1. Attendees

1.1 Present

• Peter Lauener (PL) - Chair

• Chris Larmer (CL) - Chief Executive Officer

• Natasha Toothill (NT) - Non-Executive Director

• Gary Page (GP) - Non-Executive Director

• Charlotte Moar (CM)- Non-Executive Director

• Stephen Tetlow (ST) - Non-Executive Director

• Margaret Ollerenshaw (MO) - Non-Executive Director

• Stephen Marston (SM) - Non-Executive Director

• Janette Campbell (JCA) - Non-Executive Director

• Mandy Beech (MB) - Non-Executive Director

• David Wallace (DW) - Deputy Chief Executive Officer

• Audrey McColl (AMC) - CFO

• Gary Womersley (GW) - Company Secretary

1.2 Also in attendance

• Courtney Brightwell (CB) – DfE (by videoconference)

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

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

• Martin McCourt (MMCC) – Department for the Economy NI (by videoconference)

• Jason Dunham (JD) – CIO

• Jackie Currie (JC) – Executive Director, Business Operations

• Nauman Dar (ND) – Executive Director, Change, Data and Repayments

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

• Gillian Brydie (GB) - Executive Director, People

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

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

• Adam Treslove (AT) - Head of Corporate Affairs (for Item 6.1, 8.1 and 8.2 only) (by videoconference)

• Nicholas McDermott (NMC) – Chief of Staff (for item 6.1 only) (by videoconference)

• Scott McEwan (SMC) – Financial Performance and Analysis Manager (for item 6.2 only) (by videoconference)

• Alison Lindsay (AL) – Financial Accounting Manager (for item 6.3 only)

• Stephen Baker (SBA) – Director of Product, Policy and Customer Resolutions (for item 8.1 and 8.2 only)

• Rena McIntosh (RMC) – Manager, Independent Liaison Officer (for item 8.1 and 8.2 only)

• Victoria Smith (VS) – Independent Assessor (for item 8.1 and 8.2 only) (by videoconference)

2. Apologies

• Victoria Bowman (Scotland)

• Chris Williams (Wales)

• Jonny O’Callaghan (Northern Ireland)

• Margaret McMullan (SLC)

3. 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.        

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

PL welcomed everyone to the meeting especially the new Non-Executive Directors who each introduced themselves.  Apologies were noted from VB, CW, JOC and MM.

Declarations of interest

There were no new declarations of interest noted at the meeting in line with PL’s request, as new Non-Executive Directors had formally recorded their interests with SLC as part of their onboarding process.

5. Chair Update

5.1 Update from the Chair on relevant matters

PL explained that his annual review of Non-Executive Directors’ performance was complete.  His midyear review of CL was due to be reported to RemCo on 8 November, and his own review by the DfE Director General was due to take place on 11 November (post meeting note – now rearranged to 5 December). 

PL noted that he was due to attend the ALB Chairs Network in London on 7 November.  He advised the Non-Executive Directors that there was an open invitation for them to a meeting of ALB Non-Executive Directors at the DfE office in London on 4 December.

6. Strategic items

6.1 CEO Report

AT and NMC joined the meeting.

CL introduced the CEO Report, highlighting key points from his CEO risk opinion, as well as issues front of mind in relation to SLC’s customers, shareholders and colleagues.

*

*

*

Customer

CL was pleased with the performance and efforts of the wider team to deliver the best possible academic cycle despite headwinds. SLC had committed to seek to maintain key metrics relating to ‘ready to pay’ and customer satisfaction and had achieved that.   Similarly, despite challenges, repayments continued to perform very well. 

*

Responding to points raised by the Board on call drivers and digital engagement, CL noted that a large number of customers were still calling SLC to ask about progress with their application.  SLC had good digital engagement, with containment the key issue.  These were issues that SLC was looking to address through the Enable business case, as SLC was clear what it needed to do, but needed investment funding to be a simpler, modern, digital business.

*

Turning to DSA, CL noted that he and PL had updated Baroness Smith last week, on the positives and challenges SLC was managing. The service had been running for 8 months delivering the one stop shop for customers and creating critical stability for the sector. Processing backlogs and time to process were being actively managed, but CL was pleased to report a 14% increase in customer satisfaction compared to the same point last year.

*

SM commended the progress made by SLC.

*

Shareholder

CL noted the continued collaboration with DfE on preparation for the Spending Review and SLC’s Enable Business Case, on policy, and specifically on LLE following the announcement that the launch would be delayed for one year.

DR noted that there were three key reasons for the delay to the LLE launch – to allow Skills England to be established and take a view on skills priorities that could be met through LLE, to allow more time for sector preparation, and to allow Ministers to consider any further policy changes they may wish to make.  SLC had been aware of the decision to delay and had been working with DfE behind the scenes to advise on delivery implications.  PL noted that LLE was an issue that the Board would come back to at the November Strategy Session.

Colleague

CL noted that RemCo was meeting on 8 November, and that he would therefore not cover people issues in depth. 

*

Responding to a range of questions on employee engagement, CL noted that the pulse survey response rate was low but that this was not uncommon for a pulse as opposed to the annual survey.  CL outlined that colleagues were working hard to increase participation with the hope that engagement would increase from circa 70% to 80% for the annual survey.  CL agreed that the survey had to be worthwhile, but that time to take the survey was also a factor at SLC for frontline teams in particular.  In terms of drivers of satisfaction, CL noted that pay had improved but colleagues also felt the impact of flat-cash budgets which impacted their ability to deliver for customers, shareholders and fellow colleagues.  SLC was already thinking differently about how to approach the survey, having made the decision to move to an index approach rather than use the eNPS as the overall engagement score. 

GB briefly outlined the recent National Living Wage announcement, noting that she would consider the impacts on SLC at RemCo.  CL concluded by noting the second phase of the Pay Case had been implemented in October, recognising the significant effort made in getting the case across the line.

Performance

Finally, CL noted performance as set out in the CPD and, this month, the additional quarterly shareholder CPD which showed strong performance for all reporting APRA measures and for all shareholders. 

PL summed up by noting that the Board took assurance that SLC was managing a range of risks and issues effectively.  He noted a number of threads from the discussion, including the importance of SLC collecting every pound due in repayments.  PL reflected the huge benefits to customers and taxpayers that would be delivered through DSA reforms.

*

*

AT and NMC left the meeting.

6.2 CFO Report

SMC joined the meeting.

*

The paper then focused on the outcome of the mid-year review which incorporated an initial view of September actuals. 

*

AMC noted the announcement the previous day in the autumn statement around LLE and that the team were currently finalising the impact this would have on the forecast lifecycle cost for the Programme.  In addition to next steps in the paper, the team would also be assessing the impact of other elements of the Budget Statement which would impact SLC.

AMC explained that the current forecast positions assumed that Catalyst would realise its cash releasing target.  Catalyst had been established to identify, analyse and deliver strategic cost saving initiatives, with the aim of reducing SLC’s operating costs, building on the foundations established through the previous transformation programme.  The continued focus was on initiatives delivering cash-releasing benefits in FY24-25 whilst also developing a strong pipeline of opportunities for future year efficiencies and savings.     

*

MO asked whether SLC took steps to engage colleagues on budget announcements.  AMC noted that whilst there was no budget-specific note to colleagues, there was a budget-setting process within their own directorates, and there would also be the opportunity to cover this at ‘town hall’ meetings. 

*

*

In summary PL noted that the Board took assurance that SLC finances were being carefully managed in-year and planning was well advanced for FY25-26.  PL also noted that SLC had worked hard to transform budgeting systems and reporting and that it was evident in the focus and grip demonstrated via the CFO Report.

*

SMC left the meeting.

6.3 Annual Reports and Accounts

AL joined the meeting.

AMC introduced the Annual Report and Accounts 2023-24 (ARA) noting that good progress had been made. 

*

AMC recommended that the Board delegate final approval of the ARA to PL and CM.  CM highlighted that the ARA had been reviewed by ARC at their 9 July meeting and then again on 22 October where the Committee had recommended the ARA to the Board for approval subject to final edits. 

The Board delegated final approval of the ARA to PL and CM.

AL left the meeting.

6.4 ARC Annual Report 2023-24

CM introduced the ARC Annual Report 2023-24 noting that it was coming to Board alongside the ARA.  She summarised that overall, SLC had a robust three lines of defence model and that the Economic Crime Unit was in place and driving fraud savings. 

CM explained that the Internal Audit Report had provided moderate assurance that SLC maintained a sound system of governance, internal control and risk management.  Within this, ARC had noted substantial assurance around controls on Workday, environmental sustainability, and significant maturity of the second line of defence. 

*

In response to a question from JCA, CM noted that any additional audit fees from the NAO in relation to the extra work on the ARA had not yet been agreed, however internal audit costs had gone down due to the progress made with the three lines of defence model. 

*

The Board took assurance from the ARC Annual Report 2023-24.

7. Reports from Committees

7.1 ARC Chair Report

CM introduced the ARC Chair Report noting that a meeting had taken place on 8 October. The Internal Audit Progress Report had included substantial assurance on the process ELT had adopted to determine funding prioritisation; and ARC had taken assurance on the Annual Health and Safety Report, which was now recommended to the Board for approval.

*

*

In relation to scenario planning, MB noted that the significant UK civil unrest in the summer of 2024 might provide a case study to inform a future business continuity exercise.  DW agreed, noting the specific actions that SLC had taken to support colleagues during this period.

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

8. Directors’ Reports

8.1 Complaints and Appeals Bi-annual Report

AT, RMC, SBA, and VS joined the meeting.

DW introduced the Complaints and Appeals Bi-annual Report noting that the SLC process was as close as possible to the standards set by the Financial Conduct Authority for private sector financial services.  Formerly separate teams, Complaints and Appeals had been brought together to increase efficiency and capacity.  This had delivered improvements on SLA performance, with one remaining area to address, which was the time taken to compile cases for the Independent Assessor (IA).

SBA noted that in the past six months there had been overall reductions in the number of complaints, with comparable changes in both Apply to Pay and Repayments.  Progress had been made in terms of service improvements and, as a result of more and better triage, there was an increase in the number of cases closed.  SBA highlighted activity to reduce complaints, based on customer insight.  Response times for complaints overall had been quicker, with resource being deployed flexibly across teams to address backlogs.  Response times for appeals had come into SLA in June. 

*

The Board considered, given how resource hungry this area was, if it was possible to reduce complaints at source, the role of policy complexity, especially in relation to residency and the overall costs associated with the function for SLC.

DW explained that the team very successfully addressed the root cause of complaints, with significant year on year reductions in volumes stemming from joint work between SBA and JC’s teams.  He also confirmed that complexity was a key driver as was the differing rules on residency between the Home Office and those for applying for student finance.  SBA noted that efficient triage was key too.

*

MB noted that the SLC process was complex, and bespoke solutions were likely needed.  However, she noted that her organisation used AI effectively and suggested she share learnings with SLC.

ACTION – SBA and MB to have follow up discussion on using AI to support complaints handling

PL summed up the discussion noting that it was great to see significant improvements and the work that had delivered these improvements.  PL also noted that it would be helpful to arrange a lean-in on complaints and appeals next time the Board was in Darlington. 

ACTION: Complaints and Appeals leaning in to be arranged for June 2025 Board meeting in Darlington.

*

8.2 Independent Assessors’ Annual Report

DW highlighted that until three years ago the IA Annual Report had been part of the ARA.  IAs were now invited to attend the SLC Board to present their report which gave greater exposure and transparency to this important aspect of SLC’s customer service. 

VS introduced the Independent Assessors’ Annual Report noting that the IA felt valued by SLC and DfE, and that the support from the SLC team was outstanding.  A huge amount of work went into the files that were passed to the IA, with up to 120 appendices on the larger submissions.

VS highlighted two areas of note from the report: standard letters, that can cause customer frustration; and the increasing time it took to refer a case to the IA. 

*

DW reflected that complex student finance regulations were navigated by SLC colleagues who were paid minimum wage. 

In terms of the referral time to IA, DW explained that the team’s focus on getting the appeals cases to IA as a priority, as these cases could be life changing for customers.  Although the backlogs had been reduced, DW noted that the focus had to be on root cause.

*

In relation to standard letters, JCU explained that standard, system-generated letters required significant effort to change and were an aspect of the legacy environment.  There were two on-going strategic workstreams to address the issue, one in CX looking at customer notifications aligned to the Evidence Reduction Working Group, and the other looking at future-proofing service to ensure customers get the right information online.  In addition, there were tactical efforts to review letters to ensure fitness for purpose.  

*

PL thanked VS for the report and for the work done by the IA, asking that she convey the Board’s thanks to the wider IA team.  PL noted that the next Complaints and Appeals Report should note progress on standard letters, and the referral time to IA.

ACTION: Next Complaints and Appeals Annual Report to note the progress on standard letter and the referral time to IAs.

PL noted that DfE, supported by SLC, would take forward the work to recruit new IAs with a focus on ensuring that there is the experience needed within that group. Finally, PL noted that VS has recognised the support provided to the IA by SLC and thanked RMC for her work.

AT, SBA, RMC, and VS left the meeting.

9. Governance

9.1 Strategy Session Outline

PL highlighted the 27 November Strategy Session which would provide the opportunity to have some more informal conversations around the implications of the budget announcements, Enable, and SLC culture.  PL noted the current fluidity, with budgets and SR periods as yet not fully known.  PL encouraged attendees to contact HB with any asks for the agenda. 

9.2 Minutes of meeting held on 1 December

The minute of the 26 September meeting was approved as an accurate record.

9.3 Matters arising from previous meetings

The matters arising document was approved as accurate.

10. Any other business

The new Non-Executive Directors thanked the team for their warm welcome to SLC. 

10.1 Date of Next Meeting

The next formal meeting was confirmed as being at 10.00 a.m. on Thursday 28 November from the Glasgow Boardroom or by Teams.

There being no other business the meeting ended at 1.20 pm.