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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 3
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 4
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 5
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 6
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 7
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:
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 8
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 9
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 10
CHAPTER TWO THE ACADEMIC PARTNERSHIPS TEAM
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 11
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
6350 [email protected]
Alison Topping Academic Partnerships Manager Faculty Allocation: Engineering & Technology, Science, Education Health and Community
6351 [email protected]
Maureen Evans Summer Semester Operations Manager
6480 [email protected]
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
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 12
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 14
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 15
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 16
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 17
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 18
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 19
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 20
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 21
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 22
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 23
CHAPTER FOUR
GUIDELINES FOR DEFINING TYPES OF ACADEMIC
COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 24
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 25
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 26
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 27
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 28
CHAPTER FIVE
INITIATION, DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL PROCESS IN SUMMARY
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 29
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 30
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
Review and sign off of
the FDD by the DFD
Review and sign off of
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 31
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 32
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 33
CHAPTER SIX
INITIATION, DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL PROCESS IN DETAIL
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 34
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 35
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 36
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 37
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 38
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 39
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 40
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 41
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
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 42
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 43
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 44
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 45
CHAPTER SEVEN RECOGNITION ARRANGEMENTS
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 46
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;
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 47
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
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 48
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
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 49
CHAPTER EIGHT
EXIT AND CLOSURE
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 50
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 51
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 52
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 53
CHAPTER NINE THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 54
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 55
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 56
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 57
CHAPTER TEN REVIEW
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 58
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
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:
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 59
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):
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 60
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)
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 61
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)
Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7
Number of students next academic year (15/16 projected across all levels and intakes) (LT)
Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 62
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 63
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,
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 64
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 65
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 66
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 67
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 68
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 69
CHAPTER ELEVEN
PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT
Section A Institutional Information
Section B Programme Information
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 70
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 71
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 72
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:
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 73
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)
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 74
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:
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 75
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 76
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;
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 77
(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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 78
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
Key Activity in Managing a Partnership
Enrolment Process
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 79
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 80
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 :
https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/lea/77304.htm
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 81
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 82
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
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 83
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 84
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
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-partnerships
The Partner Institution Staff Access form can be found at
https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/lea/123237.htm
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 85
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 86
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 87
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-framework
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-framework
Full details of the Extenuating Circumstances process and guidance notes are available from
the LJMU web pages at:
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 88
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).
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 89
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 90
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
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:
https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/about-us/public-information/academic-quality-and-
regulations/academic-quality
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 91
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.
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 104
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 105
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 106
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 107
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,
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 108
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 109
Dissemination of and Access to this Policy:
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 110
APPENDIX FOUR LJMU Academic Committee Structure
https://www2.ljmu.ac.uk/secretariat/126195.htm
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 111
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.
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 112
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
September 2015 Academic Collaborative Partnerships Operational Manual P a g e | 113
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
Top Related