improve the retention rate of the overall student population. In order to better understand the progression of our students, SOAS commissioned Continuum: the centre for widening participation policy studies based at the University of East London to undertake an analysis of our student data covering three years in the first instance so we can better understand the undergraduate student experience, with particular reference to progression, retention and achievement. The research project takes into account what can broadly be described as “widening participation characteristics” including (but not limited to) ethnicity, social class, disability, previous academic achievement and the different learner progression routes into the institution. The findings of this report will inform the development of a university-wide retention and success action plan which will be developed in consultation with academic colleagues, professional services and the Student’s Union. This will have an impact on the allocation of resources to support projects and activities in 2018/19. To supplement this research SOAS are working with the Students’ Union who have undertaken a qualitative analysis to understand the causes of, and possible steps to address, attainment gaps. The report which specifically focuses on the experience of black students, has 34 recommendations for every level of the institution. This important piece adds depth to the UEL-commissioned quantitative analysis and builds common cause between the SOAS Students’ Union and key individuals, teams, committees and working groups within the School with the power to influence, decide or take action to address attainment gaps. The aim is to build an inclusive environment for all students. All activity funded through our OFFA access agreement impacts positively on student success and progression. SOAS will continue to deliver a programme of access activities with the aim of raising aspirations, increasing attainment, improving progression to HE and enabling student success. The tables below provide examples of activities which form part of our student lifecycle approach. Raising aspirations

Activity Features Key outcomes Discovering University

• Provides younger students with an introduction to university

• Involves talks by undergraduate students

• Understanding of link between university and career benefits

• Experience of university campus

• Awareness of variety of subjects available in higher education

Ambassador-led taster days (and in conjunction with the SOAS Student Union)

• Provide a positive and engaging HE experience • Provide IAG on HE through an interesting learner-led

experience • Provide tasters through subject-specific workshops

• Increased knowledge of university study and options available

• Increased understanding of progression routes to university

• Increased confidence in own ability to progress to university

13

Increasing attainment Activity Features Key outcomes SOAS Scholars: Thinking Globally!

• Long-term sustained outreach project for Year 12s from disadvantaged backgrounds with the potential to achieve high grades at Level 3 study

• Develops participants’ critical thinking skills to fulfil their academic potential in their current studies

• Explores different subject areas in order to find the right degree choice

• Involves working with current undergraduate students on a number of higher education and career related activities to build knowledge and skills

• Increased confidence and resilience

• Improvement in key study skills and time management

• Strong rates of progression to high-tariff institutions

Immersion Weeks (Turkish & Urdu)

• Provide a positive and engaging HE experience • Provide GCSE support for Turkish and Urdu speakers • Improve community language skills and increased

confidence • Provide greater exploration of HE for hard to reach

group

• 84% Participants gain greater awareness of what university studies would be like and 81% learn more about how to progress to university

• Participants develop critical thinking skills, presentation skills and essay writing skills. Although learners find the writing exercise difficult, they believe that it will support them to succeed at school.

Step On Programme

• Long-term programme providing young people with no family history of higher education with the opportunity to learn a new language

• Develops the study skills require to succeed at KS5 Develops metacognitive skills such as planning, goal setting, reflective learning and monitoring

• Provides an opportunity to experience what it is like to study languages at university

• Aims to improve retention in language studies from AS to A-level and to university

• 80% more excited about the subjects they can study at university

• 80% said they gained skills and knowledge to help them fulfil their academic potential.

• Participants gain greater self-awareness of how to learn

• Support students make better decisions about university studies

• Provides opportunities to learn about different cultures through research and presentation skills

Progressing to HE Activity Outcomes/features Key outcomes Summer schools • Provide a sustained and intense HE intervention

• Provide students interested in particular topics with a broader understanding of the discipline and degree options

• Extensive understanding of the higher education experience

14

• Provide sustained, meaningful contact with current HE students, as well as forum for gaining study skills and specific subject knowledge

• Includes sessions on careers and employability

• Increased understanding of how to progress to university

• Learners are exposed to a variety of languages, cultures and subjects

Masterclasses

• Provide a snapshot of university-style learning and teaching

• Provide meaningful contact with current HE students; who very directly provide role models of people who have come from similar backgrounds

• Increase the understanding of the HE experience to younger students

• Provide support to students who may be struggling with the concept of HE

• Increased subject knowledge

• Increased understanding of progression to university

Enabling student success Activity Outcomes/features Key outcomes Bridging Courses for Mature and First Generation Students

• Transition support for students • Study skills including academic writing • Early awareness and access to support services • First year support • Programme is also delivered online for target students

• Sense of belonging • Improved study skills • Greater resilience • Improved non-

continuation and progression rates

First Term E-Mentoring

• E-mentoring throughout first term using Brightside platform

• General pastoral and transition support, as well as specific academic support

• Increased knowledge of institution-specific knowledge to support transition

• Improved non-continuation and progression rates

Peer Assisted learning programmes

• Targets traditionally difficult academic subjects • Peer leaders encourage peer support during sessions

and students identifying own solutions to common problems

• Focus on the topics students find difficult • Sessions reflect on topics covered on recent lessons

• 4 Peer leaders trained in reflective listening, facilitation and report writing in order to support fellow students

• Preliminary findings are that the programme has a positive impact on learners’ confidence in problem-solving, self-management, and in networking skills

5. Evidence informed expenditure in widening participation and access

Section 4 above provides a range of activities across the student lifecycle which are funded through our access agreement. The tables evidence key outcomes for each activity and ensure we maintain an evidence based and outcome driven approach. The activities funded have the greatest impact in achieving our goals in widening access and improving student success, and we continue to inform the development of these activities through the use of a robust evaluation strategy which is outlined in section 5.3 below.

15

Further evidence and analysis will continue to be conducted to support an increased focus on student outcomes across the student lifecycle, taking into consideration the national challenges surrounding the attainment gap for BME student and increasing the proportions of BME and white working class boys into Higher Education. These are outlined further in section 6. Significant outcomes informing practise and developments

SOAS measures the successful impact of our activities by asking learners to self-report on their own attitudinal change on anonymous post-activity evaluation forms. The table below shows the measures used for general taster days and language taster days which are targeted at students at key stage 4 and below. Our activities consistently demonstrate impact in at least one of the three key attitudes measures below:

% Agreeing they have learnt more about what university study would be like

% Agreeing they have gained study skills to help fulfil their academic potential

% Agreeing that they now believe more strongly that they will go to university

Taster days [n=883]

84.2% 55.3% 71.1%

Languages outreach programme [n=367]

60.7% 49.5% 67.0%

We also measure the successful impact of the activities for students at key stage 5, by asking learners to self-report on their own attitudinal change on anonymous post-activity evaluation forms. The table below demonstrates, consistent significant impact in at least one of the three key attitudinal measures:


% Agreeing they have gained study skills to help fulfil their academic potential


Taster days [n=294]

82.6% 48.7% 65.5%

Masterclasses [n=424]

78.3% 62.4% 71.0%

Summer schools [n=110]

99.1% 96.4% 90.9%

Sustained long-term projects [n=22]

95.4% 90.9% 90.9%

Access conferences [n=46]

90.9% 73.4% 88.9%

To further measure impact, structures are in place for tracking the progression to higher education outcomes of learners who engage in our long-term and summer school programmes. In addition, our aim to increase the number and scope of our school partnerships should provide us with the opportunity to evaluate the impact of programmes in terms of the impact of the above attitudinal change on participants’ learning outcomes. SOAS perform well within the context of our current evaluation procedure, and are reaping the rewards of having refined our evaluation forms, reduced the range of attitudinal questions asked and focusing on key indicators which can be used to evidence top-line impact more clearly. Having gathered significant data on these measures, we continue to invest in the outreach activities outlined above.

16

Outline of expenditure in access, student success and financial support Based on the assessment of our performance outlined in section 3.1, SOAS will commit 29.8% of its higher fee income on access, progression and success measures. The table below shows the split between financial support, outreach and retention expenditure between 2017-18 and 2021-22. Year 1

2017/18 £

Forecast

Year 2 2018/19

£ Forecast

Year 3 2019/20

£ Forecast

Year 4 2020/21

£ Forecast

Year 5 2021/22

£ Forecast

Financial support

1,137,927 1,184,968 1,194,102 1,158,508 1,158,508

Access

490,228 515,908 548,344 571,718 564,718

Student success

493,818 546,908 561,930 591,075 591,075

Progression

25,000 31,000 37,000 43,000 50,000

Total expenditure

2,146,973 2,278,784 2,341,376 2,364,301 2,364,301

The table below demonstrates, in % of higher fee income terms, the shift in balance of expenditure away from financial support and towards access, student success and progression:

Year 1

2017/18 Forecast

Year 2 2018/19

Forecast

Year 3 2019/20

Forecast

Year 4 2020/21

Forecast

Year 5 2021/22

Forecast Financial support

15.8% 15.6% 15.4% 14.9% 14%

Access

6.8% 6.8% 7.1% 7.3% 7.3%

Student success

6.8% 7.2% 7.3% 7.6% 7.6%

Progression

0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.6%

Total expenditure

29.8% 29.9% 30.2% 30.4% 30.4%

5.1 Evidence based approach to targeting

In order to ensure that we target our activities to learners who would benefit the most, we have developed a school formula which ascribes numerical values to state schools according to various criteria. The more disadvantaged and low-performing the school is, the higher the score it receives, and the higher priority it is to work with. The formula takes into account the following data-sets, although we are currently evaluating how best to change the formula to reflect the school- and national-level data now published by the Department of Education:

• POLAR3: this data is used to indicate the likeliness of a pupil body which is expected to contain pupils from Low Participation Neighbourhoods (maximum of 10 points in the formula)

• Percentage of pupils eligible for Free School Meals (FSM): this data is used as a measure of the socio-economic deprivation of the pupil body (maximum of 50 points in the formula)

17

• Percentage achieving 5+ A*-C GCSEs (or equivalent) including English and Maths GCSEs: this data is used as a measure of the schools’ performance in comparison to the national average (maximum of 35 points in the formula)

• Index of multiple deprivation: this data is used as a measure of deprivation in the immediate locality of the school (maximum of 5 points in the formula)

The 10% highest scoring schools form the Priority 1 group, then the next highest scoring 20% are Priority 2, then the next highest scoring 30% are Priority 3, with the remaining 40% being non-priority. As a result of our school level targeting procedures in the past 12 months we have directly engaged with 13 priority 1 schools, 14 priority 2 schools and 5 priority 3 schools.

In addition students are asked to disclose socio-economic information on anonymous post-activity evaluation forms in order to ensure activities are targeting the most appropriate students. These are analysed on an event-by-event and annual basis. Of over 4000 participant evaluation forms collected in 2015/16, just under half reported no parental background of higher education, and two-fifths reported that they had been in receipt of Free School Meals.These figures reflect increasingly robust targeting procedures, and continue to improve year on year. The table below provides targeting data for the key activities: Type of activity

% Attendees eligible for Free School Meals

% Attendees with no parental experience of HE

% Attendees disclosing that they have been in care

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

Taster days 39.7% 46.3% 40.7% 45.5% 43% 45.2% 5% 5% 4.2% Masterclasses

40.5% 60.5% 47.2% 67.6% 71.5% 72.7% 1.2% 1.3% 1.2%

Summer schools

42.7% 54.7% 61.8% 77.3% 70.7% 73.6% 1.5% 0% 0%

Sustained long-term projects

77.4% 83.3% 68.2% 77.4% 77.8% 86.4% 0% 0% 4.6%

Languages outreach programme

32.1% 23.8% 29.4% 61.2% 25.8% 31.3% 8% 3.7% 3.5%

Access conferences

n/a 53.1% 32.6% n/a 54% 54.4% n/a 14.6% 2.2%

5.2 Contributions to the national landscape in social mobility

Collaboration is a key requirement in meeting need and delivering activities concerning widening participation and access to schools, colleges and the local community. SOAS deliver a wide range of activities to support students into Higher Education by collaborating with partners in working with underrepresented groups. By doing so it makes significant contributions to the national landscape in social mobility. Opportunity Areas There are significant areas of challenge across the country with regards to social mobility. The £60m funding from the Government to support the challenges faced is a welcome and needed resource to support schools, colleges, universities, business and local authorities to ensure all children have the opportunity to reach their full potential.

18

Currently London is not one of the opportunity areas so we are unable to engage with the local challenges faced by our young people in the city using this funding. However SOAS engage with some of the other regions identified by delivering programmes which help raise aspirations and attainment for young people in schools. An example of this is the Language Challenges project which we have been running for 3 years. The Languages Challenge is a collaborative experiential project developed by SOAS and completed at schools. In 2016-17, 36 schools registered over 1000 learners on the programme, of which 11 schools and 276 students are from out-of-London schools. In addition SOAS is able to utilise its networks with other partners who are in Opportunity Areas. For example HEIs who formed part of the HEFCE Routes into Languages programme will provide a crucial link into areas where SOAS can support ongoing developments to improve social mobility in the region. HEFCE National Networks for Collaborative Outreach SOAS have been engaged with a number of the regional collaborations as part of its engagement with the HEFCE NCOP programme. As part of our membership of Linking London we will be supporting their NCOP work with colleges in target wards. We will be providing student ambassadors for the collaborative work at the colleges as well as providing input in to project discussions. For our work with Aimhigher London South, SOAS will be supporting a range of activity. The most recent is the Look to the Future programme which will run for two years. It targets Looked After Children to give them a chance to experience different university environments and gain a better understanding of what university has to offer. Several local authorities provided 14 participants that met the Look to the Future criteria. SOAS is committed to developing more projects that focus on engaging young people from backgrounds in care. We will be providing student ambassadors for the collaborative work at the various college events to buddy up with one of the young people

This important area of contribution to the national landscape complements the work being delivered through our access agreement by focusing on young people who are most underrepresented. These groups are hard to reach by SOAS, and the collaborations provide a systematic and measureable environment in which to engage in making a difference in these areas. Applicants who go to other HEIs We have gathered evidence to show how SOAS is contributing to improving access across the sector. The table below displays information about the institutions which those SOAS applicants who attended our outreach did not gain a place at SOAS (by choice or otherwise) ended up at, with previous years’ data for comparison: Applicants Who Went Elsewhere 2013 Entry

[n=66] 2014 Entry [n=80]

2015 Entry [n=97]

2016 Entry [n=90)

To another London HEI 68% 48% 65% 67%

To an HEI in the South East (including London) 70% 65% 69% 77%

To a Russell Group HEI 30% 35% 48% 28%

To a Post-1992 HEI 18% 33% 6% 21%

Not placed 14% 8% 8% 10%

The table below displays the same data for 2016 entry students, this time split between those who attended one-off outreach activities, and those who took part in long-term projects

19

Applicants Who Went Elsewhere One-off

[n=29] Long-term [n=61]

To another London HEI 66% 72%

To an HEI in the South East (including London) 72% 79%

To a Russell Group HEI 17% 31%

To a Post-1992 HEI 34% 15%

Not placed 14% 8%

It is worth noting that SOAS outreach supports participants to progress to selective HEIs, with an annual average of 35% of our outreach attendees who apply to SOAS but don’t come here ending up placed at a Russell Group institution. The impact of long-term projects is particularly pronounced here, and we hope to see the impact grow with increase in our long-term work through school partnerships. Work with primary schools The WP team collaborates with the education charity IntoUniversity to host events for the young people that they work with. The charity offers a programme that supports young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to attain either a university place or another chosen aspiration. The charity has education centres across London which organise homework clubs, mentoring and educational visits. We will continue to host university visits for the charity such as IU Lambeth and IU East Ham. We will also continue to host primary groups from the charity as part of their Primary FOCUS programme. An activity entitled 'Discovering University' has been successfully piloted with feeder schools of our priority secondary schools. We will continue to roll out this activity in 2018/19. SOAS also works with Mosaic, founded by HRH The Prince of Wales in 2007, in order to offer experiences of a university campus, and insights into higher education for primary school children and their parents. The visits consist of the materials used for ‘Discovering University’ (particularly focussed on the career benefits associated with going to university), and taster sessions led by current students of different subjects on offer at university. Other key Pre-16 partnerships: Team Up; The Access Project; the University of Brighton; ReachOut UK Collaborations with other HEIs Capital L, Routes into Languages Capital L is a London consortium of 5 HEIs who collaborate with schools, colleges and a range of other stakeholders to increase and widen participation in language studies in schools, colleges and universities. Capital L staff sit in the WP team within the Academic Services Directorate. The consortium is jointly directed by the Head of Widening Participation at SOAS and the Professor of French at the University of Westminster. Linking London Linking London is a unique partnership of 40 partners made up of universities, colleges, sixth form colleges, schools, awarding bodies, jisc Regional Support Centre, the London Councils Young People's Education and Skills team and unionlearn. The long-established network has been in existence since 2006, as is also part of the HEFCE NCOP. The core aims of the partnership are to support recruitment, retention and progression into and through higher education, in all its variety, including full and part time, higher apprenticeships and work

20

based learning and employment. Through Linking London membership partners work both collaboratively, and individually, to maximise their contribution to targeted student engagement and achievement, social mobility and in pursuit of improvements in social justice through education. Aimhigher London South AHLS works to ensure fair access to higher education for young people from non-traditional backgrounds. This is achieved by linking schools, colleges, universities and education providers together to work effectively. AHLS works in partnership with 11 universities, 28 schools and 3 further education colleges across London and the South East. The network is committed to collaboration and works together to; provide impartial information, advice and guidance to learners from year 8 – year 13, share good practice at a local and regional level in order to determine what works well and that activities are effective, develop and apply evaluation and monitoring methods to illustrate long term impact, improve the involvement of current students.

University of London Outreach, Access and Success Group A network established in April 2014 where a number of University of London institutions have come together to collaborate on four strategic themes including; white working class boys, key stage 3 and 4 outreach, evaluation and research and student success and progression.

5.3 Monitoring and evaluation

Monitoring and evaluating impact is core to our access agreement. This is conducted at an institutional and activity level which assists in refining approaches and processes across the student lifecycle. It includes commissioning external research such at the commissioned report on Student Characteristics, and gathering data which is used to continuously improve the outcomes of our activities. Activity level SOAS systematically and routinely gathers data from learners, and other stakeholders on the impact of its activities. Reports are produced against a number of variables which allows the monitoring of outcomes and attitudinal changes amongst different groups as described in section 5.1. These include measuring:

• Increased awareness of HE study and student life • How to progress to HE • Costs and support available • Impact on current study • Changes in attitude towards HE

The table below demonstrates our activities consistently impact learners in at least one of the three key attitudes measures:

Type of activity


% Agreeing they have gained study skills to help with their current studies


2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

2013/14

2014/15

2015/16

Taster days 88.2% 86.8% 83.8% 63.4% 56.2% 53.6% n/a 71.1% 70.1% Masterclasses

88.3% 84.7% 78.3% 55.9% 67.4% 62.4% n/a 75.4% 71%

Summer schools

98.6% 100% 99.1% 93.5% 100% 96.4% n/a 96% 90.9%

Sustained long-term projects

84.4% 100% 95.4% 87.9% 83.3% 90.9% n/a 100% 90.9%

21

Access conferences

89.2% 92% 90.9% 64.7% 76% 73.4% n/a 84.3% 88.9%

Languages outreach programme

66% 47.2% 61% 53.6% 44.9% 55.4% n/a 56.1% 70.2%

School level The central Widening Participation team work closely with colleagues in the Planning department to understand the access, progression and success of students from underrepresented backgrounds. This includes analysis of the make-up of the current student body by protected characteristics, but also departmental-level analyses which enable us to better understand the progression, success and withdrawal rates of students from widening participation backgrounds at a more granular level, and which reflect the interest of academic staff in issues to do with widening participation at the departmental level. The WP and Planning teams are working closely together in order to identify and develop further areas where data is sufficiently robust to provide the evidence for developing and delivering additional interventions. The Widening Participation team works closely with the Admissions team, particularly to develop our approach to contextual admissions. All home applicants to undergraduate programmes are considered eligible for reduced offers dependent on a range of socio-economic and educational criteria identified by the WP team, and those applicants who receive reduced offers are tracked once at SOAS in order to build our institutional evidence base for further refinement. The WP and Admissions team are currently working together in order to better publicise this approach, and to demystify any aspects of the application and admissions process for SOAS applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds. Through these methods of targeting, analysis and evaluation, SOAS ensure that progress is made to improve access, student success and progression.

5.4 Financial support SOAS will spend £1,184,968 on financial support for students in 2018/19. Institutional evidence from the evaluation of our financial support packages indicates that outreach has the biggest impact on a students’ decision to apply to university but that financial support has a significant impact on the retention rate. This has informed our decision to offer financial support over the duration of programmes for students from the most disadvantaged groups. Excellence Bursary The Excellence Bursary provides £750 per academic year to every undergraduate student with a household income under £25,000. This bursary provides guaranteed financial support to students with a low household income. Enhanced Excellence Award The SOAS Enhanced Excellence Bursary provides an additional £750 per academic year. The recipients of this bursary will receive the Excellence Bursary plus the Enhanced Excellence Bursary totalling £1,500 per academic year. The bursary will have a total value of £4,500. It is targeted at care-leavers, students from low participation neighbourhoods, first generation HE entrants and students with refugee status. Students must also have a household income below £25,000. This award provides support to the most underrepresented groups and helps towards improving student success by supporting students over the course of their degree. Study Support Funds SOAS Study Support funds provide one-off financial support to students who experience unanticipated financial hardship. The fund is targeted at students from underrepresented groups, and those who have low household income. The support is provided on a means-tested basis with a maximum value of £1,000.

22

The table below shows the financial support available and reflects our priorities in recruiting and retaining the best students from disadvantaged groups.

Award

No. available

First year Second year Third year Total Cash

bursary Fee

waiver Cash

bursary Fee

waiver Cash

bursary Fee

waiver SOAS Excellence Bursary

318 £750 - £750 - £750 - £2,250

SOAS Enhanced Excellence Bursary

165 £750

- £750

- £750 - £2,250

SOAS Study Support Funds

98 Max. £1,000

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Max. £1,000

In 2018/19 SOAS will guarantee 318 new students financial support over the course of their programme. Evaluation financial support using OFFA toolkit Initial steps have been taken to gather the data required to evaluate our financial support using the OFFA toolkit, though we understand that HESA and OFFA are working together to simplify this process further for institutions. Once this is complete we will proceed with the evaluation, as well as putting in place new data collection processes (or simplifying existing processes) if necessary to ensure that the analysis can be repeated on an annual basis for subsequent cohorts. Impact of financial support on attainment In the meantime however, we have over the past few years been tracking the progression rates of recipients of financial support in comparison to other applicants who – broadly – share the same WP background characteristics. The table below displays the difference, in percentage points, for first-year outcomes for bursary recipients, compared to the average of all WP background students. Although no control for prior attainment is made, the data demonstrates higher rates of progression for those who receive financial support:

First Year Outcome 2012 entry

[n=90] 2013 entry [n=87]

2014 entry [n=86]

2015 entry [n=92]

Progressing to Year 2 -4 +2 +8 +8 Restarting Year 1 +5 +3 0 0 Withdrawn 0 -6 -6 -2 Unknown -1 +3 -2 -7

6. Targeting specific groups

SOAS are concerned about both national and institutional evidence that point to ingrained disadvantage for particular groups of students. The key starting point for our response to ongoing work in this area is a better understanding of the journey for students across differing characteristics. This begins with our access work through to employment or further study, and understanding how multiple dimensions of disadvantage may affect the student experience. The commissioned research will provide statistical data for tracking this, with the Student Union’s report on the experience of black students providing the student voice. The resultant action plans will seek to address the findings of the research. It is expected that a more targeted programme across the student lifecycle will be developed with pilots delivered in 2018/19.

6.1 White males from disadvantaged socio-economic groups

23

We are aware that changes need to be made in order for us to engage a greater number of white males from disadvantaged socio-economic groups in our outreach offer. For example, in 2015/16 only 2.1% of participants were white males in receipt of Free School Meals. That is why in 2016/17 we prioritised any applicants from this group when allocating places for our post-16 activities such as summer schools. In addition, we will take into account the findings of the “The underrepresentation of white working class boys in higher education” report recently published by King’s College London and LKMco when formulating new outreach activity. This work will be further developed by specifically identifying a selection of schools using our targeting formula to increase work with this group. This will be monitored using our evaluation system to ensure we are increasing our engagement with white boys from lower socio-economic groups. Further to this we are working with Planning and Registry to develop a mechanism to identify and track students from this group through their undergraduate experience. We currently use household income to determine ‘class’ status which is the most robust measure currently available for tracking.

6.2 Students from black and ethnic minority backgrounds Existing institutional research shows a significant attainment gap at degree classification level between black home students and their white counterparts. The recommendations from the SOAS’ Students’ Union report, ‘Degrees of Racism’ identify 39 recommendations around 7 themes:

1. Establish leadership and strategy around eliminating the attainment gap 2. Acknowledge and address institutional racism 3. Address BME underrepresentation within the staff and student body 4. Create and repair systems that support a system of accountability 5. Create an inclusive learning and teaching environment 6. Clarify and communicate existing support available 7. Dismantle barriers to accessing support

An action plan is being devised from these recommendations to ensure that at the highest level SOAS address the disparities in the experience of students from BME backgrounds. For example a KPI had been developed which will report to Academic Board to monitor SOAS progress in this area. This important area of work links with the School’s Equality Diversity Inclusion Action Plan which already seeks to address by taking actions to applying for external benchmarking such as the Race Equality Charter, extending Unconscious Bias training for decision making staff and identifying student retention and attainment gaps.

During 2018/19 the School will continue to develop this area of work at the highest level through the Attainment Gaps Working Group and by implementing a range of support activities for the target students including a mentoring scheme. In addition the findings of the commissioned student characteristics analysis will provide a module level data against ethnicity in order to better identify where changes in curriculum, or additional student support may be required to address disparities.

6.3 Disabled students

Effective and tailored support is required to ensure students with disabilities have success progression through their undergraduate experience. Currently we exceed our HESA benchmark for the proportion of students in receipt of DSA so have a significant number of students disclosing a disability. However we are also aware of the increasing numbers of students that require support who may not be in receipt of DSA. This has led to increased investment in staffing for mental health and wellbeing in the Student Advice and Wellbeing team. During 2018/19 will we develop a target to monitor the impact of this additional support, and ensure we are providing sufficient information, advice and guidance to the student body on where to access the support available.

6.4 Mature students We are aware of the steep decline in the numbers of mature learners entering higher education. SOAS have established programmes targeting students on the Access to HE diploma through our progression agreements

24

with local FE colleges, and deliver a variety of support programmes aimed at improving student success for the group. To encourage further engagement with mature learners we will be providing a year long programme of support for students completing the new African Studies Access to Higher Education Diploma at Kensington and Chelsea College. The students will have access to mentoring from current SOAS students, who have progressed to university from Access programmes, throughout their studies. This will provide the students help with developing their study skills and improving the quality of their diploma work, advice on making a successful transition to university and guidance on completing Personal Statements. As part of the programme as well we will be providing a couple of guest lectures at the college, complementing what the students are learning and exposing them to university style teaching. Further to this SOAS will develop a programme of outreach activities specifically targeted at adults. A summer school is planned for July/August 2017. It will take place in the evenings and lead to a Family Day. Current mature students have helped develop the programme by identifying what study skills sessions to include on the summer school. We are working with SOAS Mature Students reps to consult mature students on initiatives aimed at supporting retention and success as well as outreach. This includes a proposal to set up a peer-assisted project for this particular cohort. We have also been approached by Aimhigher London South to develop activities aimed at parents with no previous experience of higher education.

7. Targets and milestones SOAS have committed to a range of ongoing targets over a 5-year period, and these were most recently updated in 2016/17. The targets are ambitious and have been formulated across the student lifecycle, and institutional data has been used to develop a refined set of targets and milestones that ensure SOAS works with the most disadvantaged students. During 2018/19 we will develop an additional set of target based on the guidance outlined in this access agreement which focus on white males from disadvantaged backgrounds, students from black and ethnic minority groups, students with disabilities and mature students. A target to appropriately measure the impact of our work on raising attainment will also be developed. The targets below reflect the need to maintain and improve the scope of our access and student success activities to ensure that all students are able to access, progress and succeed at SOAS. Targets have been formulated based on our assessment of our current performance, sector wide benchmarks and institutional evidence. These targets are stretching and represent our increased investment in access, progression and student success, and the outcomes we wish to achieve. Access targets Measure Baseline

(2013/14 intake)

Target aim Milestone at 2016/17

Milestone at 2017/18



Young first degree entrants from LPN (POLAR3)

(relating to graph 4 in section 3.1)

3.7% To increase the proportion of students

from this group to 5.4% by 2019/20

4% 4.5% 4.9% 5.4%

25

Mature first degree entrants from LPN (POLAR3)


2.2% To increase the proportion of students from this group to 4%

by 2019/20

2.5% 3% 3.5% 4%

First degree students in receipt of DSA


6.3% To increase the proportion of this group to 7% by

2019/20

6.5% 6.7% 6.9% 7%

Young first degree entrants from NS-SEC 4-71


30.6% To maintain the proportion of students

from this group by 2019/20

31% 31% 31% 31%

State school first degree entrants


81.6% To maintain the proportion of students

from this group by 2019/20

82% 82% 82% 82%

Measure Baseline

(2012/13 data)


Milestone at

2017/18



Number of school and FE college students attending extended programmes

60 students

To increase the number of school and FE college students

engaged in extended programmes to 100 by

2019/20

60 students

75 students

90 students 100 students

1 The target relating to this performance indicator will be removed as HESA will no longer publish this information. A new target will be formulated based on further research.

26

Number of students attending summer schools

160 students

To increase the number of students attending subject-

based summer schools

160 students

170 students

180 students

200 students

Number of students engaged in raising attainment

60 To increase the number of students engaged in activities that raise attainment

n/a n/a 60 students 75 students

Number of students progressing to HE from POLAR3 Quintile 1

40 To see 40 learners from POLAR3 Quintile 1 progress to HE by

working with 12 NCOP schools

n/a n/a n/a 40

Progression targets Conversion of year 12 & 13 outreach attendees to SOAS applications

25% To increase the proportion of outreach attendees who apply to

SOAS to 35% by 2019/20

25% 28% 33% 35%

Conversion of year 12 & 13 outreach attendees who apply and gain a place at SOAS

25% To increase the conversion rate of

outreach attendees who gain a place at

SOAS to 35% by 2019/20

25% 28% 32% 35%

Number of students attending Bridging Course for Mature students

44 students

To increase the number of mature

students attending the Bridging Course to 75

by 2019/20

44 students

55 students

65 students

75 students

Number of students attending Bridging Course for First

34 students

To increase the number of first

generation students attending the Bridging

34 students

45 students

55 students

60 students

27

Generation students

Course to 60 by 2019/20

Percentage of Mature Bridging Course attendees progressing to year 2

72.7% To increase the progression rate of

mature Bridging Course attendees into

year two to 80% by 2019/20

72.7% 74% 77% 80%

Percentage of First Generations Bridging Course attendees progressing to year 2

79.4% To increase the progression rate of first

generation Bridging Course attendees into

year two to 85% by 2019/20

79.4% 82% 84% 85%

Measure Baseline

(2013/14 intake)





Non-continuation of young students


6.4% To reduce the non-continuation rate of

young students to 5% by 2019/20

6.4% 6% 5.5% 5%

Non-continuation of mature students


20.6% To reduce the non-continuation rate of mature students to 15% by 2019/20

20.6% 18% 16% 15%

Non-continuation overall

9.7% To reduce the non-continuation rate of

the overall population to 7% by 2019/20

9.7% 9% 8% 7%

28


Student success targets

During 2018/19 SOAS will develop in an increased understanding of student progression and outcomes. It will be based on analysis of national data sources such as DELHE, data gathered by the SOAS Careers Office and the commissioned research project. This will enable SOAS to create a set of targets related to student success and outcomes for students from disadvantaged groups. We will monitor on an in-year basis the progress towards our milestone using sector-wide and institutional proxy data to ensure we make progress over a 5-year period. Targets may be reviewed, if necessary, based on institutional data and UCAS data collected during the application cycle.

8. Consulting with students

The SOAS Students’ Union has worked in tandem with the School in drafting the access agreement for 2018/19. It is reflected in the continued emphasis of cash bursaries as a form of financial support for all students, and success initiatives for underrepresented groups. In addition the focus on mental health is aligned with the Union’s priority for increased resource for mental health support for the student body which SOAS have responded to by providing additional staff in the Student Advice and Wellbeing team. This is a continuation of collaboration in developing access agreements for the past 5 years. The School’s Widening Participation Team meet with the Union to discuss issues around access and success and align with the Students’ Union educational priorities. It includes delivering joint WP outreach activities such as Students’ Union-led outreach programme, the “SOAS Saturday Club” and “Student HUB. Strategically the Students’ Union has a key role in several areas of SOAS relating to student experience. This includes membership the Student Outcomes and Academic Experience Working Group chaired by the Director, where students who are from underrepresented groups contribute. The Co-President also sits on the OFFA Steering Group as a formal member. Consultation with the Students’ Union and student body has resulted in the following:

• Increased expenditure on long-term outreach programmes and further collaboration in building a ‘SOAS community’ for access

• Further emphasising the importance of retention and success in the agreement, and SU assistance in devising programmes in response to concerns about outcomes for students from underrepresented groups

• Reviewing financial support arrangements to ensure they are attractive and suitable for students’ needs

• Improved support for student with mental health difficulties

9. Information to students

SOAS provides clear, accessible and timely information to applicants and potential students on our undergraduate fees and financial support. Information on fees and financial support is provided through on our institutional website and the UCAS website. We will continue to publish our financial support on these websites.

29

For 2018/19 we will continue to produce a leaflet on our financial support which is distributed to schools and colleges across the country. This will be distributed from October 2017. The leaflet will be created in conjunction with current SOAS students who are from under-represented groups to ensure the information is clear and easy to understand by potential students. We have created student finance presentations with our student ambassadors that are delivered to students from year 11 onwards in all our access-related activities. We update this presentation with support from our students. In addition SOAS will be providing financial information to younger students through the delivery of broader IAG and information to parents and teachers.

Fair Processing Notice

Main contact Alternative contactName Marva de la Coudray Dr Ian Pickup

Job title Head of Widening Participation Director of Academic Services

Telephone 020 7898 4552 020 7898 4113

E-mail [email protected] [email protected]

Main contact Yes

Alternative contact Yes

Institution name: The School of Oriental and African StudiesInstitution UKPRN: 10007780

Access agreement 2018-19 resource plan (submission 26 April 2017)Contact Information

Validation checks1. Please ensure that contact details are completed for two people.

Important template notes

1. Please complete and return this resource plan, along with your access agreement document, by 26 April 2017.

2. Please complete sections in yellow; white sections will autopopulate.

3. Please do not copy and paste cells within this workbook as this can corrupt and overwrite the validation checks. You can, however, copy and paste into the white formula bar box (which can be found just below the command ribbon at the top of the Excel window).

4. Please do not apply inflation.

5. OFFA will publish the information you provide in Table 7 (Milestones and targets) on the OFFA website along with your access agreement. Summary financial information will be published by OFFA in an outcomes report.

6. Please also consult our detailed online guidance for Universities and Colleges for help with completing this resource plan.

OFFA supports the development of robust evidence that supports effective practice. We are contacted occasionally by academics and organisations conducting research into widening participation, who are interested in contacting practitioners and heads of WP to contribute to their work.

We will share your contact details only where you have given consent to share. We will seek assurances from the organisation that they will use your information only for the purpose of conducting research into widening participation and delete it when it is no longer required.

We will not share your contact details with organisations seeking to contact you for marketing or other commercial purposes.

Please select ‘Yes’ from the dropdown menu below if you are happy for us to share your contact details for research purposes.

2. Please ensure the question about sharing contact details is answered.

Are you happy for us to share your contact details?

OFFA requests that each institution nominates two people to take the lead in the completion of the access agreement. We expect these individuals to read this section explaining why we need contact details, how these contact details will be used and how to complete the contact details section, including the question on sharing contact details with external researchers.

We require the names and contact information of the two individuals to refer to the people who are taking the lead on the completion of the access agreement and in order to contact them to discuss the information provided. Additionally, we may contact these individuals periodically throughout the year to discuss aspects of the access agreement process, for example, to seek feedback for improving engagement with institutions. We will protect your contact details and not share them outside OFFA unless you give consent to do so.

Applied for TEF2

2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

1 First degree New students from 2018/19 onwards 6165 9250 911 1746 2311 2496 9250 6165 92502 First degree Students who started in academic year

2017/18 893 9250 6165 9250 804 565 185 0 9250 6165 92503 First degree Continuing students who started in 2016-

17 or earlier 1544 9000 6165 9250 786 185 0 0 9000 6165 92504 Erasmus and overseas study years New & continuing students 175 1385 920 1385 201 188 188 188 1385 920 138556789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150

Course fee and fee caps (£)2018-19 to 2021-22

Using basic fee cap of

Using higher fee cap of

Total predicted number of students in each academic year


Using higher fee cap ofCourse fee

New/continuing studentsRow Please select the course type from the drop-down menu

Where you charge a range of fees for the same course type, please provide more information e.g. subject or faculty

groupings. This will enable us to more easily match the fees charged when you submit your monitoring return.

2017-18 academic year

Predicted number of students

Course fee (£)

TEF year 1Table 1a - Full-time courses: fee limits and student numbers TEF year 2

Expected TEF year 2 status (for fees in 2018-19 onwards):

1. Please select an option in cell D5 for whether or not you expect to participate in TEF year 2.

Table 1a - Full-time (non-franchised) courses: fee limits and student numbers, 2017-18 to 2021-22

Notes

4. Courses must not exceed the higher fee cap for the particular system/course type selected.3. All mandatory cells within a row must be complete - rows must have system type and course type selected, at least one student recorded, and a course fee.2. There must be at least one course in the table.

Validation checks:

TEF status 2017/18: TEF1Institution UKPRN: 10007780Institution name: The School of Oriental and African Studies

In Table 1a, please enter the tuition fees you intend to charge for all your non-franchised full-time fee-regulated courses. Do not record franchised courses in this table – you can record these in Table 1b.

Institutions who are participating in TEF year 1 (2017-18) will have a basic fee cap of £6,165 and a higher fee cap of £9,250 for first degrees in 2017-18.Institutions who opted out of TEF year 1 (2017-18) will have a basic fee cap of £6,000 and a higher fee cap £9,000 for first degrees in 2017-18.

If you have applied for TEF2 status please indicate this in cell D5. For the purpose of your access agreement, this will ensure the higher level caps are applied to the fees charged from 2018-19 onwards. If you indicate that you have not made a TEF2 submission to HEFCE, your fee cap will be set at £9,000.

Further details of all fee caps are available in our online guidance. (https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/fee-and-bursary-limits-including-exceptions-and-state-support-thresholds/)

Please do not enter values in the grey boxes.

Please do not account for fee waivers in this table - you can record these in Table 5a.

Include all course fees, both above and below the basic fee levels. Any course fees that are below the basic fee will be highlighted in blue.

Complete the estimated number of full-time students at each fee level. This should be a count of all students for each academic year, not just new entrants .

OFFA will share the information you provide with the Student Loans Company (SLC) so they can populate their databases in good time to inform applications for student finance.

www.ukrlp.co.uk 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149

150

Table 1b - Full-time (franchised) courses: fee limits and student numbers, 2017-18 to 2021-22

2017-18 academic year

Predicted number of students

Validation checks:

2. Courses must not exceed the higher fee cap for the particular system/course type selected.

1. All mandatory cells within a row must be complete - rows must have system type and course type selected, at least one student recorded, and a course fee.

Where you charge a range of fees for the same course type, please provide more information e.g. subject or faculty

groupings. This will enable us to more easily match the fees charged when you submit your monitoring return.

In Table 1b, please enter the tuition fees you intend to charge for all your franchised full-time fee-regulated courses. Do not enter courses for which you are the franchisee. For more information see our online guidance (hyperlink: https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/tell-us-fees-student-numbers/).

Institutions who are participating in TEF year 1 (2017-18) will have a basic fee cap of £6,165 and a higher fee cap of £9,250 for first degrees in 2017-18.Institutions who opted out of TEF year 1 (2017-18) will have a basic fee cap of £6,000 and a higher fee cap £9,000 for first degrees in 2017-18.

If you have applied for TEF2 status please indicate this in cell D5 on the FT Fee Table (Table 1a). For the purpose of your access agreement, this will ensure the higher level caps are applied to the fees charged from 2018-19 onwards. If you indicate that you have not made a TEF2 submission to HEFCE, your fee cap will be set at £9,000.


Please do not enter values in the grey boxes.


Include all course fees, both above and below the basic fee levels. Any course fees that are below the basic fee will be highlighted in blue.

Complete the estimated number of full-time students at each fee level. This should be a count of all students for each academic year, not just new entrants .

OFFA will share the information you provide with the Student Loans Company (SLC) so they can populate their databases in good time to inform applications for student finance.

Notes

Course fee

TEF year 1

Institution name: The School of Oriental and African Studies

New/continuing students

Table 1b - Full-time courses: fee limits and student numbers

TEF status 2017/18: TEF1Expected TEF year 2 status (for fees in 2018-19 onwards): Applied for TEF2

Course fee and fee caps (£)2018-19 to 2021-22

Using higher fee cap of

Row Please select the course type from the drop-down menu

Total predicted number of students in each academic yearFranchise institution(Name and UKPRN)

Institution UKPRN: 10007780

TEF year 2


Using higher fee cap of Course fee Using basic

fee cap of

http://www.ukrlp.co.uk/

Franchise institution (Name and UKPRN)

www.ukrlp.co.uk

1 Year abroad 1350 135023456789

101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150

Row Please select the course type from the drop-down menu

Full-time equivalent course fee

Maximum fee charged in any academic year

Where you have different fee limits for different courses, please provide more information e.g. subject/faculty groupings

2. Courses must not exceed the higher fee cap for the particular course type selected.

Notes


For the purposes of this table, we only need to know the fees for your part-time fee regulated courses by course type. You do not need to disaggregate between different intensities of study. You only need to record courses where you charge part-time students above the basic fee level.

The full-time equivalent course fee is the fee per 120 credits (equivalent to a full year of study), or fee for the duration of the programme if less than 120 credits.

If you have applied for TEF2 status please indicate this in cell D5 on the FT Fee Table (Table 1a). For the purpose of your access agreement, this will ensure the higher level caps are applied to the fees charged from 2018-19 onwards. If you indicate that you have not made a TEF2 submission to HEFCE, your full-time equivalent fee cap will be set at £9,000.


OFFA will share the information you provide with the SLC so that they can populate their databases in good time to inform applications for student finance.

Table 2 - Part-time courses: fee limits

Table 2 - Part-time courses: fee limits for students in 2018-19Institution name: The School of Oriental and African StudiesInstitution UKPRN: 10007780

Validation checks:1. All mandatory cells within a row must be complete - rows must have course type selected, and the full-time equivalent course fee and maximum fee completed.

Expected TEF year 2 status (for fees in 2018-19 onwards): Applied for TEF2

http://www.ukrlp.co.uk/

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

All students 2 612 2 702 2 684 2 684 2 684

of which above the basic fee 2 612 2 702 2 684 2 684 2 684

All students

of which above the basic fee

All students 2 612 2 702 2 684 2 684 2 684

of which above the basic fee 2 612 2 702 2 684 2 684 2 684

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

7 213 520 7 612 550 7 741 330 7 787 580 7 787 580

7 213 520 7 612 550 7 741 330 7 787 580 7 787 580

2. New system, part-time, above the basic fee student numbers should be less than or equal to all new system, part-time student numbers.

Table 3a - Total number of students

Full-time

Academic year

Table 3 - Summary student numbers and fee income

Notes


Validation checks:

Tables 3a and 3b mostly populate automatically using the data you have provided in Table 1 for full-time students.

In Tables 3a and 3b you will also need to complete the data relating to part-time student numbers and relevant fee income, indicated by the yellow cells.

* For part-time students, do not include those studying at an intensity of less than 25 percent FTE or those studying a course which leads to a qualification equivalent or lower than one they already hold, as these are not regulated by OFFA.

Please do not leave any yellow cell in Table 3a blank - if you do not have a figure to input please use 0.

Optional commentary on fee income and predicted student numbers. If there is additional information that you would like to make us aware of you can include this here. This box is limited to 500 words; however, we are happy for you to upload additional ‘supporting information’ as a separate Word/pdf document.

1. If you record part-time student numbers above the basic in Table 3a, you must have higher fee income from part-time students in Table 3b, and vice versa.

Academic year

Table 3b - Fee income above the basic fee (or higher fee income (HFI)) (£)

Total students

Total higher fee income

Part-time*

Full-time

Part-time*

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

Total expenditure on access 573 818 595 066 623 154 642 206 629 908

of which uses OFFA-countable funding 490 228 515 908 548 344 571 718 564 718

Total expenditure on student success 634 599 689 801 706 967 738 287 740 496


Total expenditure on progression 25 000 31 000 37 000 43 000 50 000


Total access, student success & progression expenditure 1 233 417 1 315 867 1 367 121 1 423 493 1 420 404

of which uses OFFA-countable funding 1 009 046 1 093 816 1 147 274 1 205 793 1 205 793

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

Optional commentaryThis box is limited to 500 words; however, we are happy for you to upload additional ‘supporting information’ as a separate Word/pdf document.

Table 4 - Access, student success and progression spend forecasts

Institution name: Institution UKPRN:

Validation checks:1. Tables 4a must be completed.

Notes

In Table 4a, we are looking to understand your institutional expenditure on access, student success and progression from all areas of funding.

Against each activity category we ask that you tell us the total amount spent (this may include public funds, such as the Student Opportunity allocation), and how much of your activity expenditure is counted in your access agreement (hyperlink: https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/offa-countable-access-agreement-expenditure/). The ‘of which uses OFFA-countable funding’ totals for access, student success and progression will then be used to calculate your overall access agreement expenditure in Table 6a.

When calculating your access agreement spend for progression, please note that OFFA’s remit only extends to students and courses that are fee-regulated. This means only activities targeted at undergraduate students (or postgraduate ITT students) from under-represented and disadvantaged groups should be included in your access agreement spend for progression. For example, you should not include spend on financial support for postgraduate students in your access agreement expenditure.

For more information on disaggregating access, student success and progression spend, see our online guidance (hyperlink https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/disaggregating-access-success-progression-expenditure/).

In Table 4b we ask you to record expenditure on activities to support under-represented and disadvantaged students into postgraduate study. However, it is not mandatory to complete this table.

Please also note that while the data for the academic year 2017-18 is pre-filled using data submitted with your 2017-18 access agreement, this information can be amended if necessary. If there are substantial differences in the expenditure you committed to in your 2017-18 access agreement and the expenditure you now wish to submit for the academic year 2017-18, please provide an explanation in the optional commentary box.

Please do not leave any yellow cell in table 5a blank - if you do not have a figure to input please use 0.

Progression expenditure forecasts

2. OFFA-countable spend on access, student success and progression should not exceed the total expenditure for access, student success and progression respectively.

Access expenditure forecasts

Table 4a – Access, student success & progression expenditure forecasts (£)Academic year

Student successexpenditure forecasts

Total activity expenditure

Table 4b – Postgraduate expenditure forecasts (£)Academic Year

Expenditure on activities to support under-represented and disadvantaged students into postgraduate study

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

Students with household residual incomes up to £25,000 0

Students from other under-represented groups* 0



0 0 0 0 0

Students with household residual incomes up to £25,000 1,040,000 1,087,040 1,096,175 1,108,000 1,108,000Students from other under-represented groups* 0



1 040 000 1 087 040 1 096 175 1 108 000 1 108 000

0

0

0 0 0 0 0

Hardship funds 97 927 97 928 97 927 50 508 50 508

1 137 927 1 184 968 1 194 102 1 158 508 1 158 508

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

Bursaries and scholarships for all students

Fee waivers

(including free or discounted foundation years)

Table 5 - Expenditure on financial support

Notes


The data for the academic year 2017-18 are pre-filled from your 2017-18 access agreement. This information can be amended if necessary. If there are substantial differences between the expenditure you committed to in your 2017-18 access agreement and the expenditure you now wish to submit for the academic year 2017-18, please provide an explanation in the optional commentary box.

* Other under-represented groups are defined as - a) household income is unknown and you can't make estimates, or b) household income is above £25,000 but the student was from another disadvantaged group. For further information on under-represented and disadvantaged groups, please see our website: https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/target-groups/

In Table 5b we ask you to record financial support expenditure on postgraduate students. However, it is not mandatory to complete this table.

Please do not leave any yellow cell in table 5a blank - if you do not have a figure to input please use 0

Table 5a - Financial support expenditure (£)Academic year


Fee waivers for all students

Full-time

Part-time

1. Table 5a must be completed.

Validation checks:

Student choice

Hardship funds for all students

Student choice for all students

Commentary on predicted financial support expenditureThis includes any assumptions you have made where you are providing students with a choice of financial support (if required).This box is limited to 500 words; however, we are happy for you to upload additional ‘supporting information’ as a separate Word/pdf document.

Bursaries and scholarships

(including accommodation discounts and other institutional services)

Total financial support

Table 5b – Postgraduate expenditure forecasts - financial support (£)

Full-time

Part-time

Full-time

Part-time

Academic Year

Total expenditure on postgraduate students

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

Access expenditure 490,228 515,908 548,344 571,718 564,718

Student success expenditure 493,818 546,908 561,930 591,075 591,075

Progression expenditure 25,000 31,000 37,000 43,000 50,000

Expenditure on financial support 1,137,927 1,184,968 1,194,102 1,158,508 1,158,508

Total expenditure 2,146,973 2,278,784 2,341,376 2,364,301 2,364,301

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

Higher fee income (HFI) 7,213,520 7,612,550 7,741,330 7,787,580 7,787,580

Access expenditure (as % HFI) 6.8 6.8 7.1 7.3 7.3

Student success expenditure (as % HFI) 6.8 7.2 7.3 7.6 7.6

Progression expenditure (as % HFI) 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6

Expenditure on financial support (as % HFI) 15.8 15.6 15.4 14.9 14.9

Total expenditure (as % HFI) 29.8 29.9 30.2 30.4 30.4

Table 6c - New system, full-time fee levels (£) 2018-19

Average fee 8,592

Average fee adjusted for fee waivers 8,592

Maximum fee 9,250


Optional commentaryThis box is limited to 500 words; however, we are happy for you to upload additional ‘supporting information’ as a separate Word/pdf document.

Table 6 - Summary tables

Summary tables

Tables 6a, 6b, and 6c are pre-populated from the data you have entered in previous tables. You should check that the summary data fits with your understanding of your balance of expenditure, and total expenditure as a proportion of your higher fee income. If it does not, please review the data you have entered in the previous tables.

Our online guidance (hyperlink: https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/how-much-should-you-invest/) gives some broad guidelines on the expenditure levels we would expect, which we will look at when assessing your level of spend as a proportion of your higher fee income. While our guidelines are not precise minimums, we will be concerned if you propose to spend significantly less and we will need a discussion with you before we can approve your access agreement. The Director of Fair Access will use the information in these tables, alongside your targets and information set out in your access agreement, to inform his decision to approve your access agreement.

If there are significant changes in expenditure between years, please provide an explanation in the optional commentary box.

Academic year

Academic year

Table 6a – OFFA-countable expenditure summary (£)

Table 6b – OFFA-countable expenditure summary, as a proportion of fee income above the basic fee (or higher fee income (HFI)) (%)

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

T16a_01 Access Low participation neighbourhoods (LPN) HESA T1a - Low participation neighbourhoods (POLAR3) (Young, full-time, first degree entrants)

To increase the proportion of young LPN students from this group to 5.4% by 2019/20 No 2013-14 4% 4.5% 4.9% 5.4%

T16a_02 Access Low participation neighbourhoods (LPN) HESA T2a - (Mature, full-time, first degree entrants) To increase the proportion of mature LPN students from this group to 4% by 2019/20 No 2013-14 2.2% 3% 3.5% 4%

T16a_03 Access Disabled HESA T7 - Students in receipt of DSA (full-time, first degree entrants) To increase the proportion of this group to 7% by 2019/20 No 2013-14 6.3% 6.7% 6.9% 7%

T16a_04 Access Socio-economic HESA T1a - NS-SEC classes 4-7 (Young, full-time, first degree entrants) To maintain the proportion of students from this group by 2019/20 No 2013-14 31% 31% 31% 31%

T16a_05 Access State school HESA T1a - State School (Young, full-time, first degree entrants) To maintain the proportion of students from this group by 2019/20 No 2013-14 82% 82% 82% 82%

T16a_06 Student success Other (please give details in Description column)

HESA T3a - No longer in HE after 1 year (Young, full-time, first degree entrants)

To reduce the non-continuation rate of young students to 5% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 6.4% 6% 5.5% 5%


HESA T3a - No longer in HE after 1 year (Mature, full-time, first degree entrants)

To reduce the non-continuation rate of mature students to 15% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 20.6% 18% 16% 15%


HESA T3a - No longer in HE after 1 year (All, full-time, first degree entrants)

To reduce the non-continuation rate of the overall population to 7% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 9.7% 9% 8% 7%

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22

T16b_01 Access State school Outreach / WP activity (other - please give details in the next column)

To increase the number of school and FE college students engaged in extended programmes to 100 by 2019/20 No 2012-13 60 students 75 students 90 students 100 students

T16b_02 Access State school Outreach / WP activity (summer schools) To increase the number of students attending subject-based summer schools No 2012-13 160 students 170 students 180 students 200 students


To increase the proportion of outreach attendees who apply to SOAS to 35% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 25% 28% 33% 35%

T16b_04 Access State school Contextual data To increase the conversion rate of outreach attendees who gain a place at SOAS to 35% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 25% 28% 32% 35%

T16b_05 Progression Mature Outreach / WP activity (other - please give details in the next column)

To increase the number of mature students attending the Bridging Course to 75 by 2019/20 No 2012-13 44 students 55 students 65 students 75 students

T16b_06 Progression State school Outreach / WP activity (other - please give details in the next column)

To increase the number of first generation students attending the Bridging Course to 60 by 2019/20 No 2012-13 34 students 45 students 55 students 60 students

T16b_07 Progression Mature Outreach / WP activity (other - please give details in the next column)

To increase the progression rate of mature Bridging Course attendees into year two to 80% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 72.7% 74% 77% 80%

T16b_08 Progression State school Outreach / WP activity (other - please give details in the next column)

To increase the progression rate of first generation Bridging Course attendees into year two to 85% by 2019/20 No 2012-13 79.4% 82% 84% 85%


To increase the number of students engaged in activities that raise attainment Yes 2018-19 0 0 60 students 75 students 90 students 100 students

T16b_10 Access Low participation neighbourhoods (LPN) Outreach / WP activity (collaborative - please give details in the next column) To see 40 learners from POLAR3 Quintile 1 progress to HE Yes 2018-19 0 n/a 30 40 40 n/a

Table 7b - Other milestones and targets.

Notes

Alongside applicant and entrant targets, we encourage you to provide targets around outreach and student success work (including collaborative work where appropriate) or other initiatives to illustrate your progress towards increasing access, student success and progression. These should be measurable outcomes‐based targets and should focus on the number of beneficiaries reached by a particular activity/programme or the number of schools worked with, and what the outcomes were, rather than simply recording the nature/number of activities.

Description (500 characters maximum)

Is this a collaborative

target? (drop-down menu)

Baseline year (drop-down

menu)Baseline dataReference

number Target type (drop-down menu)Yearly milestones (numeric where possible, however you may use text)

Commentary on your milestones/targets or textual description where numerical description is not appropriate (500 characters maximum)

Reference Number Main target type (drop-down menu)

Yearly milestones (numeric where possible, however you may use text)

Optional commentary on milestones. This box is character-limited to 1000 characters; however, we are happy for you to upload additional ‘supporting information’ as a separate Word/pdf document.

Target type (drop-down menu)Is this a

collaborative target?

Select stage of the lifecycle Baseline dataBaseline year Commentary on your milestones/targets or textual description where numerical description is not appropriate (500 characters maximum)

Description (500 characters maximum)

Stage of the lifecycle (drop-down menu)

Table 7 - Targets and milestones


Validation checks:

2. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 7b must be complete - rows must have a reference number, lifecycle stage, target type, they must be classified as collaborative or not, and they must have a baseline year, baseline data, and yearly milestones entered.

Notes

These tables have been pre-populated using the information you provided to us in your 2017-18 access agreement data.

For detail of our expectations and requirements on targets, see our online guidance (hyperlink: https://www.offa.org.uk/universities-and-colleges/guidance/targets-milestones-access-agreement/)

To complete the table: • Please ensure that for each target you select a: lifecycle stage; main target type; data source, whether it is collaborative or not, and a baseline year. • Reference numbers will autopopulate for each target.• Each individual target must be self-contained, within one row of the table below.• Any changes made to pre-filled targets and milestones will be highlighted with blue text - you should provide a reason for any changes in Column N if blue text is highlighted.• Any new targets will be highlighted with green text and must be entered on a separate row.• Do not overwrite an old target with a new one.• If you wish to give some contextual detail about your targets, please include this within the commentary box beneath Table 7b.

Please do not leave any blank lines in between targets.

Table 7a - Statistical targets and milestones relating to your applicants, entrants or student body

Main target type (drop-down menu)

1. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 7a must be complete - rows must have a reference number, lifecycle stage, target type, they must be classified as collaborative or not, they must have a baseline year and baseline data entered, and they must contain milestones up to and including 2020-21.

Edubase Unique Reference Number

(URN)Name of academy, free school, UTC or studio school School type Sponsor type Phase Trust name

Reference number (e.g. Edubase URN) Name of academy, free school, UTC or studio school School type Sponsor type Phase Trust name

Proposed opening date

(DD/MM/YYYY)Additional commentary

Table 8a - With which academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools does your higher education provider have a formal sponsorship arrangement, as of 26 April 2017?

Additional commentary

Table 8 - Sponsorship Arrangements

In Tables 8a, 8b and 8c we are looking to understand your current and future academy school sponsorship arrangements and/or how many free schools, UTCs or studio schools you have established or plan to establish.

The information gathered in these tables will be used to improve OFFA's understanding of the work that is currently being done through this kind of relationship with schools and colleges to raise attainment for those from disadvantaged and under-represented groups. It will also allow us to understand how the contribution of HE providers with access agreements is likely to grow and develop to support the schools sector over time.

The information you provide in these tables will be shared with HEFCE and the Department for Education.

When completing this table, please ensure you have: - entered an Edubase URN for each school you list - told us the school type, sponsor type, phase and trust name for each school - in table 8b, entered the expected opening date of the school.

In Table 8c, we are looking to understand your plans and asprirations with regards to the number of schools you will sponsor or free schools you will establish. You do not have to provide specific details where your plans are still at an early stage. Rather, we would like to know the scope of your ambitions in this area, and whether you foresee your involvement in the schools sector to grow.

The information you provide in these tables will be shared with HEFCE and the Department for Education.

Notes

2. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 8b must be complete - rows must have a reference number, name of school, type of relationship, phase, name of trust and expected year of school opening1. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 8a must be complete - rows must have a reference number, name of school, type of relationship, phase and name of trust


Validation checks:

Table 8c - Additional commentary on future aspirations for sponsorship arrangements (please do not include any schools recorded in Table 8a or 8b)

Table 8b - With which academies, free schools, UTCs and studio schools does your higher education provider plan to establish a formal sponsorship arrangement in the future? (please do not include any schools recorded in Table 8a)


Financial Support - (Table 5) Expenditure on financial support1. Tables 6a and 6b must be completed.

2. All mandatory cells within a row must be complete - rows must have system type and course type selected, at least one student recorded, and a course fee.3. Courses must not exceed the higher fee cap for the particular system/course type selected.

ValidationInstitution name: The School of Oriental and African StudiesInstitution UKPRN: 10007780

Contact - Contact Information1. Please ensure that contact details are completed for two people.

2. Please ensure the question about sharing contact details is answered.

WORKBOOK VALIDATION FAILED

1. Please select an option in cell D5 for whether or not you expect to participate in TEF year 2.

1. All mandatory cells within a row must be complete - rows must have course type selected, and the full-time equivalent course fee and maximum fee completed.2. Courses must not exceed the higher fee cap for the particular course type selected.

Students & Income - (Table 3) Summary student numbers and fee income1. If you record part-time student numbers above the basic in Table 4a, you must have higher fee income from part-time students in Table 4b, and vice versa.2. New system, part-time, above the basic fee student numbers should be less than or equal to all new system, part-time student numbers.

Activity Expenditure - (Table 4) Access, student success and progression spend forecasts1. Tables 5a and 5b must be completed.2. OFFA-countable spend on access, student success and progression should not exceed the total expenditure for access, student success and progression respectively.

1. Please ensure that senior manager details are completed.

School Sponsorship - (Table 8) School sponsorship

Targets & Milestones - (Table 7) Targets and milestones

Assurance - Assuring your return

FT Fee - (Table 1a) Full-time courses: fee limits and student numbers, 2017-18 to 2021-22

2. There must be at least one course in the table.3. All mandatory cells within a row must be complete - rows must have system type and course type selected, at least one student recorded, and a course fee.4. Courses must not exceed the higher fee cap for the particular system/course type selected.

PT Fee - (Table 2) Part-time courses: fee limits for new system students in 2018-19

1. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 8a must be complete - rows must have a reference number, name of school, type of relationship and status of school2. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 8b must be complete - rows must have a reference number, name of school, type of relationship and expected year of school opening

FT Fee (Franchise) - (Table 1b) Full-time courses (Franchised): fee limits and student numbers, 2017-18 to 2021-22

1. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 7a must be complete - rows must have a reference number, target type, they must be classified as collaborative or not, they must have a baseline year and baseline data entered, and they must contain all five milestones.2. All mandatory cells within a row in Table 7b must be complete - rows must have target type and they must be classified as collaborative or not.

Name

Job title

Telephone

E-mail

Senior manager responsible for assuring the access agreement and resource plan

Deborah Johnston

0207 898 4494

[email protected]

Assuring your return

In submitting your access agreement and resource plan you are confirming that all the information you have provided has been compiled in accordance with our guidance, that it has been subject to an independent internal validation process, and has been signed off and approved as correct.

Pro Director, Learning & Teaching

Assuring your return

Validation checks1. Please ensure that senior manager details are completed.


equality & diversity committee open agenda ... - soas.ac.uk · b. could become a condition of...

Documents