Summary notes of the Executive Committee held on 16 March 2005
- Strategic investment: summary of agreed priority areas
A summary of investments in agreed priority areas was
received. This was to be viewed as the first tranche of investment
funding.
- Proposal to transfer Chemistry students from Exeter
to Bath within a sustainable strategic context
The HEFCE had committed to fund transfer of 80
places, and it was hoped that funding would also be secured for an
additional 30 places, bringing the total up to the 110 places requested
in the original bid. Formal offer letters would now be sent to relevant
Exeter students.
The Committee expressed its gratitude to Professor
Peter, the staff of the Department of Chemistry, the Registrar and
the Executive Assistant, for all the work they had undertaken in drafting
the successful bid document and in making other preparations.
- HEFCE recurrent grant for the 2005/06 academic year
The Director of Finance reported that the University's
grant settlement had increased by a total of 9.3 percent when compared
to last year. Funding for teaching had increased by 2.6 percent and
by 22.0 percent for research.
As a result of changes in the HEFCE funding methodology,
it had been predicted that the University would fall outside the +/-
5 percent contract range. Although the HEFCE had made an adjustment
in funding to compensate for this effect, over-recruitment of H/EU
students in 2005/06 could still push the University outside the contract
range, with consequential risk of claw back of funding from the HEFCE.
Accordingly, whilst it remained important for academic departments
to meet their admission targets, it was also essential for these targets
not to be exceeded in respect of H/EU students. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor
(Learning and Teaching) and the Executive Assistant were preparing
guidance to this effect for distribution to Admission Tutors, tailored
according to the particular recruitment conditions of disciplines/programmes.
This guidance would be copied to Deans of Faculty/Head of School.
In spite of this specific issue, the Committee
noted that the University's overall settlement represented one of
the largest increases in real terms among English HEIs.
Agreed: That the Registrar would
arrange for a briefing note on the grant settlement to be presented
to Senate and Council.
Top
of page
- HEFCE Capital Projects
The Deputy Vice-Chancellor gave an oral report
on the priorities for allocation of the University's HEFCE capital
funding for the period 2006 to 2008. Completion of the 4 West project
remained the key priority. Other possible projects had emerged as
part of the strategic investment initiative and during the current
Annual Planning Cycle. Another pressing area was the maintenance backlog
affecting many University buildings.
It was proposed that a comprehensive list be
produced of possible projects against the available funding, in order
to determine the full range of priorities and the extent of investment
for each particular priority. This list would be reviewed by the Monday
Morning Management Group, before consideration by the Committee at
its meeting in April. A final list of projects had to be submitted
to the HEFCE by 30 May.
The Committee noted that it would be useful to determine
which of the projects might also be classified as a priority for development
fund-raising. This could then be factored into the final consideration.
- University Research Centres
The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) reminded the
Committee that had previously decided that the responsibility for
reviewing University Research Centres (URC) should be devolved to
Boards of Studies, which would then report on their conclusions to
the University Research Committee. Following this decision, the University
Research Committee had considered and approved a standard template
for use in reviews and a revised version of the review guidelines.
These documents were now presented for consideration by the Committee.
The standard template was designed both to assist URC directors in
preparing for a review, and to provide Boards of Studies with the
range of information required for them to make their assessment. It
also sought to collect the kind of information about research outputs
and metrics that could be reused in the next RAE, thereby avoiding
duplicate requests for the same material. Some further revisions to
the guidelines were required.
The Committee noted that question 2 in the template
should be made more precise by referring to the number of articles
published in journals, as distinct from the number of journals produced.
Agreed: That, subject to fine-tuning
by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research), the review standard template
and guidelines could be approved.
- Proposed amendment to the terms of reference of theUniversity Research
Committee
The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)
informed the Committee that the devolution of the responsibility for
the review of University Research Centres necessitated a change in
the terms of reference of the University Research Committee. It was
therefore proposed that Term of Reference number 9 be amended to read:
To recommend the establishment and disestablishment
of Research Centres to Senate and Council and to review the performance
of existing Centres on a three-year cycle.
Agreed: That the amended Term
of Reference could be approved.
Top
of page
|
VC's
Office | University | Search
| News | A-Z
Index | Contact VC's Office 
