Transparency data

SLC Board meeting minutes: 30 September 2020

Published 11 June 2021

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)
• Simon Devonshire (SD) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• David Gravells (DG) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Charlotte Moar (CM)- Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• Stephen Tetlow (ST) - Non-Executive Director (by videoconference)
• David Wallace (DW) - Deputy Chief Executive Officer
• Jacqui Smillie (JS) - Chief Financial Officer (by videoconference)
• Gary Womersley (GW) - Company Secretary

1.2 Also in attendance

• Sinead O’Sullivan (SOS) - DfE (by videoconference)
• Ailsa Harris (AH) – DfE (by videoconference)
• Chris Williams (CW) - Welsh Government (by videoconference)
• Richard Leeman (RL) - NI Government (by videoconference)
• Stephen Campbell (SC) - CIO (by videoconference)
• Derek Ross (DR) - Executive Director of Operations (by videoconference)
• Bernice McNaught (BMC) - Executive Director of Repayments and Counter Fraud (by videoconference)
• Morven Spalding (MS) - Executive Director, People
• 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)
• Angela Donaldson (AD) - Head of Finance (for Item 5.2 only) (by videoconference)
• Gillian Walker (GWA) - Head of Business Services – People (for Item 5.7 only)
• Yvonne Dunne (YD) - Policy, Equality and Wellbeing Specialist (for Item 5.7 only) (by videoconference)
• Shona MacKay (SMK) - Solicitor (for Item 5.7 only) (by videoconference)
• Steven Darling (SDA) - Director of Repayments and Customer Compliance Strategy (for Item 5.8 only) (by videoconference)
• Lyndsey Gaja (LG) - Business Manager – Organisational Development (for Item 6.1 only) (by videoconference)
• Louise McWhinnie (LMW) - Programme Manager (for Item 6.1 only)
• Paul McShane (PMS) - Business Manager – Reward (for Item 6.1 only) (by videoconference)

1.3 Apologies

• Paul Kett (DfE)
• Gareth Allen (Scottish Government)
• Sinead Gallagher (Welsh 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.

PL noted that the meeting was being conducted by videoconference today and usual arrangements would apply.

There were no declarations of interest.

4. Chair Update

4.1 Update from the Chair on relevant matters

PL noted his and Paula Sussex’s recent, positive meeting with Michelle Donelan MP, Minister of State for Universities.

PL commented on the excellent Strategy CSR meeting that had taken place on 16 September. The meeting content had been well received and was now helpfully summarised in the paper written by JS on today’s agenda.

PL noted the email sent out yesterday by SB to notify the Board of the new Board Schedule. There would now be eight meetings per year and, once COVID restrictions allowed, four of these would be physical meetings. Board members had the opportunity to provide comment to SB.

5. Strategic items

5.1 CEO Report

*

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

5.2 COVID-19 Response

MC noted that as SLC moves from the Emergency Response phase to the Recovery and Stabilisation phase of our COVID-19 response, we have identified a need to sustain home working for the foreseeable future until significant progress is made in terms of vaccine development, test, track and trace, Antigen testing or availability of drugs to treat the effects of COVID-19. Working arrangements post COVID-19 would blend home and office working.

*

*

5.3 Interim Performance Pack

PS noted that although the new student funding applications figures had been rising steadily, this had now flattened out, ensuring that capacity was able to match demand. DR noted that this had not been a normal year and that even yesterday the number of applications had been just over 2,000, which was 500 more than the same time last year.

PS explained that processing timeliness was measured in calendar days, as could be seen in Lens 1. The intention was to set more targets with the Board in February to reflect what CEM was expected to deliver over the next financial year.

*

ST suggested that it would be helpful if the IPP contained figures from last year as a comparison wherever possible. ST then noted concern over the reduced number of compliant repayment customers, not just in performance terms but also in terms of optics. SD added that it would be good to know what the future plans were for non-compliant customers.

*

ST asked about the measuring of the impact that Evolve is having. BMC noted that within the Change Portfolio, from an assurance and governance point of view, the team would soon be moving to a new reporting tool.

*

CM asked about the challenge around the definition of data for CEM. PS noted that although data integration around CEM had been challenging it was now nearly a satisfactory conclusion. BMC agreed that it had been a multi-layered issue.

*

Board noted the CEO Report.

*

5.4 CFO Report

*

JS introduced the CFO Report and noted that as there had been no Board meeting in August the report included information for July. The key message was confidence in delivery of the work programme within the funding in the APRA letter. The challenge would be in recycling underspend.

JS noted that the SLC’s CSR bid had been submitted on 12 August followed by supporting business cases and evidence notes. This had been followed by the CSR Strategy Session on 16 September. Following the HMT announcement last week, SLC was waiting to find out what the period of the CSR would be. SOS noted that a three-year bid had been submitted and that a one-year settlement would be disappointing. HMT may not make the final decision until the last minute and it was unclear when this would happen.

AD explained that Finance had carried out year to date analysis on the expenditure burn rate. The actual spend against the budget had been reduced and it was clear that SLC Departments had not been spending in line with their plans. As a result, a comprehensive challenge process had been carried out and opportunities had been identified to recycle underspends.

AW asked if HLA’s would become a thing of the past. JS noted that whilst we will never get rid of HLA’s the process will continue to be more sophisticated. AD agreed that HLA’s will continue to reduce.

CM asked what consideration was being given to managing the budget for the year to ensure there is no underspend. JS noted that although it was challenging to manage, there were robust monitoring processes in place and that the numbers were reviewed monthly.

ST asked if the net increase per person in employee costs was high. Contractor costs are not included but it would be good to see a combined figure.

*

JS noted the new schedule of Board meetings that had been promulgated and agreed to provide an interim CFO Report in January when the Board we not due to meet. ACTION: CFO Interim Report to be sent by correspondence in January.

Board noted the CFO Report.

*

5.5 Tailored Review Update

*

DW introduced the Tailored Review Update and noted that although there had been good progress on some items, it would be beneficial to now apply target completion dates to those outstanding.

*

SOS noted that, in her view, the Tailored Review was current in the case of the SLC and therefore still relevant.

Board noted the Tailored Review Update.

*

5.6 Framework Document Review

*

DW introduced the Framework Document (FWD) Review and noted that the FWD was a DfE owned document but one which SLC clearly had a vested interest in. The Review had been discussed at the QSM and was seen as a rewrite rather than a review.

DW noted the interim arrangements in respect of Annex C(i) which covers government spending controls. DW noted that an interim position was required as the previous version had created problems for both SLC and DfE as it was silent on key elements of DfE’s overall approval processes. DW noted there was a need to change the multi-layered processes to align more to a principle of ‘approve once’ and ELT members could give examples of how multiple approvals were an unnecessary hindrance.

*

*

DW explained that while the multiple approvals were no doubt perceived as a way to manage risks, in fact they were creating other risks including slowing down activities. Going forward the intention should be to have in place a framework of approvals that helps SLC go faster but in a compliant manner. As part of the Board’s oversight role it may be beneficial to utilise them in a single approval capacity. PL noted that this could be an opportunity to more clearly define the role of the Board and that he and CM had agreed to work with the team on the FWD Review.

*

*

Board noted the Framework Document Review.

*

5.7 Diversity

*

MS introduced the Diversity item and noted that further to the original RPODC paper in March 2020, SLC had now successfully achieved Investors in Diversity (IiD) accreditation.

*

GWA noted that the National Centre for Diversity (NCD) had been chosen to provide accreditation as they were the only ones who could cover all of the EDI protected characteristics.

*

AH questioned the high nil response rate within SLC to the EDI staff questions. GW agreed that it was important to ensure that staff were comfortable to disclose this information. MS noted that staff may still be getting used to sharing data on Workday.

PL noted that it may be possible to compare data with DfE, and the Scottish and Welsh Governments. Further research was required and should be reported back to the Board. ACTION: Further research into EDI data and response rates to be made available to RPODC.

Board noted the Diversity item.

*

5.8 Customer Experience

*

DW introduced the Customer Experience item, noting that this is something that is being aligned to the overall thinking at SLC. In SLC, we want to reduce avoidable customer contact to reduce costs, improve reputation and make SLC a great place to work. We want to understand the customers’ needs and wants and then work as an organisation, enabled by technology, to meet these needs.

DG noted that this was an excellent paper on such an important topic and that it was incumbent on everyone (and not just front-line staff) understanding the part they play in such an important customer service organisation, hence important in making it part of the culture.

ST agreed with DG and set out some points of principle i) alignment to government strategy such as the importance of re-use of data to benefit the citizen ii) making sure ‘omni channel’ use is shaped to benefit SLC as well as the customer iii) developing a continuous understanding of what matters to customers and what impacts customers iv) if we use net promoter score as a form of measurement, being clear on why this would help us v) improving the ability of SLC to react to customers in real time and vi) everyone being responsible for delivering on the agreed customer experience.

MCC noted that this was a good paper and that the organisational design would be critical to guard against the CX team alone carrying the load and letting everyone else off the hook. MCC welcomed the notion of thinking through customer logic and noted that this is a good approach to take when considering from an internal and external perspective. MCC noted that she would like to see what the CX is for different customer groups including minority groups and was keen to see diverse membership on the customer board.

CM also welcomed this paper, mentioned stakeholder mapping and being clear on what CX would mean in partnership working.

AW agreed with everything that had been said, noting that we should use this work to ensure consistency of language and to help with the argument over the language of loans.

PS noted the organisation wide responsibility point, and that the need for infrastructure to be in place meant that there is a long way to go to really enable major CX change so we will move this at the right pace.

SD was keen to see more visibility on data and noted that the non-executives would be keen to help in any way possible.

PL thanked all for an important discussion and confirmed that an update would be brought back to the Board in around 6 months time.

*

6. Deep Dive

6.1 People

*

MS introduced the People Deep Dive and noted that there had been a lot good work done since she started with SLC in November 2018. This included Role of the Manager and the implementation of the low pay business case. The creation of the People Strategy in 2019 had set out the strategic direction of the People function but then had to be recalibrated as a result of COVID-19.

LMW talked to the slides, covering the relationship between the People Strategy and Evolve, and developments in the People Strategy.

*

LG talked to the Skills slides and noted that SLC Career Pathways are a practical way for staff to manage the stages of their career and achieve their career goals. The pathways align to the reward and competency frameworks. The career journey slide illustrated how a pathway might work for an individual with the project pathway, giving the example of a traditional role path in Change and Programme. LG noted that the New Emerging Talent Programme enrolments had risen year on year since FY 2018-19.

PMC talked to the Our Reward slides and noted that the SLC Total Reward deal consisted of six reward elements, including Blended Working and the SLC Bonus Scheme.

*

MS noted that in recent months the SLC as an employer brand had been positively received both internally with our employees via the recent wellbeing survey and also with external agencies like Investors in People and National Centre for Diversity. PL noted the encouraging progress on the SLC as an employer brand and that it would be useful to discuss again in future. ACTION: SLC brand as an employer to be discussed at a future RPODC meeting.

DG thanked MS and her team for all their work.

*

Board noted the People Deep Dive.

*

7. Papers for Noting / Reports from Committees

7.1 ARC Chair Report

CM introduced the ARC Chair Report.

PL noted that the SLC Annual Report and Accounts for FY 2019-20 had been submitted to Companies House.

CM noted that there had been a deep dive at the recent ARC meeting on controls. In November there would be a deep dive into the risk management policy.

Board noted the ARC Chair Report.

7.2 September QSM Minutes

No comment was made.

8. Minutes of Previous Meetings and Matters Arising

8.1 Minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2020

The minutes of the SLC Board meeting held on 30 July 2020 were approved as a true and accurate record.

8.2 Matters arising from previous meetings

The matters arising document was approved as accurate and no further questions were asked.

9. Any other business

*

9.1 David Gravells

PL noted that today marked the departure of DG from SLC. PL thanked DG for his valuable service as an SLC Non-Executive Director and also as Chair of RPODC.

9.2 Date of Next Meeting

10:00 am, Thursday 29 October 2020, The Boardroom, 100 Bothwell Street, Glasgow G2 7JD or remotely.

There being no other business, the Chair thanked everyone for attending and the meeting closed at 1:30 pm.