Search and Governance Committee Minutes 12 September 2024
Search and Governance Committee Minutes 12 September 2024
Corporation and Committee Minutes- Search and Governance Committee Minutes 12 September 2024
Minutes of a Meeting of the Board of Leicester College Corporation:
Meeting of the Search and Governance Committee Minutes 12 September 2024
Present: Danielle Gillett (Chair), Jackie Rossa, Louisa Poole*, Sophie Strevens-Robinson, Shabir Ismail
In Attendance: Hazel Director of Governance and Policy, Matt Widdowson Governance and Policy Officer (Minutes)
*via Microsoft Teams
Declaration of Interest
1.1 The Chair declared an interest in item 4.
1.2 It was highlighted that Chan Kataria may have an interest in item 4 as he knew Vipal Karavadra.
1.3 The Acting Principal provided a brief update on the Principal and governors asked for their best wishes to be conveyed to her.
Apologies for absence
2.1 Apologies were received from Chan Kataria.
Minutes of the Last Meeting and Matters Arising
3.1 7.2.2 – comparisons had been made with the self-assessments from previous years. As most of the responses were positive, the comparison did not provide a great deal of information and any changes from ‘strongly agree’ to ‘agree’ might have been the result of the Corporation’s changing membership over the years.
3.2 The minutes of the meeting of 20 June 2024 were agreed as an accurate record and approved.
3.3 Confirmation of Written Resolutions
3.3.1 The Director of Governance and Policy confirmed that approvals had been received from Search and Governance Committee members for:
3.3.1.1 Approval of the minutes of the meeting held on 15 February 2024
3.3.1.2 Approval to reappoint Zubair Limbada from 1 August 2024 for an exceptional and final one-year term of office
3.3.1.3 Approval to reappoint Roger Merchant from 23 May 2024 for a three year term of office.
3.3.1.4 Approval of the revised governor visit form
3.3.1.5 Approval of the self-assessment questions for 2023/24
3.3.1.6 Approval of the workplan for 2024/25.
Succession Planning
4.1 The Director of Governance and Policy presented a paper on succession planning. The following points were highlighted.
4.1.1 The current membership stood at 16. There had been two resignations: Harmesh Manghra who had new commitments meaning he would not be able to continue as a governor; and student governor, Carol Goode who had decided not to return to the College.
4.1.2 The new President of the Student Union, Kyle James, would be taking on the role of one of the student governors, as he was entitled to do so.
4.1.3 The ethnic diversity of the board had declined due to recent resignations.
4.1.4 The Skills Matrix had not changed much, however under-represented areas still included estates, youth work, community work, and marketing. There were still sectors which were under-represented including Green Economy.
4.1.5 There were vacancies on all committees.
4.1.6 Following the recent recruitment exercise, there had been one applicant, Vipal Karavadra, who had been interviewed. The interview panel provided positive feedback and it was noted that the applicant had board experience and demonstrated a commitment to the city. As the applicant had a financial background, he would be a good addition to the Audit Committee. The applicant was also keen to engage with students so would be a good fit on the Student Liaison Committee.
4.1.7 A further round of recruitment was required. An application for funding had been made to the DfE who used Peridot.
4.1.8 It was highlighted that recruitment to the CSQI Committee was a priority.
Danielle Gillett left the meeting.
4.2 Extension of Danielle Gillett’s Term of Office
4.2.1 Danielle Gillett’s term of office was due to expire in June 2025. At this point, she would have served for three terms, which was the usual limit.
4.2.2 The Chair’s position would be due for re-election in December 2024, ready for a new term of office starting on 1 April 2025. Danielle Gillett had indicated that she would be willing to stand again.
4.2.3 Additional or extended terms of office may be approved in exceptional circumstances. In light of the Principal’s extended sick leave and interim arrangements, governors would be asked to approve an extension of one year until 13 June 2026.
4.2.4 A two-year extension had been considered but the Chair had been uncomfortable with that length of extension.
4.3 Governors made the following comments.
4.3.1 This had previously been discussed with governors as a possibility if the merger with SMB Group had gone ahead.
4.3.2 This would provide stability at governor level.
Danielle Gillett rejoined the meeting.
4.4 Governors made the following comments.
4.4.1 Had any progress been made with another suggested candidate? He would be added to the mix during the next recruitment round.
4.4.2 Would any recruitment carried out by Peridot be in addition to the College’s own efforts? It would.
4.4.3 What was the process for recruiting to fill the Vice Chair post on the CSQI Committee? There was the option to fill the vacancy after recruitment had taken place or ask a recruitment agency to look for someone who would be able to fill this post.
4.4.4 Could a current member of the CSQI Committee be asked to fill the post of Vice Chair? Lesley Giles would be a suitable candidate. The Director of Governance and Policy would discuss the CSQI Committee Vice Chair post with Lesley Giles.
4.4.5 It was important that Green Economy/Sustainability had been highlighted in the Skills Matrix as this was a priority area for the new government. The government’s “missions” should be considered when recruiting.
4.4.6 Did the Skills Matrix include governors who have resigned? The Skills Matrix only included current governors.
4.5 Governors:
4.5.1 Noted the current Board and Committee membership and Skills Matrix.
4.5.2 Approved the extension of Danielle Gillett’s term of office until 6 June 2026.
4.5.3 Approved the appointment of Vipal Karavadra for a three-year term of office.
4.5.4 Approved the approach to filling the current vacancies.
Governor Engagement
5.1 Governors’ Attendance and Engagement Report
5.1.1 The Director of Governance and Policy presented the Governors’ Attendance and Engagement Report. The following points were highlighted.
5.1.1.1 Attendance had been good, and the level of governor engagement had been better than previous years. Governor engagement had been appreciated by students and staff.
5.2 Work Undertaken by the Chair
5.2.1 The Chair presented the report of work undertaken by the Chair of the Corporation. The following points were highlighted.
5.2.1.1 Engagement with the AoC had been a useful source of training and support.
5.3 Feedback from Chair’s 1:1S
5.3.1 The Chair of the Corporation provided feedback from 1:1 meetings with governors. The following points were highlighted.
5.3.1.1 There were still a couple of 1:1 meetings to arrange.
5.3.1.2 Governors had provided positive feedback. The feedback from the new cohort of governors had highlighted the learning, support, and development within the role. Governors reported that they were confident in the role and appreciated the support they had received.
5.3.1.3 Governors were also keen to know about opportunities to get involved.
5.4 Governors made the following comments.
5.4.1 The committees with smaller memberships have a lower turnout. For smaller committees, each individual member represented a greater proportion of the membership.
5.4.2 Habitual non-attendance would be addressed by the Corporation Chair and Director of Governance and Policy. However, this had not been an issue in 2023/24.
5.5 Governors noted the Governor Engagement for 2023/24.
Committee’s Annual Report to Corporation
6.1 The Director of Governance and Policy presented the draft Search and Governance Committee’s Annual Report to Corporation. The following points were highlighted.
6.1.1 There was an expectation that the Search and Governance Committee would produce an annual report for the Corporation.
6.1.2 There was no recruitment to report for 2023/24 as there had been a significant round of recruitment during the previous year.
6.1.3 Governors who had resigned during the previous year had done so due to other commitments, including work. This included Zoe Allman who had left due to her conflicts of interest between her roles with De Montfort University and Leicester College.
6.2 Governors made the following comments:
6.2.1 There needed to be more detail on recruitment. Further explanation could be added to highlight that the recruitment process for this year was started in 2023/24.
6.2.2 Could it be explicitly stated that governors left due to external factors? This would be included.
6.3 Governors approved the draft Annual Report, subject to the amendments agreed, for submission to the Corporation.
Committee and Corporation Self-Assessment
7.1 The Director of Governance and Policy presented the results of the self-assessments for Search and Governance Committee and Corporation. The following points were highlighted.
7.1.1 Governors were able to identify and evidence impact.
7.1.2 The focus for this year would include working to the new Code of Practice, recruitment, and awareness of intended impact.
7.1.3 The request for simpler, shorter papers emerged as a theme. This would be considered later in the year and involved striking a balance between governors who preferred longer, more detailed papers, and those who did not. There may be some work to be done around simplifying cover sheets and including executive summaries.
7.1.4 The self-assessment results highlighted the need for more focus on sustainability. Neil McDougall would be taking on the link governor role for sustainability.
7.1.5 Governor engagement with stakeholders would improve over time as more governors came into the College. This year’s stakeholders’ event would be moved to later in the academic year.
7.1.6 The issue over a lack of clarity around delegation may be due to a misunderstanding of the question.
7.1.7 Training and development suggestions would be added to the action plan.
7.2 Governors made the following comments.
7.2.1 Governors had previously discussed committee papers. There was an issue with repetition of information rather than the length of reports. Noted.
7.2.2 Presenters at meetings should make more use of dashboards. The CSQI Committee may be a good committee to start moving more towards using dashboards.
7.2.3 The feedback from Search and Governance Committee members and Corporation was aligned, especially around sustainability. This should inform future recruitment.
7.2.4 Addressing any skills gaps was a constant exercise. Having good information about skills and diversity helped governors to make good decisions when recruiting.
7.2.5 Some of the feedback around stakeholders was quite interesting and might relate to issues around the College’s website. The website was quite difficult to navigate when looking for information about careers or stakeholders. A new website would be going live on 1 October 2024. Once the website was live, governors could be given a demonstration.
7.2.6 It would be useful to have a web link which could be provided to potential stakeholders. There might be some benefit in a session where the Marketing team could gain feedback from governors. The new website had been informed by data analytics including how the previous website was used by stakeholders.
7.2.7 Colleges tended not to have any information on their website about their physical location. This is one of the most basic pieces of information. Governors could look at the new website when it went live to see if there is any information which they thought was missing.
7.3 Governors noted the process and outcomes of the Committee and Corporation self-assessments.
Draft Governance SAR and Governance Improvement Action Plan
8.1 The Director of Governance and Policy presented the draft governance SAR and improvement action plan. The following points were highlighted.
8.1.1 The draft governance SAR and improvement action plan was in a similar format to previous years and included some of the feedback from the Ofsted report.
8.1.2 Some of the areas for improvement would need to be reflected in the College SAR and QIP.
8.1.3 The suggested action plan included ongoing actions due to the turnover of the governing body.
8.1.4 Link governor engagement would be themed around their particular area.
8.1.5 Work on the dashboard would take place later in the academic year and be dependent on capacity.
8.1.6 Another External Review of Governance would need to be commissioned.
8.2 Governors made the following comments.
8.2.1 The intended impact ought to be measurable and include information on the impact on the College as a whole. Governors needed to know what difference they were making. It was difficult to measure the impact of a governing body. Due to governors working at such a high level it was difficult to correlate this directly to outcomes.
8.2.2 Governors have provided challenge on certain issues. If these issues were then resolved, while it could not be attributed directly to governors, a link between the challenge and any changes could be evidenced. Perhaps some examples of the responses to challenge could be used. The Student Liaison Committee was a good example of where issues were raised directly with governors and then dealt with.
8.2.3 The kind of questions which should be considered may include “What would it look like if 100% of governors were well informed about the College? Would they be able to engage in informed debate?”
8.2.4 The Self-Assessment survey question: “How do you know/what is the evidence?” is useful. It requires some thought about what the evidence is. Noted
8.2.5 How often was this plan reviewed? The action plan was reviewed at every meeting.
8.2.6 How did the Search and Governance Committee know about governors who were not members of this committee? A lot of the actions were for the Director of Governance and Policy to follow up on and action. There was also the possibility of running an in-year survey of governors.
8.2.7 Did the Corporation see this action plan? The governance SAR and action plan would go before Corporation.
8.2.8 It was important that the committee was seen to be ‘closing the loop’ on these actions. The Director of Governance and Policy would look for any examples of evidence which had come out of the self-assessment process.
8.3 Governors agreed the Draft Governance SAR and Governance Improvement Action Plan, subject to the amendments agreed.
Review of Confidential Items Filed in 2023/24 and Legacy Items
9.1 The Director of Governance and Policy presented a report on confidential items filed in 2023/24. The following points were highlighted.
9.1.1 It was good practice to confirm whether items were still required to be treated as confidential.
9.1.2 Most confidential items were associated with the recovery plan, although papers related to the senior pay were also included.
9.1.3 The documents which were recommended to be retained as confidential related to commercially sensitive information or personal information.
9.2 Governors approved the recommendations for retaining or releasing the confidential status of each paper.
Any Other Urgent Business Notified to the Chair Prior to the Meeting
10.1 Although the next meeting would be on 23 January 2025, it was noted that an earlier meeting might need to be called to discuss recruitment.
Action Record
11.1 Governors noted the Action Record.
Freedom of Information / Data Protection Review 2023/24
12.1 Governors noted the Freedom of Information / Data Protection Review for 2023/24.
Use of College Seal 2023/24
13.1 Governors noted the use of the College Seal during 2023/24.
Dates and Times of Future Meetings
23 January 2025
15 May 2025