1. Insert Title Tribal Education Benchmarking FE Total Financial Benchmarking financial benchmarking curriculum efficiency curriculum benchmarking learner mapping curriculum modelling

2. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Financial Benchmarking Presentation to; University of Essex Heads of Admin Sections Away Day 19 th January 2007

3. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Agenda  The Tribal Group  The Tribal Benchmarking Model  The Process  Realising the Benefits  Current HE Clients  Next Steps

4. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 About The Tribal Group  Listed plc, seven years old  Consultancy, support services and delivery  Markets: education, health and social care, local government, housing and regeneration, central government  Services: consultancy, technology, resourcing, property, communications and delivery  Group turnover of £275m  60 offices, c. 2,300 staff

5. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Company Background Benchmarking Education and Technology Consulting Communications Property Resourcing

6. © Tribal Education Limited 2007  Based in Nottingham (formerly Ben Johnson-Hill Associates)  Market leader for provision of benchmarking services within both Higher and Further Education  Products & services include;  Quantitative (incl. financial benchmarking)  Qualitative (incl. student experience benchmarking)  Curriculum planning and development  Value added Benchmarking

7. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Tribal Benchmarking Model  Flexible and scalable – benchmark all activity, from a single department up to whole institution  Analysis of data for any 12 month period – usually the most recent completed financial/academic year  Analysis of income, pay costs, staff numbers, pay levels, non-pay costs  Function driven model - identify full costs to deliver a function, regardless of delivery model

8. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Databank Structure Overall Institution Non Core Activity Catering Residences Others Non Operational Items Core Activity (Detailed Analysis) Academic Departments Teaching Activity Research & Commercial Activity Support Areas Library Services Information Technology Student ServicesRegistry Finance & Human Resources Marketing, Recruitment & Public Relations Institution Administration Estates

9. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Databank Structure All Activities Income Analysis (eg; per Weighted Student) Income Mix Cost Analysis (eg; per Weighted Student) Number of Staff Mix of Staff Salary Levels Non-Pay Costs Activity indicators (eg; SSR’s)

10. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Tribal Benchmarking Model (cont.) Key Benefits  Comparators - over 35% of HE Sector within the databank, and growing  Flexibility – bespoke output to reflect individual institution needs, within a standard framework  Consistent and accurate – experienced, objective team applying proven methodology to provide robust comparisons  Multiple benchmarks – chosen with institution to provide maximum value for each area of activity

11. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Tribal Benchmarking Model (cont.)  Comprehensive - uses 750 comparative measures  Timely – benchmarking data available in c. 10 weeks  Data – available from core systems and existing returns  Support & Admin Functions – robust benchmarks of each function that overcome degree of centralisation or devolvement

12. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Tribal Benchmarking Model (cont.)  Management involvement – consultation ensures data accuracy, detailed knowledge of institution and buy-in to process  Product development – relationship with clients informs changes to methodology and outputs, to reflect current issues and developments in the sector  Compatibility – with other sector datasets, eg; TRAC, Sconul, EMS

13. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Process  Project Initiation  Agree timescales  Agree benchmarking period  Discuss data requirements  Data collection & analysis  Financial  Staffing  Student Numbers  Estates Data  Library and Computing Statistics

14. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Process (cont.) Primary Datasets – analysed in detail by Tribal consultants  Financial data  Detailed trial balance for consolidated University, down to nominal / cost centre / project level  Provided by Finance direct from finance system  Supplemented by existing working papers  Staffing data  Full University staff list – all staff employed in benchmark period  Provided by Personnel & Payroll direct from core systems  Interviews with managers from every Department (academic and non-academic) to understand what each individual staff member did in the benchmark period

15. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Process (cont.) Secondary Datasets – measures of activity levels  Student Numbers  Total FTE’s, analysed by standard groupings (Home/Overseas, HEFCE/TDA/Health, academic cost centres, etc)  Estates Data  Total sq.m., analysed by room types (lecture rooms, offices, etc)  Library and Computing Statistics  Numbers of libraries, books, PC’s, etc

16. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 The Process (cont.)  Project Initiation  Data collection & analysis  Consultation  Report and Feedback Project usually completed in around 2 to 3 months

17. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Example output

18. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Example output

19. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Example output

20. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Example output

21. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Realising the Benefits  The Financial Benchmarking Report will contain a wealth of valuable management information that can be used for a multitude of different purposes; 1.To identify areas for immediate financial savings  Case study A London based University identified from their report that their staff recruitment costs were over twice the benchmark for London universities. The University commissioned an immediate review of this area and were able to identify savings of over £150k by renegotiating with suppliers and refining recruitment processes.

22. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Realising the Benefits (cont.) 2.To inform strategic reviews of resource allocation across the University  Case study A Midlands University believed that previous investment had been too focussed on academic areas to the detriment of overhead/support functions. Their benchmark provided clear evidence of this and demonstrated the imbalance in resources relative to other institutions. Decisions were taken to reallocate resources from academic areas to overhead/support areas over a planned period, and a subsequent benchmark clearly showed the impact of this rebalancing.

23. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Realising the Benefits (cont.)

24. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Realising the Benefits (cont.) 3.To identify areas for investment  Case study A Northern University identified from their 2003/04 benchmark report that their IT costs were around 30% (£1.8m) lower than the benchmark. Given the importance of IT to staff and students, the University recognised the need to increase investment in this area as a priority and have targeted resources to this area. They have recently undertaken a follow-up benchmark on 2005/06 data. The results show their costs remain below benchmark but the variance has fallen to c. 13%.

25. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Realising the Benefits (cont.) 4.To provide evidence for strategic decisions already taken  Case study A London based organisation had a number of strategic / operational alliances, involving delivery by partners, that they believed were financially ineffective. There was however no firm evidence to support this belief. Planning deadlines meant a decision on future delivery was required immediately, and management decided to bring large elements of this delivery in-house. They then commissioned a Tribal benchmark which quantified the financial performance of the alliances and clearly demonstrated a significantly higher contribution from in-house delivery, thereby justifying the decisions taken and supporting the ongoing strategy.

26. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Current HE Clients 1994 Group members; Goldsmiths Leicester Sussex Other institutions completing recent benchmarks; Anglia Ruskin, Aston, Canterbury Christ Church, Central England in Birmingham, Chester, City London, East London, Glamorgan, Lincoln, London Metropolitan, London South Bank, Napier, Nottingham Trent, Oxford Brookes, Queen Margaret, Edinburgh, Robert Gordon, Salford, Sheffield Hallam, Southampton Solent, Sunderland, West of England, Wolverhampton, Worcester

27. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Why use Tribal Benchmarking?  Our role is not to tell you whether you are right or wrong :– Our role is to tell you where you are different!

28. © Tribal Education Limited 2007 Next Steps - Questions and Way Forward