Precis | History | Print Friendly
Adding Bookmark..........
This procedure prescribes the process for the University to conduct formal reviews for the purpose of quality assurance and improvement.

Responsible Officer: Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Integrity)
Implementation Officer: Director, Quality and Standards

First Approved by:
Academic Board on 26 March 2013

Amendments Approved by:
Vice-Chancellor on 8 December 2014
(amended version)




Reviews Procedure


This procedure was approved by Academic Board on 26 March 2013 and incorporates all amendments to 8 December 2014.
This document is pursuant to the Quality Management Policy.
SCHEDULES

This procedure has four schedules:
Schedule A: Organisational Areas of Activity Regularly Reviewed under this Procedure
Schedule B: Composition of Review Panels
Schedule C: Standard Terms of Reference for Reviews
Schedule D: Performance Report Appendices

PURPOSE

This procedure prescribes the process for the University to conduct formal reviews for the purpose of quality assurance and improvement.

SCOPE

This procedure applies to formal quality reviews by the University of organisational areas and areas of activity (as defined) or any other matters as directed by the Vice-Chancellor. This procedure does not apply to evaluations conducted by:

  • the Internal Audit function
  • areas of the University as part of their own ongoing arrangements for ensuring continuous quality improvement.
DEFINITIONS

Area of activity: group of related services, activities and processes which aim to support the achievement of the University’s goals.

Organisational area: Faculty, Institute involved in teaching and/or research, School, Division, Unit, University Library, Deakin International and DeakinPrime.

PROCEDURE
Purpose of reviews
1The University conducts formal reviews of organisational areas and areas of activity in accordance with this procedure to:
a)assure itself of:
i) the quality of its operations
ii) compliance with the Higher Education Threshold Standards and other relevant external requirements (as appropriate)
iii) alignment with the University’s strategic plan
b)identify areas of excellence, potential and opportunities for improvement.
2The review process set out in this procedure is aligned to the University’s continuous quality improvement cycle: Plan, Implement, Review, Improve.
3Before an area of the University initiates a review as part of its own ongoing arrangements for ensuring continuous quality improvement it must notify the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Integrity) (PVC PI) (or nominee) who will:
a)advise whether the review should be managed by the Office of the PVC PI in accordance with this procedure and
b)if not, provide guidance on how to conduct the review to ensure the best possible outcome for the area and the University.
4Where a review under this procedure is also intended to meet external regulatory requirements, the process set out in this procedure may be adapted to meet those requirements. In such a case, it is the responsibility of the area concerned to ensure that external requirements are satisfied.
Timing of reviews
5Reviews of Faculties, Institutes engaged in teaching and/or research and areas of activity specified in Schedule A: Organisational Areas and Areas of Activity Regularly Reviewed under this procedure are carried out under this procedure generally every seven years in accordance with a schedule approved annually by the Vice-Chancellor. Unscheduled reviews of these organisational areas or areas of activity may also be carried out at any time at the request of the Vice-Chancellor.
6The Vice-Chancellor may request that a review of any other area or matter be conducted in accordance with this procedure at any time.
Terms of reference for reviews
7The terms of reference for reviews are determined by the Vice-Chancellor (or nominee) with reference to the standard terms of reference set out in Schedule C: Standard Terms of Reference for Reviews, adapted as appropriate depending on the scope and purpose of the review.
Review panels
8The Vice-Chancellor appoints review panels in accordance with Schedule B: Composition of Review Panels.
9The Vice-Chancellor seeks advice from relevant members of the Executive regarding suitable external panel members.
10The PVC (PI) appoints a secretary to support the review panel to carry out the review in accordance with this procedure.
Performance reports
11To inform each review, a performance report is prepared by:
a)an organisational area under review or
b)in the case of the review of an area of activity, a group of staff with appropriate expertise from relevant organisational areas approved by the Vice-Chancellor, led by a member of the group nominated by the Vice-Chancellor.
12Performance reports:
a)address the approved terms of reference
b)provide relevant data and other evidence of performance (with particular reference to the indicators in relevant University plans)
c)identify areas of excellence, potential, initiatives in progress and opportunities for improvement
d)include progress on implementation of outcomes from previous reviews
e)are up to 30 pages in length in the main body for reviews of Faculties and large organisational areas OR up to 20 pages in length in the main body for reviews of other organisational areas and areas of activity
f)include appendices as specified in Schedule D: Performance Report Appendices
13Performance reports are sent to the secretary of the review panel at least four weeks before the review panel meets and are circulated to panel members, who may request additional information.
Submissions
14At least four weeks before the review panel meets, the secretary of the review panel:
a)makes the performance report available to:
i) all University staff and
ii) where relevant, students and other key stakeholders
b)calls for written submissions from the people to whom the report has been made available, advising them that, unless otherwise stated, submissions will as far as permitted by law be treated as confidential to encourage full and frank disclosure of information and opinion as part of the University’s internal deliberative processes.
15The secretary of the review panel provides submissions to the review panel at least one week before the review meetings take place.
Review meetings
16The secretary of the review panel develops a program of review meetings, in consultation with the Chair, relevant senior managers (as appropriate) and the Office of the PVC (PI), to inform the assessment of the organisational area of area or activity against the terms of reference.
17Review meetings are conducted in private and any oral submissions, responses and comments made by those meeting with the panel, as far as permitted by law, are treated as confidential to encourage full and frank disclosure of information and opinion as part of the University’s internal deliberative processes.
Reports and responses
18As soon as practicable following a review, the panel develops a written report documenting the outcomes of the review and provides the report to the Office of the PVC (PI). The report:
a)is developed with reference to the performance report, written submissions, oral feedback received during the review meetings and any additional information requested by the panel
b)identifies areas of strength and opportunities for improvement
c)includes formal recommendations for action to address areas requiring improvement.
19The responsible Executive/s are invited to respond in writing to the panel’s report and in preparing the response they should consult with the relevant area(s) which were covered by the review.
20In the case of a review of an organisational area involved in teaching and/or research or an academic activity, the Academic Board is invited to respond in writing to the panel’s report, taking into account the Executive response/s.
21The Vice-Chancellor responds to each review taking into account the panel’s report, the Academic Board’s advice (where appropriate) and the Executive response/s. The Vice-Chancellor’s response addresses each recommendation and includes follow-up actions as appropriate.
22The outcomes of the panel review and the Vice-Chancellor’s response to the review are reported to the Academic Board (as appropriate) and the Audit and Risk Committee of Council at the discretion of the PVC (PI) in the case of reviews of high risk areas.
Quality improvement reports
23Actions agreed by the Vice-Chancellor to address recommendations are monitored by the Office of the PVC (PI) and progress is reported in the next review of the organisational area or area of activity, or as otherwise requested by the Vice-Chancellor or the Audit and Risk Committee of Council.
24Annual reports on progress in implementing agreed actions are provided by the Office of the PVC (PI) to the Executive.
Information and documents
25Any personal information or health information collected, held or used by the University during reviews will be dealt with in accordance with relevant legal requirements including the Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014 (Vic), Health Records Act 2001 (Vic) and the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic).
26Any documents generated during reviews will be dealt with in accordance with the Public Records Act 1973(Vic) and General Retention & Disposal Authority for the Records of Higher and Further Education Institutions, Public Record Office Standard PROS 02/01.
Costs
27The costs of a review of an organisational area are met by the area being reviewed.
28The costs of a review of an area of activity are met by organisational areas as determined by the Vice-Chancellor.
ASSOCIATED INFORMATION

Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic)
General Retention & Disposal Authority for the Records of Higher and Further Education Institutions
Health Records Act 2001 (Vic)
Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014 (Vic)
Public Record Office Standard PROS 02/01
Public Records Act 1973 (Vic)
Quality Management Policy
Schedule of Reviews



Printed copies of this document may not be current. Please refer to The Guide for the most recent version.
Deakin University 2015