Transparency data

SLC Board meeting minutes 30 June 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)

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

• David Wallace (DW) - Deputy Chief Executive Officer

• Gary Womersley (GW) - Company Secretary

1.2 Also in attendance

• Anne Spinali (AS) - DfE (by videoconference)

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

• Lauren McNamara (LMC) – Scottish Government (by videoconference)

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

• Jonny O’Callaghan (JOC) – Department for the Economy, NI (by videoconference)

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

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

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

• Bernice McNaught (BMC) – Executive Director, Repayments & Customer Compliance

• Derek Ross (DR) - Executive Director, Programme Director HE/LE Reform (by videoconference)

• Morven Spalding (MS) - Executive Director, People

• Margaret McMullen (MCM) – Director of (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)

• David Derrick (DD) – Financial Accounting Manager (for item 5.2 only) (by videoconference)

• Stephen Baker (SBA) - Director of Policy, Design and Change (for item 7.1 only) (by videoconference)

• Ash Marston (AM) - Head of Infrastructure and Operations (for item 7.2 only) (by videoconference)

• Mark Cassidy (MC) – Head of Estates and Sourcing (for item 7.2 only) (by videoconference)

• Jac Bowman (JB) – EMO Manager (for item 7.3 only) (by videoconference)

• Emma Gilchrist (EG) – Associate Finance Business Partner (for item 7.3 only) (by videoconference)

1.3 Apologies

• Rona Ruthen (Non-Executive Director)

• Audrey McColl (CFO)

• Paul Kett (DfE)

• Sinead Gallagher (Welsh Government)

• Laura Irvine (NI Government)

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 RR, AMC, PK, SG, and LI.

PL highlighted the visit of the Rt Hon Nadhim Zahawi MP, Secretary of State for Education, to the Bothwell Street offices on Friday 17 June. The visit had been a great success and the Secretary of State had noted his high opinion of SLC and of the important work being done.

PL explained that since the announcement that PS would be leaving SLC at the end of the year, recruitment for a new CEO had commenced. The closing date for applications was 11 July and a final decision on her successor was expected by the end of August. Formal approval of the appointment would be sought from RemCo and the Board in due course.

PL welcomed the fact that some of the Non-Executive Directors were in Darlington and noted the importance of them engaging with the work of SLC. MCC had met with Complaints and Appeals colleagues earlier that morning, and CM was due to meet with the Head of Control Function, Operations after the Board meeting. PL invited Non-Executive Directors to contact HB or SB if there was a part of the organisation that they wanted to find out more about.

There were no declarations of interest.

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 explained that Blend would continue for the next three months and that she would remain as its SRO. The Communications Team was working to develop a Managers’ Proposition for Blend which would include training for all managers to build engagement with, and sponsorship of, blended working. In parallel, the team would include further developing the narrative around the value of the office, as well as building out and communicating the narrative on pay and non-pay benefits.

PL noted that he would like Blend to continue to be brought to Board and RemCo.

ACTION: Blend to continue to be brought to Board and RemCo.

Finance

PS noted that in respect of paragraph 4.15 of the CEO Report, the word ‘negative’ ahead of ‘central adjustment’ should be ignored.

4.3 Operational Update

CL noted that application numbers remained broadly in line with last year and were as expected. As of 13 June, 60k cases were in the work queues compared to 166k at the same time last year. CL highlighted that multi-skilling enabled by the new operating model had been rolled out to maximise efficiency and that 50 FTE from Repayments had been assigned to Operations to support application processing.

CL called out the great work that was being done by DW’s CX team who had been collaborating closely with Operations and other teams across SLC to drive customers towards self-serve, to reduce demand and to manage customer behaviour more generally. More assertive customer messaging was being applied to customer communications and the IVR system to guide customers to self-serve, and front-line colleagues were advocating the benefits of self-serve and signposting it when interacting with customers.

MCC invited CL to give more detail on the net productivity outcome of the increased uptake of new channels and contact. CL explained that it was too early to be definitive about gains from CEM but noted that these would be clearer as CEM matured. CL reiterated that CEM was not only about helping the customer but was also to make it easier for colleagues. Productivity had improved and the plans in place would accelerate that.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

4.4 Repayments Customer Satisfaction Approach

DW explained that, in conjunction with BMC’s team, they had revisited the questions that were being asked through the customer satisfaction (CSAT) survey. In particular, a more detailed view of the stages of the ‘Repay’ customer journey in order to be more targeted with questions. DW noted further that the teams were taking forward some of the initiatives that had been discussed at the Board in April, but that due to funding pressures, others were still under consideration

In response to a question from GP, DW noted that although it was not possible to give a date when the CSAT scores would turn green, he believed the work being done would drive improvements and that there would be a further report on progress at the next half-yearly report to the Board.

*

*

4.5 Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) Review

ST highlighted that the GREEN overall Evolve programme rating from the IPA was a great achievement and that GREEN ratings were rare.

Corporate Performance Dashboard (CPD)

ST noted that the CPD had improved markedly over the past three years and was now a useful tool. ST noted that further details on the channel shift would be welcomed.

HMT Approval of the Revised SLC Framework Document (FWD)

CM invited AH to comment on the conclusion of the revised FWD approval. AH noted that the FWD had been cleared by HMT.

PL noted that an annual review of the FWD would be useful.

ACTION: FWD to be reviewed annually.

4.6 SLC Accounting Officer Discretion

PL highlighted the Ministerial overview of SLC Accounting Officer discretion and its links to the FWD, and policy simplification. It had been important to gain agreement on the matter and it should be regarded as being a living document.

PL noted that the Board took assurance that SLC’s key issues and achievements were identified and were being suitably managed.

AT and NG left the meeting.

4.7 CFO Report

MMC introduced the CFO Report noting that there remained a substantial funding gap for FY2022-23. SLC continued to work closely with DfE colleagues to ensure there was early access to any additional funding which became available. SLC had started the financial year with contingency plans in place should the further funding not become available. This would ultimately allow SLC to work within agreed budgets but would not be without consequence in terms of benefits and priories being delayed. It was then noted that DfE was already under additional pressure and, as a result, had recently asked SLC to reduce its Admin budget by 1% (and if possible 2%) which would add a further £400k to £800k to the overall Admin funding gap.

MMC explained that action taken to date through prioritisation exercises equated to an overall reduction of £12m and decreased the funding gap to £13.1m on Programme, £2.4m on Admin and an unallocated Capital element of £5.1m (excluding LLE/HE Reform). Difficult decisions would have to be made to adjust projects that had already been assessed as business critical if no further funding was made available.

MMC highlighted that additional measures had been put in place to mitigate the risk of overspending, including the introduction of formal directorate quarterly budget challenge meetings. Meetings between MMC, AMC and the DfE finance directors also continued.

CM highlighted the Change budget items listed in appendix A, including the reclassification of Bothwell Street Exit. MMC explained that KPMG were producing a report to assess the viability of the reclassification and AMC would receive a full update in the next week or so.

CM noted that more information on the road map to take further action would be helpful. MMC explained that the road map would depend on negotiations with DfE. There would be a deep dive carried out on June with the results available in late July. The tipping point was expected to be in September should there be no additional funding from DfE.

AS explained that DfE were still working on the numbers. There was an awareness of the pressures being faced at SLC and projects that required a decision should be flagged to DfE.

RM noted that the delaying of projects like GDPR may lead to compliance issues. PS acknowledged the challenge and noted that she was doing everything possible to stay on the right side of compliance and had accepted that SLC would now have to give more priority to this area.

PL commended the joint working on the SLC budget. The July CFO paper should include a clear timetable around the budget and should also cover the budgeting round for 2023-24. PL and CM would continue to be a sounding board for PS, AMC, and MMC.

ACTION: July CFO paper should include a clear timetable around resolving this year’s budget and should also cover the budgeting round for 2023-24, noting that this would have to start soon.

The Board took assurance from the CFO Report.

5. Papers for Noting / Reports from Committees

5.1 ARC Chair Report

CM introduced the ARC Chair Report noting that the Committee had met on Monday, 27th June. The ARA had been reviewed and would be presented to the Board for approval at an additional special Board meeting on 7 July.

CM noted that the Committee had been presented with reports on financial crime, and health and safety. Private meetings had been held with PS and AMC, and also with the NAO.

PL noted thanks to the ARC Independent Member, Douglas Griffin, whose final meeting would be in October, and requested that a valedictory letter to Douglas be prepared.

ACTION: Valedictory letter to Douglas Griffin to be arranged.

The Board took assurance from the ARC Chair Report, and approved the ARC ToR changes, and the recruitment of a new Independent Member.

5.2 RemCo Chair Report

AW introduced the RemCo Chair Report noting that Blend would be ongoing, and that the Committee comments on the gender pay gap and EDI had been absorbed into the RemCo Annual Report.

The Board took assurance from the ARC Chair Report and approved the RemCo ToR.

5.3 Directors’ Reports

PL noted that he had attended a meeting of the Student Finance Customer panel and had been impressed with the engagement of the attendees.

5.4 Complaints and Appeals Biannual Report

SBA joined the meeting.

DW introduced the Complaints and Appeals Biannual Report outlining the progress made during the reporting period. The Appeals and Complaints teams had started to be amalgamated, and work to look at aligning SLAs had been carried out.

SBA explained that backlogs had been driven by the transition to remote working, historic under resourcing, and a significant increase in demand. Formal appeals had increased year on year, and policy changes had increased complexity.

SBA highlighted that the Appeals team and Complaints team had previously been in different directorates, but the Appeals team had now been brought into PCER and aligned with Complaints to form Customer Resolutions. Backlogs had been addressed through tactical steps including the flexing and short-term increase in resource, and there was budget approval for the additional resources necessary to maintain a more balanced position vis a vis SLAs. In response to a question, SBA noted that there were distinct specialisms within the team and that they did not try to deal with appeals and complaints in the same way.

CM noted the complaints that had been upheld and that more information on the long-term plans would be useful. SBA explained that Customer Resolutions had been working with the operational teams on work instructions for complex applications and were putting in place a series of workshops when products are launched.

MCC explained that she and PL had attended a very useful meeting earlier that day with SBA and managers from the Customer Resolutions department. It had been clear that there were numerous points that could cause a complaint or appeal and commended the team’s grasp of what were clearly very complex issues. MCC noted that it was good to see that the team had engaged with the We Belong charity regarding residency issues.

GP noted that it may be helpful to explain more to customers why a complaint was not upheld. SBA explained that expectations management was important. Initial communications are issued to explain the timeframes involved but that a further response would be considered.

PS noted that she personally reviews several complaints every week. It had been difficult culturally for colleagues to feedback on internal issues causing complaints, but this had now been largely resolved. Policy simplification would help reduce the number of errors.

DW highlighted that the Customer Resolutions teams are empowered to challenge decisions from both Operations and Repayments. DW also noted that the lead Independent Assessors would be invited to attend the October Board meeting as part of the next Biannual Report.

CL noted that there was a rich amount of data to help the operational teams to learn, and that following the peak processing period colleagues would be retrained to use that data. It would be a big step forward to create a loop where dissatisfaction was understood.

CW left the meeting.

PL suggested that the next report would benefit from including more detail on how many complaints become appeals, examples of complexity issues, examples of dissatisfaction, and where the data might take us.

ACTION: October Complaints and Appeals Biannual Report to include more detail on how many complaints become appeals, examples of complex issues, and examples of dissatisfaction.

The Board welcomed the chance to review the Complaints and Appeals Biannual Report.

SBA left the meeting.

6. Bothwell Street Exit

AM and MC joined the meeting

SC introduced Bothwell Street Exit noting that it had been a year since the Board had approved the move. AM and MC noted that given the planning that had been undertaken, they were confident and ready to make the move safely.

MC explained that work on the move had commenced in October 2021 and that most recently, the developer had reported that they were two months ahead of schedule. The office design had been socialised with colleagues and would move forward to procurement with the contractor.

AM highlighted that the data centre element of the move was underway and there were different transition options. AM advised that the new building would not be hosting a physical data centre and that disaster recovery would be at the forefront of all planning. There was a three-month contingency built into the planning, but the work was expected to be finished by September 2023.

The Board noted Bothwell Street Exit.

AM and MC left the meeting.

7. SLC Economic Analysis: Background

JB and EG joined the meeting.

PS introduced SLC Economic Analysis: Background, thanking JB and EG for their work on the paper. This was an initial report and feedback from the Board members was sought to understand where the analysis should focus. The purpose was to establish that SLC was delivering value for the taxpayer.

GP noted that SLC was delivering more for less and that focus on products that are the biggest drain on resource would be beneficial. AW highlighted that further segmentation by product and student type would be useful, along with a cost per application figure. AS noted that it would be useful to have the further details to show ministers the linkage between cost and complex policy.

ST noted that benchmarking would be helpful. MCC highlighted that the next step should be translating the analysis into plans for the future; a point also picked up by CM.

PL explained that a cost per application figure breakdown for frictionless applications against those that needed support would be useful.

PS highlighted that the aim was to bring next analysis paper to the November Board meeting.

ACTION: Next SLC Economic Analysis paper to come to the November Board meeting.

The Board noted the SLC Economic Analysis: Background.

JB and EG left the meeting.

8. Governance

8.1 Minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2020

The minutes of the SLC Board meeting held on 28 April 2022 were approved as a true and accurate record.

8.2 Matters arising from previous meetings

PL noted that MB 544 could now be closed as the appendix to the CFO report covered this action.

The matters arising document was approved as accurate.

8.3 Any other business

No additional business was raised.

8.4 Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting was confirmed as being at 10:00 am on Thursday 28 July 2022 by Teams with Executive hosting from the Glasgow Boardroom. PL noted that he may attend in person.

PL noted that the September Board meeting was being planned as physical, open to all invitees, and that SB would write out to gauge interest.

ACTION: SB to write out to Board invitees to gauge interest in physical attendance for the September Board meeting.

There being no other business the meeting ended at 14:20 pm.