Transparency data

SLC Board meeting minutes January 2024

Updated 8 May 2024

1. Attendees

1.1 Present

• Peter Lauener (PL) - Chair

• Chris Larmer (CL) - Chief Executive Officer

• Natasha Toothill (NT) - Non-Executive Director

• Gary Page (GP) - Non-Executive Director

• Charlotte Moar (CM)- Non-Executive Director

• David Wallace (DW) - Deputy Chief Executive Officer

• Audrey McColl (AMC) - CFO

• Gary Womersley (GW) - Company Secretary

• Anne Rimmer (AR) - DfE (by videoconference)

• Patrick Curry (PC) – DfE (by videoconference)

• Tom Lee (TL) – DfE (by videoconference)

• Chris Williams (CW) - Welsh Government (by videoconference)

• Laura Irvine (LI) – Department for the Economy NI (by videoconference)

• Jason Dunham (JD) – CIO

• David Beattie (DB) – Executive Director, Change, Data and Repayments

• Derek Ross (DR) - Executive Director, HE and FE Reform

• Gillian Brydie (GB) - Executive Director, People

• David Thomson (DT) - Head of Operational Readiness (by videoconference)

• Helen Bogan (HB) – Head of Governance and Planning

• Margaret McMullen (MMC) – Director of Finance

2. Apologies

• Stephen Tetlow (ST) - Non-Executive Director

• Evelyn Aitken (EA) - SAAS

• Jonny O’Callaghan (JO) - NI

• Jackie Currie (JC) – Executive Director, Business Operations

3. 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.        

4. Chairman’s Opening Remarks / Directors’ Matters / Declarations of Interest

4.1 CHAIR’S OPENING REMARKS

PL welcomed all attendees to the Board which had been convened primarily to consider the LLE AO Assessment.

5. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

5.1 LLE

CL thanked Board members for their time and noted that while it was an AO Assessment that was being discussed, he welcomed Board input and support.  CL also noted the co-design approach to LLE and strong, ongoing collaboration with DfE.

CL confirmed that the AO Assessment remained in draft, as did the supporting documents and that the Board’s views would help in the process towards finalising and submitting the AO Assessment.   ELT and the Project Team had already fed in their views and CL felt that the Assessment was now in very good shape.  CL also noted that the AO Assessment was not a requirement, but something he had offered to support DfE in making informed decisions.

*  

Finally, CL confirmed that he and PL had agreed that SLC’s approach to LLE would be subject to committee oversight, and that SLC Governance was working up a Terms of Reference.  This would be agreed by CL and PL, alongside Stephen Tetlow as the Committee Chair.

DR gave a high-level overview of the Assessment and the supporting documentation noting the significant amount of work undertaken to complete the Proof of Concept work.  The Assessment was of the impact on SLC of delivering LLE by the DfE deadline of February 2025. 

*

*

*

DR noted that SLC was confident that it had the right plan to deliver LLE in terms of business architecture, alignment with the Technology Strategy and the organisation-wide strategic roadmap. 

*

*

*

*

*

*

PL noted that it was right for CL to make this AO Assessment at this time.

There was going to be an IPA Review at the end of February which would also support DfE’s decision-making. 

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

LI welcomed the recognition of the DAs in the AO Assessment.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

PL summed up the discussion by noting the exceptional work undertaken to produce the draft AO Assessment.  PL considered the key risks to be properly considered and the detailed planning to have been done effectively. 

*

*

*

*

*

Finally, PL noted that the solution moved SLC more quickly to the point of managing and reducing technical debt and that the risks and issues for DAs were properly flagged.  PL noted that the meeting would be formally minuted as it was important for this discussion to be recorded.

*

*

*

5.2 Finance

AMC noted that she had provided interim updates to PL and CM since the November Board and would provide the latest risk adjusted Admin and Programme budget figures. 

*

*

MM provided an update on LLE – both the impact on the current and future FYs.  Replanning was underway to ensure the programme hit the FY23-24 forecast, which included some category movements which were being discussed with DfE Finance. 

*

PL concluded the item by reaffirming the Board’s complete confidence in AMC and MM and that the Board supported the decisions SLC was having to make to land within tolerance.

6. AOB

PL noted that there were a number of items of AOB and asked CL to update the Board on the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) session to which SLC DfE and OfS had been invited.  CL confirmed that the NAO Report on student finance and franchising arrangements had been published that day and was the subject of the PAC which was scheduled for 26 February. 

*

*

PL asked AR to comment on DfE’s perspective.  AR noted that DfE welcomed the NAO Report and that it had helped to focus minds and would help drive progress on next steps. AR noted that SLC’s good work had been highlighted, albeit there was more to do, especially in relation to better use of SLC data. 

*

PL provided an update on activity to recruit three new NEDs, noting that interviews had begun. 

*

*

PL noted that the Board would next meet at the end of February.