• Section 1 - Preamble
• Section 2 - Purpose
• Section 3 - Scope
• Section 4 - Policy
• Section 5 - Procedures
• Purpose of reviews
• Scheduling of reviews
• Targeting of Reviews
• Review Terms of Reference
• Self-review
• Review Panels
• Stakeholder Feedback
• Review Panel Meetings
• Review Reports and Responses
• Quality Improvement Reports
• Information and Documents
• Costs
• Section 6 - Definitions

Section 1 - Preamble

(1) This Procedure is effective from 24 May 2023.

Section 2 - Purpose

(2) This Procedure prescribes the process for the University to conduct quality reviews for the purpose of quality assurance and improvement.

Section 3 - Scope

(3) This Procedure may be applied to University activities and structures where the Vice-Chancellor forms the view that a quality review is appropriate.

Section 4 - Policy

(4) This Procedure is pursuant to the Quality Management policy.

Section 5 - Procedures

Purpose of reviews

(5) The University conducts quality reviews in accordance with this Procedure to:

1. assure itself of:
   1. the quality of its operations
   2. compliance with relevant legislation
   3. alignment with the University's strategic plan
2. identify areas of excellence, potential and opportunities for improvement.

Scheduling of reviews

(6) The Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor Academic will provide the Vice-Chancellor with a proposed schedule of quality reviews for approval annually.

(7) The schedule of quality reviews will assure compliance with the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 and satisfy review-related re-registration requirements set by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency.

(8) The Vice-Chancellor may request that a quality review of any other area or matter be conducted in accordance with this Procedure at any time.

Targeting of Reviews

(9) The targeting of quality reviews is informed by consideration of:

1. regulatory necessity, including but not limited to the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021
2. identified risks and University risk appetite
3. proportionality
4. internal audit schedule
5. University strategic objectives.

(10) A targeted approach to quality reviews will ensure:

1. investment in Reviews is proportionate to issues in need of review
2. duplication with other quality assurance processes is minimised.

Review Terms of Reference

(11) The terms of reference for quality reviews are determined by the Vice-Chancellor and drafted as appropriate to the scope and purpose of the review. Due consideration will be given to the following:

1. clarity of strategies relevant to the activities and/or structures under review
2. effectiveness of the leadership, governance and management relevant to the areas and/or structures under review
3. efficiency of the areas and/or structures under review
4. suitability of quality assurance and quality improvement processes relevant to the areas and/or structures under review
5. emergent needs relevant to the areas and/or structures under review
6. progress against relevant agreed actions arising from earlier quality reviews
7. identifying a responsible officer for the areas and/or structures under review.

Self-review

(12) The responsible officer for an area and/or structure under review will oversee the preparation of a self-review report.

(13) The self-review report will give due consideration to:

1. relevant alignment with approved terms of reference
2. valid evidence of performance relevant to the terms of reference
3. identifying opportunities for improvement
4. identifying areas of excellence
5. progress on relevant agreed actions arising from relevant quality assurance processes
6. brevity, with an expectation that written reports ordinarily be no longer than ten pages of plain text, including where appropriate, up to 15 pages of appendices of relevant data.

Review Panels

(14) The Vice-Chancellor  approves the establishment of review panels in accordance with the following princiles:

1. the number of panelists is appropriate for the terms of reference but will not ordinarily be comprised of more than five members
2. review panels will ordinarily be chaired by a person who is external to the University and who possesses expertise relevant to areas and/or structures under review and terms of reference
3. review panel members who are University staff will not be drawn from the area and/or structures under review.

(15) Self-review reports will be made available to the Review Panel with sufficient time to adequately prepare for review panel meetings, ordinarily at least six weeks before any panel meetings.

(16) The Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor Academic appoints secretariat support the review panel to carry out the review. Secretariat support is not considered to be part of the review panel.

Stakeholder Feedback

(17) Terms of reference and self-review reports will be made available to stakeholders with sufficient time for the provision of meaningful feedback to the review.

1. University staff and students will ordinarily have access to the terms of reference and self-review report at least four weeks before any panel meetings.
2. Where relevant, external stakeholders may also be provided with the terms of reference and self-review report.

(18) Responses to the self-review report and terms of reference may be provided via identifying and anonymous non-identifying feedback mechanisms.

(19) All responses to the review will be treated as confidential and anonymous, and as far as permitted by law, the review panel will not be provided with information that identifies respondents unless requested by the respondent.

(20) Review secretariat support undertakes an analysis of responses and provide a synthesis of this analysis to the panel. The review panel will also be provided with access to de-identified responses, and where requested, identified responses.

Review Panel Meetings

(21) The review panel will meet (face to face or via video or teleconference) at times and locations appropriate for the review.

(22) The review panel will ordinarily meet in advance of stakeholder interviews to discuss the self-review report, stakeholder feedback, preliminary themes, and plans for stakeholder interviews.

(23) The secretariat for the review panel will

1. develop a program of review meetings, including stakeholder interviews
2. provide analysis support to inform review themes and panel discussion
3. draft the panel review report under the guidance of the review panel.

(24) Review 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, and unless otherwise requested, are treated as confidential.

Review Reports and Responses

(25) As soon as practicable following the review panel meetings, the panel will prepare a report setting out review findings and recommendations. 

(26) The review report will:

1. be evidence based and draw upon:
   1. the self-review report
   2. stakeholder feedback
   3. stakeholder panel interviews
   4. relevant information collected relevant to the review
2. identify areas of strength and opportunities for improvement
3. include recommendations for action
4. be succinct, and ordinarily no longer than ten pages of plain text.

(27) The panel review report is provided to the responsible officer for areas and/or structures under review and the Vice-Chancellor.

(28) The responsible officer for an area under review and or the Vice-Chancellor may request minor amendments to the review report for reasons including but not limited to factual inaccuracy. Any amendments:

1. must be to the satisfaction of the review panel.
2. must not be inconsistent with expectations set out in clause 26.

(29) The Vice-Chancellor approved the final report for publication on the University Quality and Standards website. The review report may be withheld from publication at the discretion of the Vice-Chancellor.

(30) The final review report (whether published or withheld from publication)is made available to the responsible officer for the areas and/or structures under review.

(31) The responsible officer for the areas and/or structures under review will develop written responses to recommendations for consideration by the Vice-Chancellor.

(32) The Vice-Chancellor approves the responsible officer’s written responses to review recommendations for publication on the University Quality and Standards website. Responses to review recommendations may be withheld from publication at the discretion of the Vice-Chancellor.

(33) Review reports and authorised responses from the area under review will be made available where relevant for consideration by the Academic Board and the Audit and Risk Committee.

(34) The responsible officer for areas and/or structures under review will ensure that agreed responses to review recommendations are included within relevant planning and quality assurance processes.

Quality Improvement Reports

(35) Annual reports on progress in implementing agreed actions are provided by the Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor Academic to the University Executive, and where relevant to the Academic Board and the Audit and Risk Committee.

Information and Documents

(36) Any 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).

(37) Any 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 16/07.

Costs

(38) The costs of a review of an area under review are met by the responsible officer of the relevant area.

Section 6 - Definitions

(39) For the purpose of this  Procedure:

1. Areas and/or structures under review: means a formal structure of the University such as a Faculty, Institute, Division, Department or Unit, or a form of activity undertaken by the University such as admission, enrolment, teaching, research or administration that may span multiple formal structures.
2. Responsible officer: an internal Deakin appointment who may be an Executive member, Senior Leader or Leader for whom the areas and/or structures under review fall within their jurisdiction and who is the primary point of contact for the review.