Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational...

4th

Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual

Author Academic Partnerships Team Date created September 2015 Due for review September 2016 Approval route Collaborative Quality and Standards Panel

September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 2

Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual 2015-16


Table of Contents

Item

Page

CHAPTER ONE Introduction

6

CHAPTER TWO The Academic Partnerships Team

10

CHAPTER THREE Academic Partnerships Strategy 2015-17

13

CHAPTER FOUR Guidelines for Defining the Type of Academic Collaborative Programme

23

CHAPTER FIVE Initiation, Development and Approval Process in Summary

28

CHAPTER SIX Initiation, Development and Approval Process in Detail

33

A Approval of a New Partner of the University Due Diligence

B Development of the Initial Programmes with a New Partner 1. Costing the Programme Activity 2. Programme Proposal Proforma 3. Academic Planning Panel 4. Heads of Terms 5. Education Committee 6. Programme Approval 7. Contractual Agreement

C Additional Programmes and/or Developments with an Existing Partner

CHAPTER SEVEN Recognition Arrangements

45

CHAPTER EIGHT Exit and Closure

49

CHAPTER NINE The Contractual Agreement

53

CHAPTER TEN Review

57


CHAPTER ELEVEN Partnership Management

70

Section A: Institutional Information 71

Section B: Programme Level Information

88

APPENDICES

APPENDIX ONE QAA Indicators

APPENDIX TWO Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit Report

APPENDIX THREE Policy for the Approval of Marketing and Publicity Materials Produced by Collaborative Partners and the Monitoring of Collaborative Partner Websites

APPENDIX FOUR LJMU Academic Committee Structure

APPENDIX FIVE Certificate Policy

APPENDIX SIX Glossary of Terms


CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION


CHAPTER ONE Introduction The Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual (the Manual) is the

definitive reference document for:

a) Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) and partner colleagues involved in

developing a new academic collaborative partnership (ACP);

b) Partner and LJMU Faculty staff in the delivery of an LJMU programme in a

partner organisation;

c) Guidance on developing a new programme in collaboration with LJMU.

The Manual sets out the processes by which the University will initiate, develop,

approve and contract with a proposed new partner. The first stage will determine that

the reputation, standing and strategic direction of a proposed new partner are

deemed an appropriate fit with the University.

The Manual makes reference to other University processes which ensure that

academic standards and the quality of the student learning experience are

maintained for all awards in the University’s name delivered at other institutions both

in the UK and overseas.

The Manual is annually updated and this version is from September 2015 onwards.

Within the University an ACP is defined as any one of the following:

The partner delivers a full and/or part of a programme leading to the award of

LJMU credit;

The University recognises the partner award as being equivalent to LJMU

credit and provides for advanced standing entry;

The partner is supporting the programme in delivery through for example, the

provision of learning spaces and resources.

Each of these arrangements is subject to the expectations of the UK Quality Code for

Higher Education, Part B, Ensuring and Enhancing Academic Quality, Chapter B10:


Managing Higher Education Provision with Others. See Appendix 1 – QAA

Indicators.

The Manual is published on the LJMU website under Public Information

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-

regulations/academic-partnerships

Should the Manual be updated within the Academic year, colleagues will be made

aware through the Partnership Forum list server.

LJMU has a range of partnerships within the UK, Europe and Internationally. The

Academic Partnerships Team (APT) has oversight of all ACP’s and will provide

advice on setting up a new partnership and / or programmes in delivery with an

existing partner.

There is a Partnership Agreement in place with each partner and the APT retains on

file a signed original. The APT will provide advice and information on the content of

the Partnership Agreement.

The APT looks forward to being of service to you during the development of a new

partnership and following approval wishes you well in the delivery of the programme.

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-regulations/academic-partnerships



CHAPTER TWO THE ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIPS TEAM


CHAPTER TWO The Academic Partnerships Team (APT) The APT is part of the Student and Academic Services Division. The APT works

closely with other parts of the University in undertaking its responsibility for the

development and management of academic collaborative partnerships in line with

agreed university policy and procedures.

Contact details are:

Name and Title Extension e-mail address

Julie Hargreaves Head of Academic Partnerships

6491 [email protected]

Gill Murphy Academic Partnerships Manager Faculty Allocation: Arts & Professional Studies and Education Health and Community


Alison Topping Academic Partnerships Manager Faculty Allocation: Engineering & Technology, Science, Education Health and Community


Maureen Evans Summer Semester Operations Manager


South East Asia Office Liverpool John Moores University (Malaysia) SDN BHD Unit A-2-5, Northpoint Offices, Mid Valley City, 59200 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

+603 (2284) 6881

[email protected]

The APT are Key Account Managers for academic collaborative partnerships and

thereby act as both a first point of contact for, and, provide a service to the University

and the partner in:

Facilitating the development of a new partnership/programme;

Liaising directly with partners both in development and existing partnerships;

Managing the contractual process underpinning the arrangement;

mailto:[email protected]






Engaging with the critical reading of documentation prior to an approval event;

Facilitating best service in enhancement to an arrangement and/or resolution

of issues;

Providing staff development for internal and external colleagues;

Managing Partnerships Forum;

Managing the Summer Semester Programme ;

Reporting on all matters within their remit to the appropriate

committees/panels within the University.

Liaising directly with the South East Asia Office;

September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual

11TH

September 2015 P a g e | 13

CHAPTER THREE THE ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIPS STRATEGY


CHAPTER THREE The Academic Partnerships Strategy Introduction

The Academic Partnerships Strategy 2015 - 2017 supports the University vision to be

recognised as a ‘modern civic university delivering solutions to the challenges of the

21st century’, and its purpose is to support the University in the attainment of the

following Core Aims from the Liverpool John Moores University Strategy Map 2012 -

2017 and namely; (to be)

A university that supports the life-long education of its students through

proactive links with other education providers to enhance social mobility

and access, whilst sustaining our relationship with alumni;

A university that initiates and supports research collaboration with

partners;

A university that supports the local, national and global economy with

innovative knowledge and technology exchange;

A university that is globally engaged and embraces internationalism to the

benefit of its students, staff and partners.

The rationale underpinning Academic Partnership activity is;

The endeavour, through partnership working, to widen the reach, reputation

and knowledge base of the University and impact upon the opportunities

available locally, regionally and internationally for the educational, social and

cultural development of our students and staff.

This document sets out the principles within which the University will aim to develop

its Academic Partnership activity in support of the Core Aims stated above. The

strategy is operationalised through the Academic Collaborative Partnerships

Operational Manual which is reviewed, updated and approved by the Collaborative

Quality and Standards Panel (CQSP) on an annual basis. CQSP reports to the

Education Committee.


Context

The scope of the Quality Code Chapter B10: Managing Higher Education with Others

is:

“… all learning opportunities leading or contributing to the award of academic credit

or a qualification that are delivered, assessed or supported through an arrangement

with one or more organisations other than the degree-awarding body.

In determining which provision falls within the scope of this Chapter, the critical factor

is whether the achievement of the learning outcomes for the module or programme

are dependent on the arrangement made with the other delivery or support

organisation(s).”

In line with B10, for the purposes of this strategy an Academic Partnership is

classified as being any one of the following arrangements:

Where the partner delivers either the complete or, a part of the

University award;

Where the partner delivers their own award which is found to be

equivalent in standard and level to a body of University academic credit

to afford advanced standing entry to the agreed University programme;

Where the University delivers the academic credit and the partner

provides an element/s of support (environmental and/or interactional)

that directly impact upon the achievement of learning outcomes for that

module or programme.

The Academic Partnerships Strategy 2015 - 2017 encompasses some of the

arrangements that fall within the UK Quality Code for Higher Education: Chapter B10

Managing Higher Education Provision with Others (December 2012) namely:

Franchised and validated programmes;

Joint, dual/double or multiple awards;

Provision by ‘embedded colleges’ of study preparatory to undergraduate

or postgraduate higher education programmes;

Recognition and Articulation arrangements;

Study Abroad, including exchanges and student mobility programmes.


The agreed University definition for the above is found in Chapter 4.

The Governing Principles of Academic Partnership

The governing principles are;

1. Strategic

a. The partner organisation can be seen to reflect the vision and

values of the University.

b. The academic, public and legal standing of the partner organisation

is without doubt.

c. The partner organisation can demonstrate financial viability and

stability.

d. There is demonstrable benefit for each partner.

e. The partnership will contribute to the civic responsibilities of both

organisations.

2. Standards

a. The University remains responsible at all times for the academic

standards granted in its name.

b. The partner organisation can demonstrate that the quality of

learning opportunities offered to the student is equivalent to the

standards of the University.

c. The University award/s are fully delivered and assessed in English.

3. Potential

a. There is potential to develop a broader base to the partnership in

one or more terms of;

i. Research or knowledge transfer opportunities.

ii. Student exchanges and/or joint student projects.


iii. Internationalisation of the curriculum and the student

community.

Each new organisation seeking a partnership with the University is judged according

to its strategic fit against a set of criteria which require approval by the Strategic

Management Team prior to programme arrangements being developed. Full and due

consideration is applied to the organisation in respect of their:

Reputation.

Strategic fit with the University.

Academic Standing.

Financial Viability and Stability.

Ensuing programme arrangements must be:

Aligned with the UK Quality Code.

Compliant with University Academic Framework.

Compliant with University policies and procedures for academic

collaborative provision.

Based as a minimum on full cost recovery.

The Scope of the Strategy:

The term Academic Partnerships reflects a wide range of partners and arrangements

reflecting the ever changing nature of Higher Education.

The University has national and international partnerships within both the public and

private Education sector with other Universities, Colleges and/or Institutes of Higher

Education, Further Education Colleges, Hospital Trusts, the Voluntary Sector,

organisations within the Public Sector, and Training organisations.

An Academic Partnership must provide for one or more of the following:

Progression to the University with recognised advanced standing for

entry at either Undergraduate (UG) or Post Graduate (PG) levels (for


example: entry to Level 5 or 6 at UG and advanced entry to complete

a Masters award);

Progression to the University having studied part of an LJMU award in

the partner organisation and progressing to the University to complete

the target award or complete an approved progression award;

Select opportunities to follow a complete, or top up to, an LJMU award

in country through Franchise and/or Validation arrangements;

Select opportunities to engage with a Joint/Dual award at UG or PG

level with time spent in each of the awarding institutions;

Delivery by University staff in country with follow up distance learning

activity for bespoke programmes developed to respond to and to meet

a particular need at a particular time;

Study Abroad opportunities involving study1 within a University leading

to the achievement of transferable credit with the associated student

experience, or, study activities within a University not involving

transfer of credit;

Summer School experience packages to suit the partners, students

and staff including educational and social activities within the

University, the city and beyond;

Provision of short courses on subjects of UK history, culture,

language, politics and many others providing cultural and educational

experience beyond Summer Schools and tourist trips.

The strategy does not support the development of an Academic Partnership in an

area where the University cannot provide academic expertise. Furthermore, outside

of a Franchise arrangement it will normally not support the approval of a programme

at a Partner bearing the same award title as a programme delivered at the University.

The Strategic Aims:

The Academic Partnerships Strategy 2015 – 2017 has six overarching aims:

1. To support the growth and optimisation of Trans-National Education

partnerships.

1 The term ‘study’ also refers to research or scholarship activity.


2. To increase student progression to the University from International

partnerships.

3. To support the growth and optimisation of UK partnership activity.

4. To increase the number of opportunities for home students to study

abroad.

5. To engage where possible with Government initiatives on collaborative

partnership activity.

6. To review year on year existing processes to further mitigate risk to the

University

Delivering the Aims:

Academic Partnership activity is working in partnership not only with another

organisation, it is equally partnership working between each constituent part of the

University that is involved in the totality of the relationship. To be successful in finding

and approving the ‘right’ partners, approving the ‘right’ programmes or opportunities,

establishing and enhancing the quality of the programmes or opportunities,

monitoring the inputs and outputs of the partnership, and, ensuring a student

experience equitable to that of home students, the University will work as a team to

deliver the strategic aims.

The University will do this by:

1. Increasing the number of progression routes with advanced standing

entry to the University.

There will be a focus on developing arrangements that increase the number of

progression opportunities that enable students to enter the Liverpool-based

programme with Advanced Standing through the recognition of the partner

award as equivalent to part of the University award.

This activity will have regional and international dimensions. Regional in terms

of working with Further Education Colleges to provide progression programmes

from, for example, HND’s and Foundation Degrees, and International in terms

of working with public and private providers to establish progression pathways

from their awards into Level 5 or Level 6 of an Undergraduate programme in


Liverpool, and/or progression pathways from Post Graduate Certificate level

into Post Graduate Diplomas and Masters programmes in Liverpool.

2. Increasing the number of international partnerships with Universities.

Whilst this covers a spectrum of engagement possibilities, there will be a focus

on increasing the number of international Joint or Dual Masters, Professional

Doctorates and Dual PhD arrangements.

3. Developing the number of Study Abroad programmes and or

opportunities with partner organisations.

There will be a focus on working with all LJMU Faculties to identify and develop

the offer for both student exchange programmes and study abroad activity.

There will be a focus on working in strategic partnership with external providers

of international cultural activities.

4. Providing staff development activity/events for University and partner

staff.

The provision of appropriate staff development activity is a key driver in

mitigating risk to the University and developing the relationship capital with

partner organisations. The activities provided to support this objective include:

Engagement with the Partnership Forum;

Engagement in the wider academic community through participation in

CPD events and/or particular occasions such as the LJMU Learning

and Teaching Conference;

Provision of training for University staff, for example in reference to

developing a new partnership, managing risk and undertaking the

required quality and standards processes;

Provision of training for Partner staff for example in reference to

following policy and procedures of the University, enhancing pedagogy

and research informed teaching, or responding to a bespoke request.


5. Ensuring a rigorous risk and reputation based approach to the appraisal

of new partnership opportunities.

Working closely with Faculties and Professional Services Teams to ensure that

the agreed University processes are followed at all times in both (i) the

development of a new partnership and (ii) the regular and appropriate

monitoring of and reporting on existing partnerships.

6. Assisting Government agendas in respect of the provision for

transnational education opportunities.

There will be a focus on particular countries with particular needs and

aspirations and, working with organisations to support a Governments

particular initiative; for example, an agenda to build capacity and knowledge in

a certain field or to provide a particular programme of study.

7. Facilitating and enabling accurate exchange and flow of information.

Ensuring that full, frequent and accurate information is exchanged between

internal colleagues and external colleagues to enable efficient and effective

work flows is essential for successful partnership working and is the bedrock of

developing the relationship capital. Equally important is ensuring that all

internal stakeholders are aware and have an understanding of, as their role

requires, either the institutional or the programme level arrangement/s with a

particular partnership, or range of partnerships.

8. Ensuring that partnership activity is led and managed in full consultation

with the Strategic Management Team and other Professional Service

Teams as required.

The provision of appropriate and accurate reports based on regular monitoring

activity is available in a timely manner and provide informed discussion and

decision taking.

9. Ensuring that the University agreed processes are followed at all times to

mitigate and control risk.


Internal stakeholders receive, prepare and submit the required paperwork to

the appropriate committees/panels to ensure that the agreed process is fully

complied with at all times and instigate checks and balances to test and/or

realign process where it is agreed that an amendment would mitigate risk

further.


CHAPTER FOUR

GUIDELINES FOR DEFINING TYPES OF ACADEMIC

COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES


CHAPTER FOUR

Guidelines for Defining Types of Academic Collaborative Programmes Covered by this Manual

The University has agreed the definitions below to identify the type of academic

collaborative programme arrangement that it may have with an external partner. It is

possible that a partner with more than one programme could have more than one

arrangement.

Franchise Where a partner institution is approved to deliver a programme, or

part of a programme, designed by LJMU which leads to an award of

LJMU. The programme does not also have to be a programme

delivered at LJMU. Students on a franchise programme would be

LJMU students and the University retains control and responsibility for

academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities.

Validated Where the partner institution develops its own programme and

delivers it as an LJMU validated programme leading to an LJMU

award. Students on a validated programme are LJMU students and

the University retains control and responsibility for academic

standards and the quality of learning opportunities.

Dual Award A dual award is defined by LJMU as an arrangement where LJMU,

together with one or more awarding bodies, provides a programme

leading to separate awards and certificates being granted by all the

awarding bodies. Each partner is responsible for its own assessment

and quality assurance.

Embedded College A private organisation operating near to, or within, the premises of

LJMU, usually engaged in the preparation of students for entry to

higher education programmes.

Joint Award A joint award is an arrangement where LJMU, together with one or

more awarding bodies, provides a jointly developed and delivered


programme, leading to a single award made jointly by all the awarding

bodies. A single certificate is produced, not separate certificates from

each awarding body. Responsibility for assessment and quality

assurance is in accordance with the agreement between partners.

Distance Learning Distance learning is where a programme does not normally require

the presence of the students at the LJMU (or partner) campuses.

Learners usually study these programmes overseas through the use

of specially developed learning materials which can take a number of

different formats and will not normally require face-to-face contact

with their tutors, e.g. via e-learning. The University retains control and

responsibility for academic standards and quality of learning

opportunities.

Distance Taught A distance taught programme is one that is delivered away from the

University, often overseas, by LJMU staff (alternatively called ‘flying

faculty’). It may include pastoral support and learner support from

local staff but will not include teaching by them. The programme is

delivered using premises and resources provided locally by the

partner. The University retains control and responsibility for academic

standards and quality of learning opportunities.

Recognition

arrangements and

articulation

arrangements

Recognition arrangements and articulation arrangements are

agreements where students who have completed a defined external

programme (or an agreed part of the external programme), which is

owned by the partner institution, can enter with advanced standing to

a subsequent part or level of a programme validated by LJMU.

The Articulation Process is used as an alternative streamlined

process to the Recognition Process where the proposed partner is

well established and meets the prescribed criteria.

Each institution is responsible for academic standards and quality of

learning opportunities for its own programmes.


Please note: Off-site Delivery – this is where a programme is delivered at a non-

LJMU venue and where:

a. All academic support is provided by LJMU (no input by a third party), and

b. All LJMU regulations and policies are followed, and

c. All student administration is completed by LJMU

This is not considered collaborative and approval will follow the internal programme

approval process.

All University awards are required to be fully taught and assessed in English.


CHAPTER FIVE

INITIATION, DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL PROCESS IN SUMMARY


Diagram 1 below outlines the process used to approve an organisation as a partner

of the University.

1) Overview of the Process of Approval for a new Partner of the

University

Diagram 2 below summarises the Check and Approval Gateways in each of the processes used to:

a) Approve an organisation as a partner of the University

b) Develop the initial programme/s with a new partner

c) Develop additional programmes with and existing partner


2) Overview of the Check and Approval Gateways for each process

a) Approve an organisation as a partner of the University

Approve an organisation as a partner of the University

Sta

ge

Re

sp

on

sib

ility

Actio

n

Check

Gateways Approval

GatewayOutcome

Dean/DFD/

HAP/PVC

External

Engagement /

Registrar

Review and sign off of

the completed IASF by

the Dean


the FDD by the DFD


the IASF and FDD by

the PVC External

Engagement and the

Registrar

All Sign offs required for

submission to SMT

SMT

SMT

Approval?

APT confirm

no further

development

No

MoU developed

and approval

reported to HAP

Initial Programme

Proposal can be

made.

Review of Partner

in 3 years

Yes

b) Develop and Approve the Initial Programme/s with a New Partner

Develop the Initial Programme/s with a New Partner

Sta

ge

Re

sp

on

sib

ility

Actio

n

Check

Gateways Approval

GatewayOutcome

Faculty and

APT

Completion and sign off

of the Programme

Proposal Proforma

(PPP)

Development and

negotiation of the Heads

of Terms

APP

Heads of Terms

signed

Programme

approval process

begins

APP consideration of

the PPP for approval to

develop the programme

Confirmation of a)

above where this is a

new partner


Approve the Initial Programme/s with a New Partner

Sta

ge

Re

sp

on

sib

ility

Actio

n

Check

Gateways Outcome

Validation

Panel

APT

Programme validation

event

Conditions of validation

are met

Event outcomes

reported to CQSP

Full Contractual

Agreement signed

Programme

made Live and

can begin delivery

Points of

Monitor

Programme Active

(students enrolled) report

back to APP

Annual Business Review

and Academic

Partnership Operational

Meeting.

Term of approval ending

and process restarts

c) Develop and Approve Additional Programme/s with an Existing

Partner

Develop and Approve Additional Programme/s with an Existing Partner

Sta

ge

Re

sp

on

sib

ility

Actio

n

Check

Gateways Outcome

Faculty/APP/

Validation

Panel/APT

PPP submitted for Faculty

approval

PPP submitted for APP approval

Confirmation that legal status of

partner has not changed and that

financial/academic standing

remains appropriate

Programme validation event

Conditions of validation are met

Variation to Contract signed, or a

separate Contract is signed for

this particular programme

Programme

made Live and

can begin delivery

Points of

Monitor

Programme Active

(students enrolled) report

back to APP

Annual Business Review

and Academic Partnerships

Operational Meeting

Term of approval ending

and process restarts


NB:

All Contractual Agreements ie Memorandum of Understanding, Heads of Terms,

Memorandums of Agreement and full Partnership Agreements are signed by the Vice

Chancellor, or their nominee, normally prior to their release for signature by the

partner.


CHAPTER SIX

INITIATION, DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL PROCESS IN DETAIL


CHAPTER SIX Initiation, Development and Approval Process in Detail DUE DILIGENCE

Definition of Due Diligence

Due diligence (DD) is the process of examining the financial, legal and resource

underpinning of an organisation as one of the first steps towards partnership. It is the

University’s policy to reduce the risk of failure and to account for success. Due diligence is

the process by which inquiries are conducted for the purpose of timely, sufficient and

accurate disclosure of all material statements, information or documents which may

influence the outcome of the transaction. QAA’s UK Quality Code for Higher Education

expands this definition to include a wider range of checks on prospective partner

organisations.

UK Quality Code for Higher Education - Part B: Ensuring and Enhancing Academic

Quality, Chapter B10: Managing Higher Education Provision with Others.

Indicator 6

Appropriate and proportionate due diligence procedures are determined for each

proposed arrangement for delivering learning opportunities with an organisation other

than the degree-awarding body. They are conducted periodically to check the

capacity of the other organisation to continue to fulfil its designated role in the

arrangement.

Undertaking Due Diligence

The APM will liaise with the Faculty, Finance and the proposed organisation, to undertake

the required due diligence activity. All proposed partners are subject to due diligence.


The information and documentation received to complete full due diligence will be used to

establish and test the:

Public and legal standing in its own country

A review of publicly available information such as prospectuses, website, British

Council, Ministry of Education.

Public and legal standing in the UK (if overseas)

Establish whether there are any relevant professional or regulatory restrictions on the

development of the partnership or delivery of the programme, and/or a requirement

for government letters of approval.

Institutional profile

Details of the management structure and academic processes and policies of the

organisation;

The level and type of awards in delivery at the partner;

Details of the context of the proposal;

Information about links with the University or other HEI’s;

A copy of the organisations current complaints process.

Financial stability

Interpretation of financial statements and/or the last set of audited accounts

Credit check;

What or who supplies the bulk of the organisation’s funding (e.g. Government, a

larger multinational company, etc.).

Quality and Standards

Review of accreditation arrangements;

QAA or equivalent, PSRB or equivalent reports;

Information relating to the local national qualifications framework.

Outcomes of Due Diligence

The outcomes of due diligence are the completion of the Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit

and the Assessment of Risk paperwork.


The Assessment of Risk is part of the University’s wider financial processes. The full

process for financial due diligence can be found at

https://share.ljmu.ac.uk/dept/fin/LJMUFIN/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx

The Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit (IASF) is found in Appendix 2.

Approval

The Head of Academic Partnerships confirms that both the IASF and the Financial

Assessment of Risk are complete and submits to the PVC External Engagement and

Registrar for their consideration. Pending their sign-off of the documentation, the paperwork

is submitted to the Strategic Management Team (SMT) for their consideration.

The SMT will consider the documents in determining the appropriateness of the organisation

as a partner of LJMU.

The APT will notify the partner of the decision of SMT. If the proposed partnership is

approved, the APT produce a Memorandum of Understanding where required.

https://share.ljmu.ac.uk/dept/fin/LJMUFIN/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx


B. DEVELOPMENT OF THE INITIAL PROGRAMMES WITH A NEWLY APPROVED PARTNER

1. Costing the Programme Activity

Costing measures the resources that the LJMU Faculty and Professional Service Teams can

expect to invest in the development and ongoing management of the partnership.

The Costing Spreadsheet

Completing the spreadsheet normally takes about an hour. The APM staff will discuss the

proposed arrangements with the Faculty Lead and Finance Manager and enter relevant

information into the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet calculates the anticipated costs for

LJMU relating to the proposal as it is envisaged at that stage. The Faculty should not change

the spreadsheet unilaterally.

Partnerships with regionally based Further Education College partners are subject to a

standard annual fee and do not normally need to be costed separately. The APM will advise

where this may not be the case.

Maintenance of the Costing Spreadsheet

The APT holds the spreadsheet on behalf of the University. The APM will amend the

spreadsheet should changes to the model of delivery emerge.

Completing the Costing Spreadsheet

To prepare for the meeting with the APM, the Faculty Lead should have a clear idea about

the following aspects of the proposal:

Programme and Student Information

Number of semesters to be taught by the partner / LJMU per year;

Number of modules in the programme per semester / year;

Number and mode of assessments for each module;

Number of students anticipated per cohort;


Number of cohorts per year of full-time and part-time students.

Development of the programme for Validation

Number of School staff to be involved in the development of the programme

with the partner;

Number of hours/days anticipated for each member of staff to develop the

programme;

Number of likely visits to the partner to develop the programme.

Programme Approval

Number of School staff to attend the Validation event, usually held at the

partner organisation.

Access to LJMU Resources

Whether or not students studying on the programme at the partner

organisation will require access to LJMU’s Libraries (especially electronic

access) and to Blackboard. (Where partner resources are to be used their

fitness for purpose is tested through the programme approval process).

Setting and Marking of Assessments

The level of involvement of LJMU School staff in the setting of assessments or

the moderation of assessments set by partner organisation staff, and the likely

time to be spent on each;

The level of involvement by LJMU in double or sample marking, or moderation

of marking by partner organisation staff, and the amount of time likely to be

spent on each;

Note: this will vary as it is dependent upon the arrangement eg franchise,

validation, distance taught.

Management of the Programme

Amount of time to be spent per year by the Link Tutor, Institutional Link,

Academic Oversight Panel (where appropriate), External Examiner,

Administrative or other School/Faculty staff in maintaining the programme on an

ongoing basis including both visits to the partner and days activity at LJMU on

behalf of the partner;

Any other anticipated costs, e.g. videoconferencing.


Staff Development

Anticipated staff development required by partner organisation staff and

provided by LJMU staff, either at the partner organisation or at LJMU.

Teaching

The extent of teaching, if any, by LJMU staff.

Assessment Boards

The involvement of University staff in the management of Assessment Boards.

Quality Assurance

The involvement of University staff in the management of the quality

monitoring and enhancement process.

Should any of these issues be unclear at this early stage, the APM will be able to provide

advice on the expected level of support that a Faculty should provide for the partner.

The Fee Arrangement

The APT will work with Finance to determine the level of fee to be applied. This is derived

from the information on the costing spreadsheet.

Communication with the Partner

The APT will inform the partner of the fee for the Validation Event and the annual financial

arrangement.

The financial arrangements will be detailed in both the Heads of Terms and the Partnership

Agreement. The financial arrangements in both documents are legally binding. Payment of

the charge for the Validation Event is expected prior to programme delivery.

Review of Price

There will be a review of the price in line with the period of review for Validation.


2. Programme Proposal Proforma

The Faculty Lead completes the Programme Proposal Proforma (PPP) template to request

University approval to develop the programme. The PPP is considered at the Faculty

Management Team (FMT), signed off by the Dean and then returned to the APM. The APM

completes the financial section and submits to APP. The minute relating to FMT’s

consideration of the PPP is sent to the APM as evidence.

3. Academic Planning Panel

The PPP is submitted to Academic Planning Panel (APP) by the APM. In relation to ACP

activity the APP has the responsibility to ensure the development of proposals for

programme approvals, closures and title changes, including variances, is consistent with the

University’s strategic and operational planning processes. APP will consider the proposed

programme and approve (or not) the programme/s for development.

4. Heads of Terms The APM will draft a Heads of Terms (HoT) to identify the general outline of the partnership,

the proposed programme/s for development, and the pricing of the arrangement including

the set up fees and the annual per capita charge with the minimum fee payable.

The APM will share the draft HoT with the proposed partner.

The agreed HoT is signed following approval by APP to develop the programme, and

normally prior to the Validation Event taking place.

A Validation Event may be postponed if the HoT is not signed. This decision would be taken

internally by the appropriate senior staff of the University eg Registrar and/or PVC External

Engagement. APT will inform the partner of the postponement or cancellation.

5. Education Committee

Education Committee as the parent committee to APP receives the outcomes from APP.


6. Programme Approval

Once the programme has been approved for development by APP, the process of

Programme Approval can commence.

Academic Quality Services (AQS) own and manage the process for Programme Approval

and it is recommended that reference is made to the appropriate AQS manual as early as

possible in the development. The manuals can be found at



In summary the Programme Approval process is structured as follows:

a) Planning Meeting

The Planning Meeting is to discuss the documentation that will be required and to

agree dates for submission of documentation for the critical reading and Validation

event. It is a requirement that the partner and the Faculty Lead/Link Tutor from the

Faculty attend the meeting. Virtual attendance by the partner is acceptable where

distance prevents actual attendance. The AQS will Chair and the APT will be in

attendance.

b) Critical Reading

The Critical Reading is undertaken at the University. The purpose of this is to

critically review the content and standard of the documentation for the Validation

Event. The panel make a judgement as to whether the documentation is ready to

proceed to the Validation Event, or makes recommendations for appropriate changes.

c) Validation Event

The Validation Event is normally held at the partner and is expected to take a full day.

The University panel will include external panel member(s).

The possible outcomes of the Validation process are:

Approval, with/without conditions and/or recommendations for the standard

length of approval (three / five years);

Approval for a fixed period, with/without conditions and/or recommendations;




Rejection, with detailed reasons.

In the event that a programme is rejected, and, where deemed appropriate, the

proposal may be taken through the Validation process again.

7. Partnership Agreement

The APT will prepare the full draft Partnership Agreement. Negotiation with the proposed

partner will be undertaken by the APT to facilitate agreement in principle on the Partnership

Agreement by the Validation event.

APT will undertake any amendments as necessary to the Partnership Agreement as an

outcome of the event and discuss these with the proposed partner.

Following confirmation from AQS that the Conditions of Validation have been met, the

programme is deemed to be in approval. The Partnership Agreement will be signed by the

University and then sent to the partner for signature. The APM will manage this process.

Three originals are signed and distributed; one copy is retained by each of the following

The partner;

The APT;

The University safe.

A PDF copy of the contract is stored on the APT SharePoint site, access to which is

provided to the Dean of Faculty, Director of School, Library Services, the Link Tutor, AQS,

Finance Manager, Student Policy and Regulation.

The programme is now in a position for students to be enrolled and for delivery to begin.

Programme delivery cannot take place until the Partnership Agreement is signed by

both parties.

Summary Process Flow Overview The table below summarises the different activity flows and timings involved in the approval

processes for a new partner organisation and new programmes with the new partner.


Summary Process Flow Overview

Contractual Activity University Activity Due Diligence Activity

Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit (IASF) is completed and signed off by the Dean on behalf of Faculty Management Team. Financial Assessment of Risk is completed and signed off by the Deputy Finance Director

IASF and financial due diligence is sent to PVC External Engagement and Registrar for sign off to submit to SMT

SMT receive the IASF and Financial Due Diligence information to approve (or not) the organisation as a partner

APP receive the Faculty signed off Programme Proposal Proforma/s to approve the development of the programme/s

Planning Meeting

Critical Reading of Programme Documentation

Validation Event

Conditions of Validation are met

and the Event Completion Form is

signed off

Programme Begins

Memorandum of

Understanding (where

required) signed by both

Parties

Heads of Terms signed by both Parties

Draft Agreement agreed by both Parties

Agreed Draft shared with the

Chair of the Validation Panel

for information

Agreement Signed by both

Parties

Academic

Partnerships and

Finance Undertake

separate checks


C. ADDITIONAL PROGRAMMES AND / OR DEVELOPMENTS WITH AN

EXISTING PARTNER

The development and approval of a new programme(s) with an existing partner follows a

similar pathway to an initial programme, eg, the proposed new programme must be costed,

and have a PPP completed and be submitted to APP for approval. Once approved, the

proposed programme moves into the Validation process.

Where there is an existing Partnership Agreement, the APT will either produce a Variation to

Contract, or an additional Partnership Agreement. Again the document must be signed

before delivery can begin.


CHAPTER SEVEN RECOGNITION ARRANGEMENTS


CHAPTER SEVEN Recognition Arrangements

Recognition or Articulation into an LJMU Award

Recognition and Articulation are each an approval process whereby a number of students

from the same organisation can enter an agreed LJMU award with Advanced Standing.

Articulation is a shorter process in acknowledgement that the organisation has met certain

criteria.

Approval of all programme arrangements is managed by the AQS and full details are

available on the AQS website at;



Recognition and Articulation arrangements with organisations new to the University must

follow the standard partner approval process prior to commencement of programme

approval activity.

Recognition arrangements are not the type of collaborative programmes that carry most risk.

However, the possibility of students progressing to LJMU ill-prepared for the higher level of

study is not acceptable and the arrangement must be managed following approval. The

approval process itself will seek to assess a partner’s capacity to set and maintain

acceptable standards consistently.

Following approval by APP, the proposal will proceed as detailed within the AQS Guidance

for Collaborative Validation 2015 - 2016.

The approval processes ensures that the learning outcomes of the programme/s in the

partner organisation are well matched to those of the designated LJMU award/s and identify

an appropriate point of entry for students meeting the prescribed entry criteria. Thus the

admissions process is streamlined and recruitment pipelines can be strengthened.




The processes are only applicable to entry with Advanced Standing. Where an

organisation’s award is to be used for entry to Level 4 or, to Level 7, this is an Admissions

issue.

The APM will prepare a MoA in preparation for the validation event. It will set out the terms

for the management and monitoring of the Recognition arrangement and any other relevant

information determined by the Panel.

Where it has been specifically negotiated, the MoA should state that students’ articulation is

guaranteed (i.e. all successful students will be offered a place). The MoA will not entitle the

successful student to generate LJMU credits or an LJMU award without the further specified

period of study at LJMU.

The MoA between LJMU and the partner organisation, is signed by both the partner and the

Vice Chancellor of LJMU prior to the progression arrangement beginning.

Note: in setting up a recognition or articulated pathway the LJMU programme must be able

to fully resource the expected additional intake of students.

The Recognition arrangement will be included in the LJMU Register of Collaborative

Provision at



and is subject to annual monitoring.

The Approval Process for an Articulation Arrangement

Within the Recognition model there is a second programme approval process termed the

Articulation Process. This is used when the outside organisation fully meets certain

prescribed criteria.

The criteria recognise organisations that are normally publically funded and in the main hold

degree awarding powers. This assurance of in country governmental support and




acknowledgement of a national in country qualification enables a streamlined process of

approval.

The approved Articulation will entitle students who successfully complete the named

programme of study at the organisation to progress to the target programme(s) at LJMU,

subject to the availability of places. Where it has been specifically negotiated, the MoA

should state that students’ articulation is guaranteed (i.e. all successful students will be

offered a place). The MoA will not entitle the successful student to generate LJMU credits or

an LJMU award without the further specified period of study at LJMU.

All Articulation arrangements must be approved through the specified route and approval at

Faculty level is not permitted.

The process can be found at https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-

quality-and-regulations/academic-partnerships

The Articulation arrangement will be included in the LJMU Register of Collaborative

Provision at



and is subject to annual monitoring.

The APT will prepare a MoA for signature by the Vice Chancellor. It will set out the terms for

the management and monitoring of the Articulation arrangement and any other relevant

information determined by the Panel.






CHAPTER EIGHT

EXIT AND CLOSURE


CHAPTER EIGHT Exit and Closure Irrespective of the circumstances of termination/closure of a programme safeguarding the

interests of students is paramount and any action must include an exit strategy that

preserves the integrity and continuation of their education. The University fully recognises,

and accepts, its responsibilities towards the remaining students and a strategy will be

developed that will enable these students to complete the award on which they originally

enrolled. Examples of such strategies could include student(s) completing their programme

in Liverpool, LJMU staff travelling to the partner to deliver the remaining part of the

programme or transferring the students to another LJMU partner running an equivalent

programme.

Whatever the reason for termination / closure of a programme no more students can be

enrolled on the programme once a notice has been served. All terminations and programme

closures will be handled by the APT in full consultation with the Faculty, AQS and The

Director of Legal and Governance Services.

Termination of the Partnership Agreement

Quality and Standards

Where LJMU identifies a failure to meet the required academic standards on a collaborative

programme, the partner will be given the opportunity to take corrective action according to

the procedure and timescale as set out in the Partnership Agreement. Failure by the partner

to take appropriate corrective action results in a breach of contract.

Breach

Where either party considers the other to have breached the terms of the contract, they may

ask the party to remedy the situation within 28 days. Failure to do so results in breach and

possibly termination of the contract.


Unexpected Closure of a Partner Organisation

In rare circumstances a collaborative partner may close unexpectedly, posing significant risk

to both the students on programme and to LJMU. In such circumstances the following

procedure will be invoked immediately and the SMT will be alerted to the potential for risk:

The designated APM will become the sole University contact with the partner and will inform

the Registrar of the unexpected closure. The Registrar will inform the Vice Chancellor. The

APM will convene an emergency meeting to formulate and agree an action plan in relation to

the unexpected closure. This meeting will take place instead of the Closure Meeting referred

to above and will include:

Registrar or nominee

Head of Academic Partnerships (HAP) (Chair)

Faculty Registrar

Director of Legal and Governance Services

Academic Partnerships Manager

Finance Director (or his/her nominee)

Director of the relevant LJMU Schoolls

LJMU Link Tutor

Director of Corporate Communications (or his/her nominee)

Director of Student Recruitment and Widening Access

Head of Academic Quality

Head of Student Advice & Wellbeing (or his/her nominee)

The aim of this meeting will be:

a) To decide the legal steps to be taken to safeguard the University and the LJMU

students on programme(s) at the partner;

b) To agree a financial plan in relation to the withdrawal from the academic partnership;

c) To formulate an academic plan for the students registered on LJMU programmes at

the partner organisation;


d) To develop a communication strategy (for dealing with students and the media) in

relation to the closure of the academic partnership;

e) To agree the responsibilities of each LJMU Department represented above and to

identify key contacts for the Academic Partnerships Manager in co-ordinating the exit

strategy.

Following the meeting the APM will draft an action plan taking into account points a) to e)

above and circulate to all key contacts including the QEO. The normal closure process will

then follow.

The APM will arrange a Termination Notice, which will be signed by the Vice Chancellor and

issued to the partner or their representatives forthwith. The Termination Notice will outline

the grounds for termination, the obligations to residual students, details of outstanding

financial obligations of the partner and the withdrawal of any rights to the LJMU name, brand

and intellectual property.

The HAP will oversee the above activity, ensuring that decisions are taken in the best

interests of the residual LJMU students and LJMU.


CHAPTER NINE THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT


CHAPTER NINE The Contractual Agreement

Types of Contract

The following documents represent a ‘contract’ between the University and partner

organisations. All are drafted and managed by the APT and each has a specific use and

legal status either before or after Validation. They are:

Memorandum of Understanding

Heads of Terms

Memorandum of Agreement

Partnership Agreement

Each type of contract is managed by the APT and is based on the University legally

approved template and information provided by the Faculty, the partner and documentation

produced during the planning and Validation stages of approval.

1. Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)

MoUs have very little legal status, being primarily statements of intent between LJMU and

partner organisations. They set out the broad areas of collaboration which the two

institutions shall work towards but commit neither institution. They are generally time-limited.

The MoU may be supplemented and tailored to the information requirements of the partner.

Faculty representatives who seek an MoU should pass relevant information to the APT to

draft the MoU.

The Vice Chancellor is the authorised LJMU signatory of MoUs.

Three copies of the MoU will be signed and circulated to the partner, the Faculty and one

retained by the APT.


2. Heads of Terms (HoT)

The HoT sets out the arrangements between LJMU and the partner and lists the

programme/s proposed to go forward to Validation.

It details the responsibility of each organisation at this stage and contains a number of

legally binding clauses including Confidentiality and the agreed Financial Arrangement to be

implemented following programme approval. It also clarifies the intentions of the parties

moving forwards. All HoT’s are signed by the Vice Chancellor and the appropriate person in

the partner organisation.

The Validation Event may not normally take place until the HoT’s has been signed.

3. Memorandum of Agreement (MoA)

MoA’s are the mechanism for formalising Recognition agreements with partner institutions

and signed with organisations whose approved programmes give successful students the

opportunity to enter named programmes at LJMU with entry at an advanced stage. The

Agreement sets out the terms of the arrangement for management and monitoring and any

other relevant information determined by the Validation Panel as well as the financial

arrangements.

Original copies to: One retained by partner

APT

University safe

Copy to SharePoint: Dean of Faculty

Director of School

Finance Manager

Library Services

AQS

Student Policy and Regulation


All MoA’s are signed by the Vice Chancellor and the appropriate person in the Partner

Organisation.

4. Partnership Agreement

The Partnership Agreement is the binding document between LJMU and the partner

organisation for the collaborative programme or programmes detailed therein.

Following confirmation from AQS that the conditions of Validation have been met, the

programme is deemed to be in approval.

The APT will confirm that the Partnership Agreement is now finalised and forward three

original copies to be signed by the Vice Chancellor, and, will then send the same three

originals to the partner institution for signature.

Once the APT is in receipt of the fully signed Partnership Agreement from the partner, it is

circulated as follows:

Original copies to: One retained by partner

APT

University safe

Copy to SharePoint: Dean of Faculty

Director of School

Finance Manager

Library Services

AQS

Student Policy and Regulation

The programme is now in a position for new students to be enrolled and for delivery to begin.


CHAPTER TEN REVIEW


CHAPTER TEN Review

Programme Validation

At initial Validation a programme is given an approval period normally of five years for an

existing partner and three years for a newly approved partner. The Programme will undergo

validation again towards the end of the approval period. The details of the process of

Validation can be found at:



In preparation for the Validation Event, a new Partnership Agreement will be drafted and the

fee for Validation activity detailed within. This cost will be notified to the partner prior to the

event. It will also be necessary to review the annual charges and to renegotiate the contract.

This will take place prior to the Validation and a revised draft reflecting any agreed changes

will be available for the Validation Event.

The schedule for Validation of collaborative programmes is managed by the AQS.

Programme teams will be contacted directly by a Quality Support Officer (QSO) when their

programme is due for Validation. All Validation Events will normally take place at the partner

institution.

Business Review

Business Review is the process by which review of a current Partnership Agreement is

undertaken. The process acts as a check and balance mechanism to review a number of

key elements of the partnership during that initial period of approval.

It particularly tests:




That on file due diligence intelligence remains current;

The financial performance in respect of its estimated income and costs against actual

income and actual costs;

The overall benefits of the partnership;

Any changes that may affect the reputational and/or the academic standing of the

partner and/or LJMU.

This is an annual monitoring activity. The reporting line for the overview of outcomes by

programme is to the Faculty Management Team. The report line for the overview of

outcomes of the activity is to the CQSP.

The APM will liaise with Faculty colleagues to complete the proforma in preparation for the

meeting. The Finance Manager (FM) will be asked to provide the financial information.

The outcomes of the review are captured on the following template. Brackets indicate who

is responsible for the provision of that information.

Business Review – Summary of Outcomes Template

Partner Name:

Programme Title:

SIS Code:

Date of Business Review:

Programme Approval Date:

Type of Partnership:

Franchise / Validated / Distance Taught

Type of Delivery:

Full Time / Part Time / Both

Director of School (DoS): (or equivalent)

Academic Partnerships Manager (APM):

Finance Manager (FM):

Link Tutor (LT):


In Attendance:

The Academic Partnerships Manager, Finance Manager and Link Tutor are required to

complete the questions as labelled in preparation for the meeting.

The required attendees at the meeting are the DoS or their nominee, APM, FM, LT and

Head of Academic Partnerships (Chair). The relevant Faculty Registrar is invited to attend

the meeting.

1.1 Has the legal status of the partner changed? (APM)

Yes No

1.2 If yes, in what way has it changed? (APM)

1.3 What are the outcomes of the website check undertaken? (APM)

2.1 Below is the financial arrangement as stated in the current partnership

agreement (APM)

2.2 Below are the costs as predicted on the costing spreadsheet (APM)

2.3 Have the costs so far been largely in line with the costs as provided by the

Faculty for the budget forecast? (FM)

Yes No Comments

2.4 If not, what is (are) the variance(s)? (FM)

2.5 What has caused unexpected costs or savings? (LT, FM, APM as appropriate)


3.1 The programme student numbers are detailed below. (LT and APM) Please amend level information as appropriate to the programme.

Minimum enrolment target as stated in the Definitive Programme Document (DPD) (LT)

Maximum enrolment target as stated in the DPD (LT)

Are there any agreed variances to the above – please detail?

Number and Month(s) of Approved Intakes per year as stated in the:

DPD (LT)

PPP (APM)

Are the later new intakes subsumed within the existing cohort or taught as a standalone cohort? (LT)

Number of students last academic year (13/14 across all levels and intakes) (LT)

Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

Number of students this academic year (14/15 across all levels and intakes) (LT)


Number of students next academic year (15/16 projected across all levels and intakes) (LT)


3.2 Overview of Student Numbers and Financial Return to date (LT and FM)

Year Total Enrolments

Income (£) Costs (£)

Surplus (£)

Margin (%)

2013 - 14 2014 - 15


3.3 The total number of all students on all programmes delivered through the

partnership arrangement if applicable (APM)

Academic Year Total number of students at the Partner

2012/13

2013/14

2014/15

4. Has the partner paid regularly? (FM)

Yes No Comments

5. Do the Director and Dean support the continuation of the collaborative link?

(As discussed and within the Business Review meeting)

6. What are the benefits of the partnership to LJMU? (As discussed and agreed

within the Business Review meeting)

7. Other issues/comments (as discussed and agreed within the Business Review

meeting)

8. Sign Off

Dean of Faculty...……………………………………… Date

Director of School/or equivalent ……………………… Date

Head of Academic Partnerships ………………………. Date


Institutional Partnership Review: Principles and Process

Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) is committed to making Institutional Partnership

Review (Review) a genuinely collaborative activity providing both organisations with

opportunity for consultation, self-reflection and identification of actions to strengthen2 the

partnership.

1) Key Principles

That:

1.1 Following approval, all new partnerships are normally reviewed in the third year of

the arrangement and then normally on a five year cycle, and, that all existing

partnerships are normally reviewed in the final year of the current Partnership

Agreement and then normally on a five year cycle.

1.2 The Review is undertaken against the terms of the Partnership Agreement.

1.3 The process of ‘Review’ is not limited to the event itself and development of the

partnership and/or changes to the partnership should be discussed prior to the

event in order to facilitate agreement.

1.4 An annual Academic Partnerships Operational meeting will be arranged with each

partner to take place towards the end of each academic year. The minutes from this

activity will be made available at the internal annual Business Review. The minutes

from each intervening year will be collated to be included in the documentation for

the Review.

1.5 The documentation completed for other purposes and relating to externally driven

reports will be included in the documentation for the Review.

1.6 To ensure effective University oversight and to reduce the administrative burden

where the partnership arrangement relates to a limited portfolio (e.g. one or two

2 ‘Strengthen’ meaning for example – LJMU providing a guest lecture within the programme, or, the identification and provision

of a specific staff development activity, or, the pilot of a joint student project,


programmes only) every effort will be made to combine this Review with another

established review mechanism for example a Programme Validation event.

1.7 A risk based approach is applied and partnerships subject to an Academic

Oversight Panel or Joint Liaison Group are not included within this process.

Partnership arrangements that are CPD based or are Recognition arrangements

are similarly not subject to this process.

2) Aim

The aim of the Institutional Partnership Review is to provide assurance that the

partnership is operating in accordance with the Partnership Agreement.

3) Objectives

The objectives of Institutional Partnership Review are to:

3.1 Provide an opportunity at Institutional level to form an overview of the entire

partnership and reflect on the experience to date.

3.2 Consider any proposed changes to the current parameters of the partnership

including identification of potential new developments and opportunities.

3.3 Review the strategic and operational arrangements including an evaluation of the

levels of inter-partner engagement and communication for the best effective

management of the partnership moving forward.

3.4 Provide assurance that information held by both parties is current and accurate.

3.5 Confirm the intent to continue the partnership subject to the terms of:

The current Partnership Agreement;

Any action plan derived from this event; and

Any subsequent Partnership Agreement signed for the next five year cycle.

4) Time and Reporting Line


4.1 Time Line

Notification of the requirement for Review is normally shared with the partner at

the end of the penultimate year of the Partnership Agreement;

The Review event takes place as early as possible in the final year of the

Partnership Agreement and/or as best aligned with other review mechanisms.

4.2 Reporting Line

The Academic Planning Panel (APP) and the Collaborative Quality and

Standards Panel (CQSP) are notified of the Reviews to be undertaken during the

next academic year;

The schedule is updated and monitored through the CQSP;

The final report of the Review Event is submitted to both the APP and the CQSP

for information.

5) Institutional Partnership Review Documentation

5.1 Prepared by the Partner

A partnership evaluation document cross referenced to appended evidence;

The evaluation document includes commentary on:

o The Partner context – identification of the current management structure and

any changes to ownership, legal standing or senior leadership; the strategic

aims and the organisation’s unique selling points for Higher Education (HE);

the expectations for the student experience at HE level; and an update to

actions as indicated within any external quality agency report.

o The Partnership context – the size and shape of the current Higher Education

provision; the inputs and outputs by programme in delivery; proposed

development of new and/or closure of programmes; related activities in

addition to programme delivery; staff development activity with the University;

and proposed enhancements to programmes and/or the partnership.

5.2 Prepared by the University

A partnership evaluation document cross referenced to appended evidence;

The evaluation document includes:

o A summary of the strategic and generic institutional information relevant to

partnership management in general.

o A summary of the partner information held.


5.3 Standing documentation provided by and appended as indicated:

The current Strategic Plan – Partner (P) and University (U);

Academic Partnerships Strategy or equivalent (U);

Higher Education Strategy (P);

Partnership Agreement (U);

Financial Overview (U);

Minutes of the strategic management meeting/discussion (U);

Minutes of the Academic Partnerships Operational meetings (where appropriate)

(U);

Other external quality inspection reports (P); and

Previous Institutional Partnership Review reports (U).

Programme Quality documentation will be made available by the University but is not

expected to form a substantive part of the discussion, i.e.

Validation and/or Programme Review Reports, Annual Monitoring Reports and

Link Tutor Reports.

6) Process

6.1 The process is owned and managed by LJMU’s Academic Partnerships Team.

6.2 A briefing meeting will normally be convened no less than 6 weeks before the date

of the Review Panel meeting to clarify the process and agree the format and

content of the documentation.

6.3 The Review Panel will meet at the University or convene by means of video

conferencing with discussion time typically limited to a maximum of two hours.

6.4 The Institutional Review Panel will comprise:

LJMU Registrar /PVC or nominee as Chair;

Partner Principal/Chief Executive Officer or nominee;

LJMU Executive Dean/Associate Dean Quality;

Partner Head of Curriculum/Quality/Department;

LJMU Head of Academic Partnerships;

Partner Leading Management role for Higher Education;


Secretary.

7) Outcomes of the Event

The Review Panel may identify recommendations based upon the documentation

viewed and the discussions held;

Any ensuing Action Plan will be jointly monitored by the Head of Academic

Partnerships and the Partner Lead management role for Higher Education;

The final report of the event, including where appropriate an action plan, will be agreed

by and shared with the partner. The University will submit the report to both the APP

and CQSP for information.


Institutional Partnership Review ProcessY

ear

3 (

Th

en

eve

ry 5

ye

ars

)SM

T A

pp

roval

An

nu

al A

ctiv

ity

New Partner

Institutional Partnership Review

Partner LJMU

Report and Action Plan

CQSP APP

Business Review

Academic Partnerships Operational

Meeting

Partner

LJMU

LJMU Evaluation Document

LJMU

Partner Evaluation Document

FMTFMT

All

Pa

rtn

ers


CHAPTER ELEVEN

PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT

Section A Institutional Information

Section B Programme Information


CHAPTER ELEVEN Partnership Management

Section A LJMU Institutional Information

LJMU Locations

LJMU has three large campuses as well as several administrative buildings throughout the

city. The link below will take you to a webpage which provides directions to all LJMU

locations http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/location/

LJMU Contact Details

Staff Role Name Telephone

Associate Dean Global Engagement (APSS) TBC

Associate Dean Global Engagement (ET) Dhiya Al-Jumeily 0151 231 2578

Associate Dean Global Engagement (SCI) Laura Bishop 0151 231 2144

Associate Dean Global Engagement (EHC) Padam Simkhada 0151 231 4451

Head of Academic Quality Emma Williams 0151 231 8770

Quality Support Officer (Collaborative Provision) Kris Barrow 0151 231 8088

Quality Support Officer (Collaborative Provision) Victoria Jones 0151 231 8771

Assistant Quality Support Officer Kirsten Barnett 0151 231 8064

Quality Enhancement Officer ECH Lucy McKenzie 0151 904 6075

Quality Administrator SCS Cathy McMahon 0151 231 3402

FQAEC Chair ECH Nick Medforth 0151 231 8179

Quality Administrator ECH Ruth Hindley 0151 231 5360

Quality Administrator APSS Denise Williams 0151 231 5860

FQAEC Chair APS Tony Hall 0151 231 3872

http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/location/








Quality Enhancement Officer APSS Janet Flexney 0151 904 6077

Quality Administrator TAE Jan Sullivan 0151 231 3163

FQAEC Chair SCS Ian Bradshaw 0151 231 2014

Quality Enhancement Officer SCS Helen Summers 0151 904 8092

Quality Administrator SCS Cathy McMahon 0151 231 3402

FQAEC Chair TAE Rebecca Bartlett 0151 231 2141

Quality Enhancement Officer TAE Jenny Moran 0151 904 6074

LJMU Academic Calendar

https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/academiccalendar/

Key Roles and Responsibilities in the Management of Partnerships

A) Partner Programme Leader

The roles and responsibilities of a Partner Programme Leader will vary according to the

nature of the programme and their individual organisation though are expected to include the

below points and/or as referenced in the Definitive Programme Document

Curriculum design, development and delivery

Managing the academic work within the subject/programme area;

Curriculum design and development, including critical evaluation and leading on the

subject/programme’s appraisal and review activities;

Having overall responsibility for the assessment of modules and the proper

implementation of assessment procedures within the subject/programme area in

conjunction with module leaders;

Liaising with external examiners for the subject/programme area;

Preparing for the Assessment Board and ensuring that the correct marks are entered

into the database by the stipulated deadlines;




https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/academiccalendar/


Regularly liaising with the LJMU Link Tutor;

Maintaining an up-to-date database for the academic work within the

subject/programme area, in conjunction with the programme administrator and other

appropriate staff, including records for Validation, student assessment details,

records and report;

Promoting and facilitating research activity appropriate to the subject/programme

area;

Promoting best practice and appropriate innovations in teaching and learning, in

conjunction with other appropriate staff.

Programme/subject administration

Dealing with publicity in conjunction with other appropriate staff for the

subject/programme area in line with LJMU policy;

Dealing with the agreed admissions policy and procedures in conjunction with other

appropriate staff for the subject/programme area;

Ensuring that students are fully informed about the programme, in particular, by

providing a programme handbook;

Ensuring the election of student representatives for programme boards and

committees;

Being responsible for the implementation of the health and safety policy within the

subject/programme in conjunction with other appropriate staff;

Managing any devolved resource responsibility for the programme area.

Other

Representing the subject/programme area as required to ensure that the

subject/programme area is appropriately represented;

Possibly managing or liaising with the teaching staff appointed to the

subject/programme area, organising teaching loads, timetable, annual appraisal etc,

in order to ensure the effective delivery of modules across the subject/programme

area.

B) Academic Oversight Panel

Terms of reference:


1. To maintain oversight of the academic aspects of the academic partnership

between XX and LJMU in respect of the quality of the student learning

experience and the academic standards of the programmes.

2. To consider the quality assurance and enhancement processes in relation to the

partnership, for example external examiners reports, validation and programme

review reports, annual monitoring reports; and to monitor appropriate action

taken in response.

3. To consider the relevant data relating to student progression and achievement,

for example admissions, retention, awards achieved and employment statistics.

4. To maintain oversight of external information in relation to XX as appropriate to

the nature of the arrangement, and to monitor appropriate actions taken in

response.

5. To receive and review documentation submitted to the panel for the

enhancement of the partnership.

6. To discuss and oversee development of joint research, scholarly activity and

other staff development activity as appropriate.

7. To ensure XX is aware of the appropriate communication channels between XX

and LJMU.

8. To discuss and make recommendation on, as appropriate, any issues relating to

academic quality and enhancement and the development and delivery of

programmes.

Membership

LJMU

Pro-Vice Chancellor (Education)

Academic Registrar

Associate Dean (Quality)


Institutional Link

Head of Academic Partnerships

Secretary: Quality Enhancement Officer

XX

To be completed by XX

Quoracy:

The AOP will be deemed quorate when attended by:

From LJMU – the Chair and two other panel members, of which at least one must be from

the Faculty,

From XX – to be completed

Frequency:

The panel will meet three times per year.

Reporting to:

The AOP will have delegated authority and report to the Collaborative Quality and Standards

Panel (CQSP) at LJMU.

The minutes of the AOP meetings will be sent to CQSP and to the relevant Faculty Quality

Academic Enhancement Committee.

C) Institutional Link

Preface:


This role is appointed to when the Partnership is deemed by the University to be of strategic

importance and/or of a significant size, such that mitigation of risk and enhancement of the

partnership arrangement is steered from an Institutional level.

The appointee will be expected to be familiar with both Institutional and programme data and

information.

This differentiates this role from that of the standard Link Tutor appointment for which the

appointee is expected to hold and have programme data, information and understanding

only.

1. Definitions

1.1 ‘Institutional Link’

The ‘Institutional Link’ means a senior academic member of the University appointed on

the basis that they have the appropriate and relevant academic and partnership

experience, acting as a link between the University and the Partner. They will be a full

member of the Academic Oversight Panel for the Partnership.

1.2 ‘Academic Oversight Panel’

The ‘Academic Oversight Panel’ means the members of staff from the University and the

Partner who together act to the agreed Terms of Reference to ensure Institutional

oversight and management of the Partnership.

1.3 ‘Terms of Reference’

‘Terms of Reference’ means the criteria that have been agreed and approved to manage

the Partnership at an Institution-to-Institution level.

2. Criteria for the Role

2.1 The University will nominate an Institutional Link to the Partner. This will normally

be a senior academic member from the University, appointed on the basis that

they have the appropriate and relevant academic and partnership experience.


2.2 The normal term of office of the Institutional Link will be the term of the current

Partnership Agreement. Normally a new appointment will be made to the role for

the term of any follow on Partnership Agreement.

2.3 The Institutional Link will be a full member of the Academic Oversight Panel.

2.4 The primary role of the Institutional Link will be to act as a ‘critical friend’

representing the University. The Academic Oversight Panel will agree, on an

annual basis, the actual responsibilities for the forthcoming year, including the

following:

(a) To provide support for the Partner, where appropriate, in ensuring

that the areas for further attention as specified in an Annual

Monitoring Report and/or outcomes of the Validation report are

considered, and that any necessary action is implemented;

(b) To attend any future Validation events;

(c) To provide support to the Link Tutor/s and confirm that any issues

raised by External Examiners are considered and, where appropriate,

actions followed up by the Partner;

(d) To receive relevant extracts relating to quality assurance and

academic audit activities from the minutes of the Partner’s <<NAME

OF BOARD>> (responsible for overseeing teaching and learning

activities) and the Academic Board or equivalent. To attend, by

invitation, relevant parts of these committees and other events,

where appropriate and pertinent;

(e) To assist in identifying possible research and scholarly activities

recognising the potential value which the development of

collaborative and non-competitive research and contract work has for

both institutions;


(f) To assist in promoting training for the development of research skills

in staff who teach on the Programmes;

(g) With prior agreement, to meet with students from time-to-time to elicit

information concerning the student experience. Any actions required

as a consequence of these meetings should be appended to the

annual report form;

(h) To visit the Partner’s provision in all locations (whether overseas or in

the UK) approved by the Validation Panel, preparing and submitting a

report for consideration at each meeting of the Academic Oversight

Panel on, for example, the comparability of provision, student

experience, teaching arrangements, examinations and assessment

and academic standards;

(i)

(j)

To undertake any such other tasks or activities as may be specified

by the Academic Oversight Panel;

To be fully conversant with the general LJMU definition of the role of

the Link Tutor providing support to the Link Tutor/s assigned to the

programme/s at the Partner.

D) LJMU Link Tutor Roles and Responsibilities

Introduction

LJMU programmes delivered by or with partner organisations are supported by a Link Tutor,

who is a nominated LJMU member of staff.

The Link Tutor is the key contact with the Programme Leader and other appropriate staff in

the partner organisation to help ensure that students who study outside LJMU have an

equivalent experience to those who study at LJMU. They are also a key factor in bringing

information back to the University, to assure LJMU that quality and standards at a partner

organisation are appropriate.


The AQS is responsible for the overall management of the process of the Link Tutor role;

individual Link Tutors are managed within the appropriate structures identified within their

Faculty.

Link Tutors bring a wide range of experiences and expertise to their role. Some are

Programme Leaders within LJMU, others have experience of working within other sectors

and others work on similar programmes at LJMU. A Link Tutor will have been involved in the

preparation for initial approval (validation) of the collaborative programme and will then

continue this involvement once the programme begins operation.

All new Link Tutors will attend compulsory Link Tutor Training in order to undertake the role.

This will be provided by AQS, in conjunction with APT, Library Services and experienced

Link Tutors. In following years existing Link Tutors will have a compulsory briefing each year.

Key areas of activity that the Link Tutor will be involved with:

Programme development and approval;

Public information;

Interaction with partner staff;

Student admission, administration and access to resources;

Prior learning;

Learning and teaching;

Assessment;

Monitoring;

Student feedback and communication;

Closing programmes.

The Link Tutor Guide 2015-16 provides details of the roles and responsibilities of the Link

Tutor and School Contact Person, and can be found at:



Key Activity in Managing a Partnership

Enrolment Process




All students are required to complete an LJMU student enrolment form, the process for

which is co-ordinated by the Link Tutor.

Enrolment forms will be required from the partner for new students only. For returning

students, partners will be asked to provide class lists containing programme details, names,

addresses and date of birth. The partner will be required to provide “nil returns” for the

programmes which have not recruited, and advise the faculty of those programmes which

have non-standard entry points. Faculties will then update the student’s current SIS records.

The partner institution will return the completed forms and returning student lists to the LJMU

Faculty within two weeks of the start of the programme. This deadline will enable eligible

students to gain access to LJMU learning resources as quickly as possible.

Once this process is complete, the Faculty will then forward a list of students with their SIS

numbers to the partner institution for cross-checking. Any amendments / additions should be

notified to the Faculty.

Issue of Staff Cards

The application form to request a staff card is found at

https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/lea/123239.htm

and must be completed by the member of staff requesting access, with an attached

passport sized photograph and returned to the APT.

The APT will process the application liaising with other professional service teams for

account set up and card production, before forwarding the staff card and password

instructions to the given address.

The account will close if the card is not used for 60 days and passwords must be changed

as indicated. Should partner institution staff wish to attend the University Graduation

Ceremony the card must be active to enable the ordering of academic dress for the

ceremony.



Issue of Student Cards

When the enrolment process is complete, LJMU will issue student cards to the partner for

distribution. A username and password will accompany the card, along with brief guidelines

on accessing LJMU on-line learning resources. A more detailed Fact Sheet is available from :


If a university card is lost, the loss should be reported to any Library. Library staff authorise

the production of replacement cards with new barcodes. Unless a valid crime number can be

produced, a charge of £5 is made for replacement cards. If you require any further guidance,

please contact a member of the APT.

LJMU Computing and IT Services

Computing Account

A valid student/partner staff card allows access to the LJMU network and its facilities such

as:

Networked software;

Off-campus Applications Service;

Networked printing facilities;

Internet access;

An email account;

A secure personal file-store;

Personal web pages;

Blackboard where appropriate;

Library Services

Provision of an LJMU card also enables access to a range of services provided by the

University’s Library Services, namely:

Full borrowing rights and use of facilities in LJMU Libraries;

Access to the Electronic Library which provides access to E-Books and approved

journal databases;

On-line reservations and renewal of library books housed in LJMU Libraries.



Access to Continuing Professional Development Opportunities at the University

The University offers a range of Continuing Professional Development activities. Staff from

collaborative partners teaching on programmes leading to LJMU awards can attend any non-

award bearing activities on the same basis as LJMU staff. The APT forwards the details of

these events as they become available via the Partnerships Forum email list server. The

event details include procedures for booking a place and any costs involved.

Partnerships Forum

To keep partners up to date with the academic, regulatory and sector developments, the

APT organises a Partnerships Forum which normally meets annually. The Partnerships

Forum is a forum for the sharing of effective practice in pedagogic and partnership matters

and the dissemination of updates to LJMU policies and regulations. The Forum also

incorporates all mandatory training for partner staff. Membership is open to all partner

Programme Leaders, partner HE Managers, LJMU Link Tutors and staff with responsibility

for collaborative provision.

The forum is served by a list server.

Please contact the APT to notify of any changes in staffing or change of email address. The

APT will keep the distribution list updated and disseminate information through it.

Invoicing

The Faculty to which the University programme belongs is responsible for raising invoices to

partner organisations, in line with the financial schedule outlined in the Partnership

Agreement.

Below is a list of contacts within the Faculty, the list is correct at the time of printing.

Faculty of Arts and Professional Studies Head of Operations Lyndsey Philip Faculty of Arts, Professional and Social Studies Liverpool John Moores University Redmonds Building Clarence Street


Liverpool L3 5UG t: 0151 231 4874 e: [email protected]

Faculty of Education Health and Community Head of Operations

Cathy Gleig

I.M. Marsh CAMPUS

Barkhill Road

Liverpool

Merseyside

L17 6BD

t: 0151 231 5303

e: [email protected]

Faculty of Engineering and Technology Head of Operations

Sara Rioux

James Parsons Building

Byrom Street

Liverpool

Merseyside

L3 3AF

t: 0151 231 2095


Faculty of Science Head of Operations

Aly Leigh

James Parsons Building

Byrom Street

Liverpool

Merseyside

L3 3AF

t: 0151 231 2242


Publicity and Marketing

A partner may only advertise new programmes after the conditions of Validation have been

met and the Partnership Agreement has been signed. All publicity materials must be shared

with LJMU as described in the Policy for Marketing and Publicity - Appendix 3.

Approval of New Staff to Deliver on Programmes in Delivery with a Partner

As part of the Validation process, guideline qualifications and the experience of any staff

likely to teach on the programme(s) will have been presented by the partner institution/LJMU

in the programme documentation. However, for various reasons, the staffing on a





programme once in delivery, will, inevitably change and the University must remain assured

that replacement staff are as appropriate as those first approved.

New staff delivering on programmes post-validation must be approved by the Faculty Quality

Academic Enhancement Committee (FQAEC). Partner institutions must ensure that they

have arranged for the CV of the new member of staff to be submitted to the Link Tutor (LT).

The LT will co-ordinate the submission of the required paperwork to FQAEC.

The following process should be used for each new proposed staff member:

1. The Academic Partnership New Staff Appointment form together with a CV should be

submitted for approval to the appropriate FQAEC at LJMU. Submission would

normally be at the end of the semester prior to the one in which their teaching duties

will begin.

2. The Link Tutor will consider the CV of the proposed new staff member and, if

necessary, discuss with members of the LJMU programme team and any appropriate

subject specialists. The Academic Partnership New Staff Appointment form is

completed by the Partner and the Link Tutor and submitted to the secretary of

FQAEC. FQAEC will consider the details of the proposed new member of staff in

accordance with the staff qualifications policy.

3. The FQAEC decision will be communicated in writing to the partner organisation by

the agreed role.

4. Where the decision is to reject, the partner will be asked for written notification of

their immediate action plan responding to the rejection.

5. Where the decision is to approve, the new member of staff will need to complete the

Partner Institution Staff Access form. This form is used to generate a University staff

card and by signing they agree to abide by rules and regulations of the LJMU

Computing Facilities Conditions of Use which can be found at

https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/pln/regulations/65847.htm

https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/pln/regulations/65847.htm


The CV presented should include the following information and should be brief, a maximum

of 2 pages in length:

Name and title:

Present post:

Main teaching activities:

Other duties: list all key administrative/academic responsibilities:

Academic qualifications (including accredited teaching qualifications): (list date,

award, classification and awarding body/university):

Professional qualifications:

Research interests/profile (last 3 years only): brief indication of key topics and any

current research projects including research grants and awards:

Publications (last 3 years only). List total number of refereed publications to date

including articles and list all refereed publications in the last three years. List total

number of unrefereed publications:

Consultancy (last three years only). Last activities during the last three years

Professional membership/involvement (last three years only):

External professional activities (last three years only):

Modules on programme responsible for:

The Academic Partnership New Staff Appointment form and the Partner Institution Staff

Access form follow.

The Staff CV template can be found within the Link Tutor Guide



The Partner Institution Staff Access form can be found at






Faculty of ……

ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIP NEW STAFF APPOINTMENT Please complete the below for each individual to be considered for FQAEC approval to deliver on a University award in a partner organisation. Date of Consideration at FQAEC …………………………

Partner Institution

Name of new staff member Please attach the summary CV to this form

Name of staff member being replaced

Job title

Programme title

Module/s taught

Other responsibilities

Contract type

Date of appointment at the Partner

Staff CV: comments from the Link Tutor/Programme Manager (to include confirmation of appropriate qualifications and experience. For details on staff qualification policy, please see Appendix 12 of the Validation manual at https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-regulations/academic-partnerships

Name of Link Tutor

Outcome from FQAEC




Academic Partnerships Team Information Technology Services Library Services

Application to access LJMU facilities from a member of staff at a Partner Institution

Please write clearly and in capitals. All details must be supplied for registration to be completed. Title: Surname: First Name: Date of Birth: Home Address:

(include postcode) Name of Partner Institution:

Institution Address: Position held at Position Held in Institution LJMU validated programme(s) I agree to abide by LJMU rules and regulations (signature of applicant) Please post my card to my Institution address / I will collect my card from the following LJMU library (Please select one) (Please delete as appropriate) Teaching and Administrative Staff: Please send your applications, together with a photograph to: Academic Partnerships Team, LJMU, 2

nd Floor, Kingsway House, Hatton Garden, Liverpool, L3 2AJ

Library Staff: Please send your applications to: Associate Director, Library Services, LJMU, Aquinas Building, Off Maryland Street, Liverpool L1 9DE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LJMU Verification I on behalf of Library Services / Academic Partnerships Team verify that the above named should be issued with a LJMU access card. Print name in capitals: Position held at LJMU: Tel.

Photograph

X

Aldham / Avril / Marsh


PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT

SECTION B PROGRAMME LEVEL INFORMATION

ACADEMIC FRAMEWORK (AF) REGULATIONS

The Academic Framework Regulations govern the academic operation of all programmes of

study leading to an LJMU award.

Full regulations are available at:


regulations/academic-framework

Managing Assessment Boards

For each programme leading to a validated award of the University, the Academic Board

requires the establishment of an Assessment Board to conduct assessments according to

the approved assessment regulations.

The role of the Assessment Board can be explored in further detail at:



Assessment Boards are Chaired by the School Director, who may exceptionally nominate an

alternate. Training sessions for new Examination Board Chairs and Secretaries are offered

each year and are mandatory.

Illness, Absence and Extenuating Circumstances

Full details of the regulations relating to illness, absence and extenuating circumstances are

contained in Section C4. Of the Academic Framework Regulations, available at:



Full details of the Extenuating Circumstances process and guidance notes are available from

the LJMU web pages at:

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-regulations/academic-framework







https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations/guidance-policy-and-

process

Academic Appeals

The procedures for dealing with appeals can be found in the Section C9 of the AF

Regulations.

Further details are available at:

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations/appeals-and-

complaints

Academic Misconduct

Information on academic misconduct can be found at

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations/appeals-and-

complaints

General principles

Academic Misconduct is deemed to cover cheating, attempts to cheat, plagiarism, collusion

and any other attempts to gain an unfair advantage in assessments. Assessment includes all

forms of written work (including in-class tests), e-assessments, presentations,

demonstrations, viva voces, accreditation of prior learning portfolios and all forms of

examination (Section C5.1 Academic Framework Regulations).

It is the responsibility of the Programme Leader to provide students with clear guidance and

instruction early in the programme, on the appropriate preparation for and presentation of

work, including writing and citation requirements. This guidance must clearly indicate that all

types of academic misconduct are considered to be serious, noting that plagiarism and

collusion are no less serious than cheating in a conventional examination. The guidance

must also indicate the consequence of, and penalties associated with, academic misconduct

(Section C5.5.5 Academic Framework Regulations).

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations/guidance-policy-and-process

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations/guidance-policy-and-process

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations/appeals-and-complaints





The Programme Leader should inform students that it is their responsibility to take

reasonable precautions to guard against unauthorised access by others to his/her work,

however stored in whatever format, both before and after assessment

STUDENT REGULATIONS

Issues relating to student complaints and student discipline can be explored further at the

link below

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

To maintain the standards of all our programmes and awards and to protect the student

experience LJMU has rigorous quality management processes.

External Examiners

All LJMU programmes which lead to an award must have external examiners.

Appointment of external examiners

All collaborative (and internal) programmes of study leading to an award are required to

have an external examiner. The responsibility for appointing the Examiner resides with the

University as outlined in Indicator 16 of the QAA UK Quality Code for Higher Education -

Part B: Ensuring and Enhancing Academic Quality, Chapter B10: Managing Higher

Education Provision with Others.

Indicator 16 Degree-awarding bodies retain ultimate responsibility for the appointment, briefing

and functions of external examiners. The external examining procedures for awards

where learning opportunities are delivered with others are consistent with the degree

awarding body's approved practices.

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/student-regulations


The external examiner must be impartial, have no involvement with the programme or the

programme team, and in the case of collaborative programmes be an experienced external

examiner. Full criteria for the appointment of external examiners is available from the AQS

website on:


regulations/academic-quality

Annual Monitoring

All LJMU programmes in partner organisations are required to undertake the Annual

Monitoring process. Full details of this are found at:


regulations/academic-quality

https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-regulations/academic-quality





Change of Programme Title

The University has an agreed process for the approval of programme title changes. All

decisions about the titles of LJMU awards are made by the Academic Planning Panel (APP),

either as part of the initial programme approval process or, within the context of the

programme title change process.

The Programme Leader/Link Tutor must complete the appropriate proforma and submitit to

the APT. The existing students’ consent should be obtained in writing prior to the proforma

being submitted to APP.

A title change needs to be approved by APP before being used in marketing materials.

Where LJMU wish to change the title of an award that is also delivered by a partner as a

franchise, the above process is used and the Link Tutor must liaise closely with the partner

to ensure their views are heard and the consent of students on the programme is obtained.

Graduation

Graduation is where awards are formally conferred. Students who are graduating are

normally invited to attend the appropriate graduation ceremony.

Graduation information is available via the LJMU website: http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/Graduation

Information provided includes registering for a ceremony, ordering academic dress and

photography details, some of which need to be booked in advance.

Partner colleagues attending the UK Graduation ceremonies are expected to undertake a

specific role in the same way as LJMU staff.

http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/Graduation

P a g e | 92

APPENDICES

P a g e | 93

APPENDIX ONE

UK Quality Code for Higher Education, Part B Assuring and Enhancing Academic Quality Chapter B10: Managing Higher Education Provision With Others

Expectation The Quality Code sets out the following Expectation about managing the delivery of learning

opportunities with others, which degree-awarding bodies and higher education providers

without degree awarding powers that are organising provision by third parties are required to

meet.

Degree-awarding bodies take ultimate responsibility for academic standards and the quality of

learning opportunities, irrespective of where these are delivered or who provides them.

Arrangements for delivering learning opportunities with organisations other than the degree-

awarding body are implemented securely and managed effectively.

Indicators of sound practice

Indicator 1

A strategic approach to delivering learning opportunities with others is adopted. Appropriate

levels of resources (including staff) are committed to the activities to ensure that the necessary

oversight is sustained.

Indicator 2

Governance arrangements at appropriate levels are in place for all learning opportunities

which are not directly provided by the degree-awarding body. Arrangements for learning to be

delivered, or support to be provided, are developed, agreed and managed in accordance with

the formally stated policies and procedures of the degree-awarding body.

Indicator 3

Policies and procedures ensure that there are adequate safeguards against financial

impropriety or conflicts of interest that might compromise academic standards or the quality of

learning opportunities. Consideration of the business case is conducted separately from

approval of the academic proposal.

Indicator 4

P a g e | 94

Degree-awarding bodies that engage with other authorised awarding bodies to provide a

programme of study leading to a joint academic award satisfy themselves as to their own legal

capacity to do so.

Indicator 5

The risks of each arrangement to deliver learning opportunities with others are assessed at the

outset and reviewed subsequently on a periodic basis. Appropriate and proportionate

safeguards to manage the risks of the various arrangements are determined and put in place.

Indicator 6

Appropriate and proportionate due diligence procedures are determined for each proposed

arrangement for delivering learning opportunities with an organisation other than the degree-

awarding body. They are conducted periodically to check the capacity of the other organisation

to continue to fulfil its designated role in the arrangement.

Indicator 7

There is a written and legally binding agreement, or other document, setting out the rights and

obligations of the parties, which is regularly monitored and reviewed. It is signed by the

authorised representatives of the degree-awarding body (or higher education provider without

degree -awarding powers arranging provision by a third party) and by the delivery organisation,

support provider or partner(s) before the relevant activity commences.

Indicator 8

Degree-awarding bodies take responsibility for ensuring that they retain proper control of the

academic standards of awards where learning opportunities are delivered with others. No serial

arrangements are undertaken without the express written permission of the degree-awarding

body, which retains oversight of what is being done in its name.

Indicator 9

Degree-awarding bodies retain responsibility for ensuring that students admitted to a

programme who wish to complete it under their awarding authority can do so in the event that a

delivery organisation or support provider or partner withdraws from an arrangement or that the

degree-awarding body decides to terminate an arrangement.

Indicator 10

All higher education providers maintain records (by type and category) of all arrangements for

delivering learning opportunities with others that are subject to a formal agreement.

P a g e | 95

Indicator 11

Degree-awarding bodies are responsible for the academic standards of all credit and

qualifications granted in their name. This responsibility is never delegated. Therefore, degree-

awarding bodies ensure that the standards of any of their awards involving learning

opportunities delivered by others are equivalent to the standards set for other awards that they

confer at the same level. They are also consistent with UK national requirements.

Indicator 12

When making arrangements to deliver a programme with others, degree- awarding bodies fulfil

the requirements of any professional, statutory and regulatory body (PSRB) that has approved

or recognised the programme or qualification, in relation to aspects of its delivery and any

associated formal agreements. The status of the programme or qualification in respect of PSRB

recognition is made clear to prospective students.

Indicator 13

Degree-awarding bodies approve module(s) and programmes delivered through an

arrangement with another delivery organisation, support provider or partner through

processes that are at least as rigorous, secure and open to scrutiny as those for assuring

quality and academic standards for programmes directly provided by the degree-awarding body.

Indicator 14

Degree-awarding bodies clarify which organisation is responsible for admitting and registering

a student to modules or programmes delivered with others, and ensure that admissions are

consistent with their own admissions policies.

Indicator 15

Degree-awarding bodies ensure that delivery organisations involved in the assessment of

students understand and follow the assessment requirements approved by the degree-

awarding body for the components or programmes being assessed in order to maintain its

academic standards. In the case of joint, dual/double and multiple awards, or for study abroad

and student exchanges, degree-awarding bodies agree with their partners on the division of

assessment responsibilities and the assessment regulations and requirements which apply.

Indicator 16

Degree-awarding bodies retain ultimate responsibility for the appointment, briefing and

functions of external examiners. The external examining procedures for qualifications where

learning opportunities are delivered with others are consistent with the degree awarding body's

approved practices.

P a g e | 96

Indicator 17

Degree-awarding bodies ensure that modules and programmes offered through other delivery

organisations, support providers or partners are monitored and reviewed through procedures

that are consistent with, or comparable to, those used for modules or programmes provided

directly by them.

Indicator 18

Degree-awarding bodies ensure that they have effective control over the accuracy of all public

information, publicity and promotional activity relating to learning opportunities delivered with

others which lead to their awards. Information is produced for prospective and current students

which is fit for purpose, accessible and trustworthy. Delivery organisations or support providers

are provided with all information necessary for the effective delivery of the learning or support.

Indicator 19

When degree-awarding bodies make arrangements for the delivery of learning opportunities

with others, they ensure that they retain authority for awarding certificates and issuing detailed

records of study in relation to student achievement. The certificate and/or record of academic

achievement states the principal language of instruction and/or assessment where this is not

English. Subject to any overriding statutory or other legal provision in any relevant jurisdiction,

the certificate and/or the record of achievement records the name and location of any other

higher education provider involved in the delivery of the programme of study. Where

information relating to the language of study or to the name and location of the delivery

organisation or partner is recorded on the record of achievement only, the certificate refers to the

existence of this formal record.

P a g e | 97

APPENDIX TWO

Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit (IASF) Report (Academic Year 15/16)

Purpose:

1) To identify and evidence that there is strategic fit between the proposed new

organisation and the University.

2) To prevent an extended use of any University resource in the event that the proposal

is deemed not appropriate to progress.

3) To ensure that minimal cost is incurred until approval to proceed is given by Senior

Management Team (SMT).

4) To better manage risk in relation to setting up ‘expectation’ with a proposed new

organisation.

Guidance Information:

The Academic Partnerships Manager (APM) completes Section A of the IASF

together with the Faculty Lead, including the risk rating column – note the IASF is

internal circulation only and is not to be shared with the organisation.

The APM submits the IASF to the Dean, Director of School, Deputy Finance Director

and Head of Academic Partnerships for their comments, copying to the Faculty

Management Accountant and Registrar for their information.

The Dean is asked to confirm (or not) the support of Faculty Management Team

(FMT), see section B.

The IASF is submitted to the PVC External Engagement and the Registrar to confirm

(or not) submission to SMT, see section C.

The required Financial Due Diligence activity is undertaken by the APM and Finance

separately and alongside completion of the IASF.

Should a proposal be deemed not to progress to the next step the APM and Faculty

Lead will agree who is best placed to inform the organisation.

The IASF must be signed off and dated in order for it to be submitted to SMT.

This is one of two documents that will be submitted to SMT for their consideration of

this organisation as a new partner of the University. (The other document is the

authorised Financial Due Diligence Assessment of Risk.)

P a g e | 98

A) Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit:

Key Information Information/Comments Risk 1- 5

Name of LJMU Faculty

Name of Faculty Lead

Name of Academic Partnerships Manager

Name and Contact Details of the Organisation

Name and contact details of the senior management sponsor from the Proposed Partner Organisation

Year of Establishment

Legal status of Organisation e.g. Public/Private/Charity

Evidence that the Organisation has the capacity to contract with LJMU

What academic level is the organisation currently operating at? e.g. PhD, Masters, Undergraduate, below Undergraduate

What existing awards is the organisation delivering? e.g. do they have degree awarding powers, do they deliver another’s awards?

What is the Organisation’s mission and objectives?

Size of Organisation Staff:

P a g e | 99

Students:

Annual Turnover:

Source of the Organisation’s Majority Funding

Tuition Fee Information e.g. policy and/or current level of tuition fees

Governance

Structure of Organisation e.g. Schools/Faculties/Depts.

Management Structure e.g. from Organogram

Key policies: e.g. does the organisation have:

Anti-bribery Policy

Complaints Procedure

Appeals Procedure

Admissions Policy

Student Charter or equivalent

Are there any ‘in-country’ laws, regulations, approvals or restrictions that should be considered?

Resources

Physical Resources How has the University assured itself that the resources available at the proposed partner are appropriate for the proposed arrangement?

Does the Organisation have a Procurement Policy?

Quality Assurance

Who is the awarding authority for the organisation?

How is academic delivery organised and managed? e.g. what is the programme management and administrative support structures

What processes are in place?

P a g e | 100

e.g. validation, review, annual monitoring and student feedback.

Is there an Assessment Policy?

Is there a Teaching and Learning Strategy?

Partnership Activity

Are there links to other parts of LJMU?

Please list other UK and/or International partners relevant to the proposal.

Context of the Proposal

Where/how did the approach come from/to LJMU?

Why has LJMU been approached?

What is the proposed model of collaboration?

Does this proposal map to current LJMU activity or programme/s?

Is there opportunity for reputational benefit to LJMU?

Will the income provided by the proposal cover all costs?

Is the organisation ranked in any way e.g. an academic league table?

Does the country have a national qualification framework? If not does the Organisation maintain its own Academic Regulations and how are these verified?

Are any risks identifiable at this stage: financial, academic, operational? If yes, please detail separately and risk rate each point.

P a g e | 101

Assessment of Strategic Fit

What is the overall objective in developing a partnership with the Organisation?

What relevant experience does the Organisation have in relation to the proposal?

How does this proposal demonstrate strategic fit to LJMU?

TOTAL RISK SCORE

Supporting Information to be completed by the Faculty:

What is the proposed start date of the partnership?

Bullet/outline the responsibilities of LJMU?

Bullet/outline the responsibilities of the organisation?

Supporting Information to be completed by Academic Partnerships Team:

Activity Y N Comments

Has a Web check been carried out?

Has the complaints policy been passed to Legal and Governance Services for comment

Has the British Council been contacted (if applicable)?

Has NARIC been contacted (if applicable)?

Has Companies House been contacted (if applicable)?

Has there been direct communication with the named senior management sponsor from the proposed partner Organisation?

P a g e | 102

B) Sign off by the Dean of ………………………………...

Dean’s Signature: Date:

Comments Proceed Reject

C) Sign off by the PVC EE and Registrar

PVC EE Signature: Date:

Comments Proceed Reject

Registrar Signature: Date:

Comments

Proceed

Reject

D) Confirmation of SMT’s Decision to Proceed or Reject: to be completed by the

APT.

Date of consideration at SMT:

Outcome from SMT and the associated Minute

Proceed

Reject

SMT Minute Received:

Date Outcome communicated to organisation:

Academic Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 103

Risk Scoring: The judgement as to which level of risk to apportion to each element should be based on the perceived level of risk to the University in deciding to partner with this organisation. Where the potential partnership is felt to be beneficial to the University please record this within the Comments box.

A. Measures of Likelihood, L

Score Score Interpretation

5 Greater than 80% chance – Almost certain

4 50%-80% chance - Likely

3 20% - 50% chance - Possible

2 Less than 5% - 20% chance- Unlikely

1 Less than 5% chance - Negligible

B. Measures of Impact, I

Score Score Interpretation Examples of Impact

4 Critical impact Reputational Impact

Long-term and sustainable reputational damage

Financial Impact

Threat to the solvency of the University or a major breach of financial covenants.

Strategic Impact

Almost certain failure of key strategic objective(s)

3 Major impact Reputational Impact

Medium-term reputational damage requiring significant recovery effort

Financial Impact

Significant impact on reserves or a technical breach of financial covenants

Strategic Impact

Potential failure of key strategic objective(s)

2 Intermediate impact

Reputational Impact

Short to medium-term reputational damage capable of light to moderate recovery effort

Financial Impact

Manageable within budget or contingency

Strategic Impact

Potential damage or delay to key strategic objective(s)

1 Minor impact Reputational Impact

Little or no reputational impact

Financial Impact

Little or no financial impact

Strategic Impact

Little or no impact on key strategic objective(s)

Risk Score: Gross Risk: Likelihood x Impact (on the assumption of no mitigation or intervention) Net Risk: Likelihood x Impact (on the assumption of successful mitigation or intervention) Maximum Score: (5)L x (4)I = 20


Note: Reputational, financial and strategic impact should be considered in all cases. The highest score of these three should be used in the Gross and Net Risk Calculation.


APPENDIX THREE

Policy for the Approval of Marketing and Publicity Materials Produced by Collaborative Partners and the Monitoring of Collaborative Partner Websites.

Introduction

1. This policy outlines the responsibilities and processes for the approval of

marketing and publicity materials produced by academic collaborative

partners and the monitoring and management of Liverpool John Moores

University (LJMU) information produced on partner websites.

2. The policy is drawn in reference to the UK Quality Code for Higher Education,

Part C: Information About Higher Education Provision and Part B, Chapter

B10: Managing Higher Education Provision with Others, December 2012,

Indicator 183, states that:

Degree awarding bodies ensure that they have effective control over

the accuracy of all public information, publicity and promotional activity

relating to learning opportunities delivered with others which lead to

their awards. Information is produced for prospective and current

students which is fit for purpose, accessible and trustworthy. Delivery

organisations or support providers are provided with all the information

necessary for the effective delivery of the learning or the support.

3. LJMU’S collaborative legal agreements set out the contractual requirements

of the both parties in relation to the prior approval of marketing and publicity

materials and the use of LJMU trademarks and logos.

3 http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/quality-code-B10.aspx

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Pages/quality-code-B10.aspx


Policy Statement

What this policy covers:

4. This policy applies to all forms of published information, including but not

limited to, printed, electronic, web-based (including HEFCE Key Information

Sets), broadcast media or any marketing activities used in promoting the

University’s programmes and awards in partner organisations.

The requirements of the policy are that:

5. Partner organisations must not advertise or signpost an LJMU award or make

statements or imply any formal relationship with LJMU until a signed

partnership agreement is in place.

6. Partner organisations must not advertise LJMU programmes or awards (prior

to a signed partnership agreement being in place) as “subject to approval, or

validation or contract”.

7. Partners must comply with the LJMU requirements for the production and

approval of marketing materials and the use of the LJMU logo and name as

outlined in the partnership agreement.

8. All publicity and marketing material prepared and issued by the partner, its

staff or agents, which makes any reference to LJMU or its programmes must

fully and fairly reveal to students and prospective students the status of the

Programme(s) offered. All programme related materials must be submitted to

the Link Tutor for prior approval. Approval shall be given in writing within five

working days.

9. All publicity and marketing material prepared and issued by the partner, its

staff or agents, which makes any reference to LJMU or its programmes must

follow LJMU corporate style, as identified in LJMU’s Corporate Brand

Guidelines. All material must be submitted to the Brand Manager and the

corporate Communications Manager from the LJMU Marketing and Corporate


Communications Department for prior approval. Approval shall normally be

given in writing within five working days.

LJMU responsibilities:

10. The University’s Academic Partnerships Team (APT) is responsible for

monitoring, reporting and taking appropriate action in relation to the

publication of information about LJMU and its awards on partner websites.

For the avoidance of doubt this applies to i) existing partners listed on LJMU’s

Collaborative Register and ii) partnerships in approval and/or development.

11. The APT will make every effort to monitor the unofficial use of the LJMU logo,

trademarks and name on the Worldwide Web.

12. The APT will report monitoring activity to the Collaborative Quality and

Enhancement Panel (CQSP), or its successor, three times per academic

year.

13. The LJMU Marketing and Corporate Communications Team (MCCT) will

maintain and make accessible to partners, LJMU Corporate Design and

Editorial Guidelines. All partner enquiries concerning publicity material will

normally be processed within five working days.

14. The LJMU Link Tutor assigned to a partner or LJMU award at a partner

institution shall routinely monitor publicity materials and the programme

specific information given to prospective and enrolled students on LJMU

awards at the partner organisation. Should unapproved or incorrect materials

or inferences be detected the Link Tutor will take the appropriate action by

requesting the partner to immediately amend the programme information

and/or referring the partner to the LJMU MCCT and/or to the APT.

15. The APT will ensure that all partners are kept up to date with the key

University contact names and email addresses in reference to this policy.

16. Where an international partner produces publicity materials and maintains a

website in a language other than English, appropriate LJMU staff will,


wherever possible, be used to provide an English translation of all published

information relating to LJMU.

17. Academic Quality Services (AQS) will annually provide up to date and

accurate information to be used by the partner in the construction of the

student programme guide.

Partner responsibilities:

18. The Partner organisation will submit all new marketing/publicity materials to

both the Link Tutor for approval of programme related information and MCCT

for approval of brand, design and/or editorial in advance of publication. This

includes updates to existing materials that have already been approved by

LJMU.

19. Where an international partner produces publicity materials and maintains a

website in a language other than English, the partner will be expected to

provide a translation on request and to agree that this activity will take place

before initial publication and annually, at an agreed time in the academic

calendar.

20. The Partner organisation will ensure that LJMU’s APT is informed of the key

marketing contact within the organisation.

21. The Partner organisation will provide information to current students about

LJMU programmes, according to a standard programme guide template,

monitored by the Link Tutor.

Related Information:

22. This policy should be read in conjunction with the Academic Collaborative

Partnerships Operational Manual.

Monitoring and Review of this Policy:

23. This policy is the responsibility of the Head of Academic Partnerships and must

be approved and reviewed by the University’s CQSP or any successor group.


Dissemination of and Access to this Policy:


APPENDIX FOUR LJMU Academic Committee Structure

https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/secretariat/126195.htm

https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/secretariat/126195.htm


APPENDIX FIVE

CERTIFICATE POLICY

Partner names always appear on certificates, except where the programme is purely

distance taught with no partner involvement in teaching, learning, assessment or

student support. Where statutory requirements over-ride this, this is noted and

agreed at validation, after receipt of formal documentation supporting this.


APPENDIX SIX

Glossary of Terms

AB Academic Board

AF Academic Framework

AMR Annual Monitoring Report

API Academic Planning & Information Team

APP Academic Planning Panel

APR Articulated Progression Route

APT Academic Partnerships Team

APS Faculty of Arts, Professional and Social Studies

AQS Academic Quality Services

Bb Blackboard

BIS Department for Business Innovation and Skills

BoS Board of Study

CQSP Collaborative Quality and Standards Panel

CPD Certificate of Professional Development or

Continuing Professional Development

EC Education Committee

EHC Faculty of Education, Health and Community

FQAEC Faculty Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee

FD Foundation Degree

FE Further Education

FET Faculty of Engineering and Technology

FMT Faculty Management Team

QEO Quality Enhancement Officer

HE Higher Education

HEFCE Higher Education Funding Council for England

HESES Higher Education Students Early Statistics Survey

IPC International Policy Committee


IV Institutional Visit

LS Library Services

LJMU Liverpool John Moores University

MoA Memorandum of Agreement

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

PPP Programme Proposal Proforma

QA Quality Assurance

QAA Quality Assurance Agency

QSO Quality Support Officer

RPL Recognition of Prior Learning

RP(E)L Recognition of Prior (Experience) Learning

SCS Faculty of Science

SD Staff Development

SIS Student Information System

SCP School Contact Person

SAW Student Advice and Wellbeing

SMT Strategic Management Team

VLE Virtual Learning Environment

WBL Work Based Learning

Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational...

Documents

Transcript of Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational...