Skills and Engagement Advisory Board Minutes of the Seventh Meeting MRC Offices, London Meeting Date: 14 November 2016 Present: Professor Carole Mundell (CM - Chair) University of Bath Professor Seb Oliver (SO) University of Sussex Professor Colin Pulham (CP) University of Edinburgh Professor Martin Hendry (MH) University of Glasgow Anu Ojha (AO) National Space Centre Professor Andrew Randewich (AR) Atomic Weapons Establishment Dr Richard Burguete (RB) National Physical Laboratory Yvonne Baker, STEM Learning Ltd Apologies: Professor Pete Clarke (PC) University of Edinburgh In attendance: Dr Janet Seed (JS) - STFC Dr Derek Gillespie (DG) STFC Michaela Simpson (MS) STFC (In attendance for Item 8) Philip Amison (PA) - STFC (In attendance for Item 8) Dr Emily Swaine (ES - Secretary) OFFICIAL Page 1 of 5
1. Welcome 1.1. The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting. Apologies were noted from Pete Clarke, the new cross member with Science Board. 2. Minutes and Actions 2.1. Minutes of the meeting on 8 July 2016 were approved. 2.2. Open actions from previous meetings were discussed. Actions that were incomplete were discussed and SEAB updated them, as appropriate. 3. Introduction to new SEAB members 3.1. A warm welcome was extended to the new Board members, AB, RB and SO (new Chair of ETCC), and a round table of introductions was carried out before new Board members outlined their career paths to date and interest in the national skills agenda. 4. Updates 4.1. STFC 4.1.1. Paper SEAB 16.07.14 provided SEAB with an STFC-wide context to developments that have happened since the last meeting and JS drew attention to paper IP 12-16 which should provide useful general background information about STFC s activities, especially for new Board members. Key items of discussion were: 4.2. Council 4.1.1.1. PC is the new SEAB/Science Board cross-member and will play a valuable role linking the PPAN and Skills Balance of Programme reviews. 4.1.1.2. STFC has proposed several capital projects for consideration in Autumn Statement funding opportunities, although it was noted that there is no guarantee of additional funding being secured. The Central Laser Facility has been awarded extra capital by BEIS for financial year 2016/17. 4.1.1.3. STFC has been awarded an additional 9m over 4 years from the Newton Fund with a significant component relating to skills initiatives. JS clarified that the bidding process was managed by BEIS, and STFC worked with the community (through targeted meetings) and in-country Newton teams to make a strategic selection of projects for submission. STFC will continue to seek opportunities to secure Newton funding and is aligning these activities with the GCRF. It was noted, however, that the necessity to secure match funding from partner countries may limit the potential growth of Newton funding. STFC is currently matching existing projects against GCRF eligibility criteria and intends to seek new projects which will be eligible for an open funding call. 4.3. SEAB reviewed the July report to Council and agreed to use Item 9 to identify key messages to convey to STFC Council from today s meeting. OFFICIAL Page 2 of 5
5. Advisory Panel for Public Engagement 5.1. The Advisory Panel for Public Engagement (APPE) presented their annual report, highlighting the successful process through which the Public Engagement Strategy was generated, the PEACE project s recommendations to change the culture towards public engagement and the success of the Daresbury Open Week. Discussing the attendance at the Open Week, CP confirmed that loyalty from local residents was evident in their high attendance, and any attempt to increase the number or geographic spread of attendees in the future would be limited by car parking logistics. 5.2. Providing an overview of the latest PE funding scheme awards, CP commented on the high quality of applicants across the portfolio of schemes, and highlighted that awards made through the Large Awards scheme include some risky projects with uncertain outcomes; a deliberate strategic move by APPE to fund excellent candidates with potentially high impact proposals, the feasibility of which is incertain. 5.3. SEAB believed that STFC has the expertise to lead the public engagement strategy across Research Councils and STFC Council is requested to consider promoting this position. 5.4. AO took the opportunity to praise the work of DG and the wider public engagement team in developing the role of APPE, enabling it to become a more proactive and impactful advisory board which remains on an upward trajectory. 6. Skills Balance of Programme 6.1. The Board were provided with the wider context of the Skills Balance of Programme review, with the objective of STFC utilising individual reviews as part of it s businessas-usual operations at the top strategic level. ES outlined the review process and time scale and invited SEAB s comments on the proposed scope, process and roles of SEAB, ETCC and APPE. 6.2. The Board welcomed the opportunity to undertake the Skills Balance of Programme exercise planned for 2017, following delivery of conclusions from the current PPAN exercise. A sub-group of SEAB would be setup to conduct the review, with an internal working group assisting in the collation of information and drafting of the report. 6.3. Through discussion it was clarified that the review would not consider the mechanisms through which funding (e.g. for studentships) was awarded. 6.4. The Board made several recommendations for the review Sub-group to consider. 6.5. Concern was expressed over studentships, as an integral component of both the PPAN research and skills programmes. Although studentships have been placed in the SEAB review remit, close communication between the Science Board balance of programmes and SEAB will be required. 6.6. SEAB supported the process and scope of the review. Although it was felt that the funding envelope of flat cash +/- 5% restricted the scope of the review, the Board understood that this would help to make the review s recommendations relevant to OFFICIAL Page 3 of 5
the current funding climate. It was also expected that the review would identify priorities for the next spending review. 6.7. The Terms of Reference for the Sub-group were approved. 6.8. Volunteers were sought for Sub-group members. ES confirmed that the next stage is for Executive Board to be asked to approve the process. 7. Corporate Strategy 7.1. The latest draft of the Corporate Strategy was shared with SEAB. The strategy development process, including discussions at the recent Council Strategy Day, was summarised, as were the next stages leading to final publication in 2017. 7.2. SEAB praised the strategy, noting that the current version was significantly more ambitious and exciting. The Board further welcomed the long-term perspective carried throughout the document, noting that it helped to position STFC s contribution within UKRI. 7.3. The Board provided minor suggestions for improvement including ensuring language style around e.g. deliverables encompassed the entire programme and did not imply ambition only for campus developments. 7.4. The Board s advice was welcomed on specific parts of the strategy. SEAB s advice will be incorporated in the next draft. Approval will then be sought from STFC Council to embark on a focussed consultation exercise, with SEAB invited to contribute to this. Publication of the strategy is expected early in 2017. 8. Equality & Diversity: STFC initiatives and SEAB s role 8.1. Marcia Griffith (STFC s former Equality and Diversity Manager) was unable to join the meeting due to a meeting clash. 8.2. DG reminded the Board that over the past 18 months STFC had put in place an Equality and Diversity Action Plan aligned with, and designed to deliver, RCUK s Equality and Diversity Policy. Councils are currently at different stages of development in this area, with varying emphasis placed on internal and external initiatives. STFC has recently employed Tanya Robinson (on secondment from NERC) to implement it s action plan. The appointment was welcomed by SEAB who hoped it will also strengthen cross-council working in this area. 8.3. The Board engaged in an extensive discussion on STFC s equality and diversity responsibilities in relation to its workforce and partner organisations. The Board felt that at present STFC lacked clarity on the mechanisms through which to implement the action plan. 8.4. Noting the lack of influence of WiSET (a long standing, external sub-group of ETCC) on STFC policies and working practices SEAB endorsed the cessation of WiSET, thanking them for their contributions to date. The Board agreed that given the importance of Equality and Diversity issues, the role of WiSET is now encompassed within SEAB s remit and, ultimately, Council. 8.5. The Board recommended that STFC embrace greater dialogue with early career researchers. OFFICIAL Page 4 of 5
8.6. SEAB advised STFC to regard the action plan as a living document, using it to inform UKRI equality and diversity initiatives when appropriate. 8.7. The Board will be kept informed of progress and agreed to invite Tanya Robinson to attend the next meeting. 9. Meeting wrap-up 9.1. The following key messages and recommendations would be reported to Council as a result of today s meeting: 10. AOB 10.1. SEAB meet next on 28 th March at Polaris House, Swindon. The Board agreed to continue rotating meetings around STFC sites. 2017 meetings will therefore be held in Swindon, Rutherford Appleton Lab at Harwell and MRC Offices London. 10.2. AO introduced an opportunity for STFC to engage with a major skills development initiative related to Cabinet Office funding a national security strategy. JS commented that STFC s Futures team may already be aware of the opportunity. OFFICIAL Page 5 of 5