Transparency data

SLC Board meeting minutes 28 July 2022

Updated 3 March 2023

1. Attendees

1.1 Present

• Peter Lauener (PL) - Chair (by videoconference)

• Paula Sussex (PS) - Chief Executive Officer

• Mary Curnock Cook (MCC) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)

• Gary Page (GP) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)

• Charlotte Moar (CM)- Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)

• Stephen Tetlow (ST) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)

• Rona Ruthen (RR) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)

• Andrew Wathey (AW) – Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)

• David Wallace (DW) - Deputy Chief Executive Officer

• Audrey McColl (AMC) - CFO

• Gary Womersley (GW) - Company Secretary

1.2 Also in attendance

• Paul Kett (PK) – DfE

• Ailsa Harris (AH) - DfE (by videoconference)

• Lorna Caldwell (LC) – Scottish Government (by videoconference)

• Sinead Gallagher (SG) – Welsh Government (by videoconference)

• Ronan Murtagh (RM) – Department for the Economy, NI (by videoconference)

• Laura Irvine (LI) - Department for the Economy, NI (by videoconference)

• Stephen Campbell (SC) – CIO (by videoconference from Glasgow Boardroom)

• Chris Larmer (CL) – Executive Director, Business Operations

• Derek Ross (DR) - Executive Director, HE and FE Reform (by videoconference)

• Morven Spalding (MS) - Executive Director, People

• Margaret McMullen (MCM) – Director of Finance (by videoconference)

• Helen Bogan (HB) – Head of Governance and Planning (by videoconference)

• Stuart Brydson (SB) - Board Secretary (Secretariat)

• Nathan Glancy (NG) - Business Manager to the Office of the CEO (for Item 5.1 and 5.3 only) (by videoconference)

• Adam Treslove (AT) - Head of Corporate Affairs (for Item 5.1 only) (by videoconference)

• Shona MacKay (SM) – Senior Solicitor (for item 4.3 only) (by video conference)

• Mark Cassidy (MC) – Head of Estates and Sourcing (for item 5.2 only)

• Don Campbell (DC) – Head of Data Centre of Excellence (for item 6.1 only)

• Jon Hopkins (JH) – Head of Technology – DfE Strategy Policy (for item 6.2 only)

• Nicholas McDermott (NMC) – Senior Policy Lead (for item 6.2 only)

1.3 Apologies

• Bernice McNaught – Executive Director, Repayments and Customer Compliance

• Anne Spinali – (DfE)

• Laura Irvine (NI Government)

• Chris Williams (CW) - Welsh Government (by videoconference)

2. FOI Notice

Where asterisks (*) appear, these sections have been excluded from the minutes before placing on the website as the subject under discussion falls within one or more of the exemptions contained in Part II of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and can be reasonably withheld.

3. Chairman’s Opening Remarks / Directors’ Matters / Declarations of Interest

PL welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies were noted from BMC, AS, LMC, and CW.

PK declared an interest as he had been appointed to the Open University Council. PK had discussed the appointment with the Permanent Secretary and did not envisage any conflicts arising but would manage them appropriately should they do so. PL noted that this appointment had been recorded at the June Board and thanked PK for raising.

PL highlighted that, following the Board meeting, he and PK were recording colleague communications which were designed to convey a message of stability for colleagues in SLC during the period of recruiting a new Chief Executive.

PL noted that his annual review, with PK, would take place following the Board meeting. Non-Executive Directors were invited to email any feedback to PK directly.

*

PL explained that he had had a brief introductory meeting with the new Secretary of State for Education, the Rt Hon James Cleverly MP. PL had highlighted the positive progress made in this year’s application round, the success of the Evolve Programme, and effective joint working and preparations for LLE.

4. Strategic items

4.1 CEO Report

AT and NG joined the meeting.

PS introduced the CEO Report, noting her key areas of focus.

4.2 Blend

PS highlighted that although the rollout phase of the Blend programme had been successfully completed on 30 June, the ELT had agreed that it was not yet ready to transition Blend to BAU. The programme would be extended with the goal of continuing to develop and embed blended working, especially given its strong connection to attraction and retention. PS noted three key workstreams which would help reimagine the role of the office: ‘Managing in a Blended Way’, a training programme designed to support managers to manage their teams effectively; a workplace management platform, to enable colleagues to see who was on site and where they were sitting; and, Project Flex, which was reviewing SLC’s approach to all aspects of flexible working.

GP noted his support for Blend, asking what the end state was and if it was to equip managers to manage in a more fluid way. PS explained that the end state was hybrid working and that there would be no full return to the office. Supporting managers was key, as was building in the flexibility to cope with variable Covid infection rates over the winter. PS expected Blend to be BAU by the start of 2023.

*

4.3 Stakeholder Engagement

PS advised that she and CL were due to host the new Minister for Skills, Andrea Jenkyns MP, in Darlington the week following the Board meeting, where she would be given a site tour and a briefing on the application cycle.

4.4 Repay Customer Satisfaction and Complaints

PS noted SLC’s continued work on repay CSAT, noting that further analysis was on-going. She noted that SLC does not consider the scores to be acceptable and that the CX update in October would provide a more detailed update on progress and understanding to date.

PS also noted that a third-party aggregator was stimulating complaints on customer data held by SLC. This reinforced the importance of SLC’s enhanced focus on the GDPR path to green.

4.5 Application Cycle

CL highlighted the ‘Processing – Tasks in Queues’ graph on page 2 of the CPD and how this illustrated that Operations was now in a good place. The figures had been reforecast to include pre-assessment work. The backlog was 58% lower than the previous year meaning that SLC had, to an extent, succeeded in flattening the peak. Although there was an expectation of some late applications, and an uptick in change of circumstance notifications, CL anticipated backlog figures would remain better than the previous year.

CL explained that customer contact was in the strong position with a 7% to 9% improvement on SLA’s compared to the previous year. It was expected that August and September would be challenging, with a volatile clearing process, but there were plans in place to flex staffing models, and the Customer Communications team had a proactive communications strategy in place. CL noted that CSAT scores had seen a month-on-month improvement.

PK asked about the potential for a UCAS and SLC to join up communications. DW highlighted that UCAS were very helpful in getting important messages out at key times, but to do much more would require funding as this was a commercial activity for UCAS.

4.6 Corporate Performance Dashboard

AW highlighted the positive year-on-year rise in Repayment customers confirmed within a repayment channel, which had hit 90.96% in June 2022.

*

*

PL asked about the impact of chatbots on the CSAT figures and how this compared with satisfaction in other organisations. DW explained that the chatbot only currently handled four questions, so the channel presently had limited scope.

AW noted the rise of headcount in Operations in June. CL explained that the figure had been affected by the 200 FTE that had moved between his and DW’s areas, as the DSA operation had been repatriated to the Operations directorate from its temporary home within PCER.

CM noted the lack of commentary on SLC’s headcount. PS noted ongoing work by the Data Centre of Excellence and the People Directorate to provide meaningful data.

4.7 DSA Reforms Update

CM asked for further information on whether the risk level had changed as the reforms progressed. DW explained that there was an ongoing programme delivery risk around funding, but as the reforms created huge Programme savings for the department there was a degree of comfort. DW also noted that lessons had been learned from the instances of fraud with the childcare grant that had been reported to Board and the current on-going DSA fraud risk assessment would be reported to the October ARC.

4.8 Quarterly Shareholder Corporate Performance Dashboard FY2022-23

CM noted that the drill-down of metrics for shareholders was helpful. PL echoed this point, noting the full service, and therefore data set, that SLC provided for England and Wales and welcoming the inclusion of high-level data for Scotland and Northern Ireland, albeit this was not, in all cases, SLC’s operational performance being reported.

4.9 GDPR

PK asked if the impact on GDPR was known when the decision to de-scope decommissioning of three data warehouses was taken. DW confirmed that the relevant SLC programme would have been aware of the impact. There was no criticism of the decision as it was deemed not affordable to take any other course of action. This did however mean there was now further work to do to stay on the path to green.

4.10 Evolve Update

ST highlighted that the FY2022-23 current forecast DfE cashable benefits had reduced from the Full Business Case position, primarily due to DSA Assessment Improvements and Sponsor Journey benefits not being realised in-year. PS noted that this would be discussed at the next Evolve Oversight Committee meeting.

ST noted that LLE may increase risk in executing the technology strategy. SC explained that rather than increasing reliance on legacy systems the technology strategy focused on reusing where possible and upgrading systems where that added value.

PL noted that the Board took assurance that SLC’s key issues and achievements were identified and were being suitably managed. PL noted the positive application round thus far, with the Board recognising the turbulent clearing process that likely lay ahead. He also reinforced the value of the CPD.

AT and NG left the meeting.

4.11 CFO Report

MMC joined the meeting.

PL noted the importance of the Board understanding timing of budget decisions and the criteria which informed those decisions, asking AMC to include this in her update.

AMC introduced the CFO Report noting the work that had been done to close the funding gap.

PK announced that an additional £20m of Programme funding would be provided, with £13m for SLC core operating costs and £7m for HE Reforms, the latter to realign budget classification issues.  He noted that while this was not incremental funding, over that which SLC had set out was required, the GDPR risks had been a significant argument for additional programme funding. He also noted that the funding was contingent on additional Admin efficiencies and that the difficult decisions that had already been made on prioritisation could not be undone.  However, the additional funding should enable SLC to move ahead without the need to further deprioritise activities.

He further noted that future underspends could not automatically be recycled, and that SLC would need to discuss emerging underspends with DfE.

PL welcomed the additional funding and noted the efficacy of joint SLC and DfE working on this difficult issue.

AMC echoed PK’s point that prioritisation decisions already taken could not be reversed, but that budgets issued to Directorates were now aligned to funding. She also noted that this was not recurring funding and that SLC would be in the same position in FY 2023-24. Tight financial control would therefore continue to be a priority for SLC.

AMC noted that some Admin savings had been made to date, that there was a small Programme overspend and a Capital surplus.

*

AMC explained that Quarterly Deep Dive reviews would remain in place as would regular meetings with the Sponsor team and DfE finance directors. Responding to PL’s question on timing and decision-making criteria, AMC noted that the same criteria had been consistently applied and included investment already made, benefits, value for money if an activity was stopped and restarted, and impact of delays. She confirmed that the full ELT conducted this analysis line by line.

MCC asked for clarification on GDPR, and whether the additional funding would enable SLC to do more and more quickly. AMC explained that the additional funding allowed SLC to maintain planned funding but there were new pressures on the GDPR budget and SLC acknowledged there would need to be a reallocation of funding from elsewhere to support this.

MCC noted the potential delay of LLE / HE reform and queried the potential budget impacts. ST noted that difficult decisions need to be well informed, with LLE properly costed and benefits well understood. PS noted that LLE / HE reform consumes resource and capacity that would otherwise be put into transformation.

CM noted that further information on the Bothwell Street exit reclassification issue would be useful. AMC explained that work was underway with external advisors with a report expected in four to six weeks.

PK confirmed that there would be a revised APRA letter issued in due course based on the additional funding. AMC noted that SLC could move quickly with spending plans now that the additional funding had been confirmed.

PL confirmed that the Board took assurance that the budget was extremely well managed and welcomed the positive funding news from DfE which would be reflected in a revised APRA letter.

*

MMC left the meeting.

4.12 SLC Framework Document

SMK joined the meeting.

PL noted that it was a landmark moment that the new Framework Document (FWD) was ready to sign.

DW introduced the SLC FWD reminding the Board that this was a key DfE document and the new version would deliver real and meaningful benefits for SLC, effectively enabling it to ‘move faster whilst remaining compliant’. DW thanked DfE and SLC colleagues for their perseverance and patience whilst working to secure HMT sign off. DW noted that HMT had taken a hard line on some aspects of the FWD, requiring the wording in their template to be used even though this did not align with shareholders’ expectations and SLC’s unique constitution. SLC and DfE had however determined that the risks of accommodating HMT’s position were not significant, and that it was more important to have the new FWD approved by HMT and put into operation.

AH, in turn, thanked the SLC team, specifically HB and SMK, and also the devolved administrations for endorsing the document. AH noted that the new FWD was in line with the recommendations of the 2018 Tailored Review and did establish SLC more as an equal partner to DfE.

PL noted the importance of keeping the FWD under review. DW agreed, noting that both the Board and Biannual Shareholder Meeting would have a role in the review process.

CM highlighted that ARC action 332 could now be closed and endorsed a regular review of compliance with, and the effectiveness of, the FWD.

The Board endorsed the SLC Framework Document.

SMK left the meeting.

5. Reports from Committees

5.1 RemCo Chair Report

AW introduced the RemCo Chair Report noting that the Committee had met on Wednesday. The three main topics covered had been People Strategy, EDI and CEO Recruitment.

*

AW highlighted that the new Policy, Equality and Wellbeing Manager had attended the RemCo meeting. RemCo had welcomed the range and depth of EDI activities underway and had emphasised the important of data to baseline, track and understand trends.

The Board took assurance from the RemCo Chair Report.

5.2 ARC Chair Report

MC joined the meeting.

CM introduced the ARC Chair Report noting that ministerial approval of the Annual Report and Accounts (ARA) had not yet been secured due to the recent Government changes.

CM noted that the June ARC had reviewed reports on internal and external fraud and health and safety. The Annual Health and Safety Report was attached to the Board papers for assurance.

The Board took assurance from the ARC Chair Report and the Annual Health and Safety Report.

MC left the meeting.

6. Directors’ Reports

Employer of Choice – Attraction and Retention

AT and DC joined the meeting.

PS introduced Employer of Choice (EoC) noting that while ultimately a People directorate responsibility, AT and his team were working to define and promote SLC’s brand and employee value proposition both internally and externally.

AT explained that prior to EoC there had been no substantive effort in defining a proposition to underpin an SLC employer brand. In establishing the employee value proposition (EVP) AT’s team had talked to colleagues to understand their views on what helped attract people to work at SLC. The resultant brand campaign concept, ‘Unlock Potential’, was part of an approach to differentiate SLC as dynamic and modern and one that was well aligned to SLC’s core mission.

AT highlighted that the team’s plans included strengthening the narrative around themes including EDI, career pathways and colleague engagement.

MS explained that the new talent acquisition team had revamped job specifications. Flexible working options, noted within the CEO Report, would also strengthen EoC and help SLC be more competitive.

MCC noted that the ‘unlock potential’ branding was good but that she felt this was lost within Workday at present and it was incongruent to move from an appealing, branded webpage to Workday. AT agreed that the team would look at this.

MCC highlighted that there seemed to be a lot more on recruitment rather than retention in EoC. PS noted that while EoC should actually be tilted more towards recruitment, it aimed to address both retention and recruitment. AT noted that the initial focus had been on recruitment because of the need to address this pressing issue, especially in Operations.

MCC noted that more could be made of employer contributions to the pensions scheme. PS agreed but noted that pensions, while a critical part of the EVP, did not necessarily help attract some segments of the workforce, in particular the less well paid.

*

RR highlighted that within the private sector there were now increasing redundancies in the technology sector and that EoC should emphasise stability in terms of working at SLC. ST also noted that the value inherent in what SLC does could be reinforced and underlined the importance of benchmarking and measuring success. PS noted that, in her opinion, the labour market would eventually swing in SLC’s favour. AT noted that further work would be done to build the EoC narrative around culture and values.

PK noted that it was positive to see this work and noted that more could be made of the upskilling and apprenticeship opportunities at SLC. He also noted that he was keen to share SLC’s very progressive thinking with DfE. PS welcomed this and MS noted that she does share our plans with her DfE counterparts on a regular basis.

GP likewise noted the positive progress, suggesting that the EoC work could be a case study for many organisations in the private sector given its depth and scope. GP suggested that performance management is an important part of an employer brand, with employees and prospective employees valuing an organisation which rewards good performance and manages bad performance.

Responding to ST’s point, PS noted that DC and MS were working on measuring the overall effectiveness of EoC. Surveys of new joiners would be reviewed, and data would be made available to a future Board meeting.

ACTION: New joiners survey data to be made available to a future RemCo meeting to help inform the Employer of Choice programme.

PL summarised the discussion, commenting on the thoughtful and innovative approach SLC was taking with EoC. He noted the full support of the Board and the Board’s interest in evaluation and measuring success. He noted that RemCo would be the right forum for regular updates but suggested that EoC should come back to the Board occasionally.

AT and DC left the meeting.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

7. Modern Slavery Statement

GW introduced the Modern Slavery Statement noting that this was the fifth annual statement for SLC and there was now maturity in the process and document.

The Board approved the Modern Slavery Statement, and approved its signature by a Director, in order that it could be published online.

8. Governance

8.1 Minutes of meeting held on 30 June

The minutes of the SLC Board meeting held on 30 June 2022 were approved as a true and accurate record.

8.2 Matters arising from previous meeting

The matters arising document was approved as accurate.

9. Any other business

PL explained that the Governance Team had been canvassing dates for the Board strategy day, later in the year, which would discuss the future of SLC.

9.1 Date of the next meeting

The next meeting was confirmed as being at 10:00 am on Thursday 29 September 2022 in the Glasgow Boardroom and also by Teams.

There being no other business the meeting ended at 1:30 pm.