The University of Edinburgh
Sustainability and Environmental Advisory Group (SEAG)
8 February 2012
The LiFE Index
Brief description of the paper
The paper provides a short introduction to the LiFE Index – which was developed over 2010-11 as a successor to Universities that Count.
The objective of the project – funded by all four Funding Councils and managed by the Environmental Association for Universities and Colleges (EAUC) – is to offer “a performance improvement system developed to help institutions to manage, measure, improve and promote their social responsibility and sustainability performance”.
Action requested
SEAG is invited to note the extensive set of frameworks and comment on the potential participants and to endorse a very careful compilation of potential response for discussion with the named Framework Leaders.
Resource implications
Does the paper have resource implications?
Yes. Commitment to engaging with the tool will take a little time but should benefit from greater understanding of the wider adoption of Social responsibility and sustainability in the sector.
Risk Assessment
Does the paper include a risk analysis? No
However – since the University has been a strong “critical friend” of the project – trying to steer away from too extensive a mechanism – then it is incumbent on us to at least participate in good faith.
Equality and Diversity
Does the paper have equality and diversity implications? No
Freedom of information
Can this paper be included in open business? Yes
To Be presented by
Professor Mary Bownes
Originator of the paper
David Somervell, Sustainability Adviser
27 January 2012
Priority Areas for LiFE Index plus Review of Team
A short introduction to the LiFE Index
The LiFE Index was developed over 2010-11 as a successor to Universities that Count.
The objective of the project – funded by all four Funding Councils and managed by the Environmental Association for Universities and Colleges (EAUC) – is to offer a performance improvement system developed to help institutions to manage, measure, improve and promote their social responsibility and sustainability performance. The online database – accessed via www.thelifeindex.com with login has been developed with a view to enabling participants to:
§ Review, track and manage performance across all areas of the system
§ Assign permissions and task to multiple users within the system
§ Take responsibility for an area of the system that has been assigned to you
§ Upload, search or edit documents within the system
§ Generate reports and export data from the system
Priority Areas and Frameworks
The LiFE Index is an online database which holds responses by each institution. It is designed to work for all types of colleges and universities, regardless of your individual focus or specialism.
It comprises a series of 12 Frameworks within 4 Priority Areas:
Leadership & Governance
1. Leadership
2. Staff Engagement and Human Resources
Partnership & Engagement
3. Business & Industry Interface
4. Community and Public Engagement Framework
5. Procurement and Supplier Engagement
Learning Teaching & Research
6. Learning & Teaching
7. Research
8. Student Engagement
Estates & Operations
9. Biodiversity
10. Resource Efficiency & Waste
11. Sustainable Construction & Renovation
12. Sustainable ICT
13. Travel & Transport
14. Utilities
Each Framework lists activities helping institutions manage, measure or improve performance. An introduction to each Framework details why the activity is important and how it relates to the wider scope of the Index – with links to resources to support participants to improve their performance.
The eight cells within each Framework (except the Procurement and Supplier Engagement Framework which uses the national procurement Flexible Framework) capture activities currently undertaken, / highlights areas not yet engaged with. This can be used to support gap analysis / action planning and manage relevant documentation and share information, track progress over time, and support participants to better embed these practices throughout their institution.
In addition to the Frameworks, each Priority Area contains a series further questions sets which contain important information for that area. The question sets details why they are important.
There are a small number of Metrics found within certain Frameworks which are used as part of the accreditation process. These require data that are similar to that collected for return to HESA.
Self Assessment: LiFE Index can enable continuous self-assessment on how an institution is performing. Every member of a team is supposed to provide a performance rating for each cell, and the system takes an average of these to provide you with an unofficial self-assessment. This helps you see which areas perform well and which areas you need to focus on.
Preparing the institution’s submission
There are four main roles within The LiFE Index:
Institution Manager plus
1. Priority Area Leaders,
2. Framework Leaders and
3. Team Members
Each role has specific responsibilities and specific capabilities within the online site. Depending on how your institution works, individuals may be assigned multiple roles.
Institution Managers are responsible for managing the LiFE Index. They have overall control and are responsible for setting up team members into the system and are able to:
§ Manage all areas of LiFE
§ Manage Users on the system
§ Assign Users to Roles
§ View all user activity
§ Perform all actions Team Members can perform
Priority Area Leaders have overall responsibility for one (or more) Priority Areas. They are responsible for the progress in their assigned Priority Area(s), are responsible for managing their teams and to
§ Assign Framework Leaders within their priority areas
§ Assign Team Members within their priority areas
§ View User Activity
§ Perform all actions Team Members can perform
§ Submit Evidence for Accreditation
Framework Leaders have overall responsibility for one (or more) frameworks within the priority areas. They are directly responsible for ensuring that each individual cell within their frameworks is completed. They are able to assign Team Members to complete this work, but many Framework Leaders will take a direct role in working with the individual cells within their assigned frameworks.
Framework Leaders are managed by Priority Area Leaders and these two roles need to communicate regularly to ensure that all work in the four Priority Areas is being completed.
Framework Leaders are able to:
§ Assign Team Members to work on individual cells within their frameworks
§ Interact with individual cells to upload evidence and rate performance.
§ Perform all actions Team Members can perform
Team Members are critical to the successful implementation of LiFE. They are responsible for ensuring that work is completed on each cell within the individual frameworks. Team Members are assigned to one (or more) individual cells within the different Frameworks and are responsible for compiling information in these cells by uploading appropriate evidence into the system.
Team Members are managed by both Framework Leaders and Priority Area Leaders.
It is important that these roles communicate on a regular basis to ensure that all work within the four priority areas is being completed.
Team Members are able to:
§ Upload Evidence
§ Rate Performance
§ Comment on Evidence
§ Answer Questions and Upload Metrics
§ Interact within Community Forums
§ Use Comprehensive Resource Centre
§ Manage User Settings
LiFE Index Task Group – Preparing the 2012 submission
Priority Area / Framework / Leaders / Team MembersLeadership & Governance: / Kim Waldron
1. Leadership / Katherine Novosel? / Rona Smith?
2. Staff Engagement & Human Resources / Eilidh Fraser? / Alex Jones?
Partnership & Engagement / Mary Bownes
3. Business & Industry Interface / Derek Waddell? / Tom Higgison?
4. Community & Public Engagement / Ian Conn? / Moira Gibson?
5. Procurement & Supplier Engagement / Karen Bowman / Billy Hislop
Learning Teaching & Research / Sue Rigby
6. Learning & Teaching / Tina Harrison? / Pete Higgins?
7. Research / Sheila Thompson? / Hamish Macandrew?
8. Student Engagement / Dai Hounsell? / VPAA?
Estates & Operations / Angus Currie
9. Biodiversity / Fleur Ruckley / John Turpin
10. Resource Efficiency & Waste / Fleur Ruckley / Sophie Rippinger
11. Construction & Renovation / Graham Bell / David Somervell
12. Sustainable ICT / ? / ?
13. Travel & Transport / Emma Crowther / Lyndsay Burns
14. Utilities / Andrew Whitson / Shona Buchanan
But note that each Framework has eight cells requiring evidence of progress / response inserted:
Policy and Strategy / Action Planning / Stakeholder Engagement / MeasurementCommunication / Training & Support / Implementation / Curriculum Links
But remember each Framework has eight fields / cells which require evidence mounting in them and many Frameworks have additional Question Sets and further Metrics requiring uploaded.
SEAG is invited to note the extensive set of frameworks and comment on the above potential participants and to endorse a very careful compilation of potential responses for discussion with the named Framework Leaders.
David Somervell, 27 January 2012
Annex – An example of text associated with two of the Frameworks
Biodiversity Framework Team Leader: Fleur Ruckley
Biodiversity, meaning biological diversity, encompasses the variation of life on earth and in its simplest form; it is measured by the number and variety of species in an area. Within the context of a university, biodiversity can make the world of difference to the environment in which we teach, learn and work. There are health benefits and also psychological benefits. It may also be a determining factor in the retention of staff and recruitment for students. On a world scale the rate of loss is now recognised to be a cause for serious concern, requiring concerted international action to prevent continued loss of biodiversity.
Why is it included?
Biodiversity is often overlooked at universities. Many institutions are now taking steps to improve their environmental performance on issues such as carbon emissions, energy, waste and transport but few consider biodiversity to be a priority within their environmental strategy.
However universities can provide highly valuable resources for biodiversity. Many campuses already contain important habitats and there are opportunities to increase biodiversity through sensitive grounds management.
Creating green spaces sends a positive message about a university’s commitment to social responsibility and sustainability regardless of whether you are a rural or inner city institution.
At an institutional level, biodiversity can provide a campus with biologically rich green spaces that contribute to the health and wellbeing of its staff, students, stakeholders and suppliers.
Biodiversity can make the world of difference to the environment in which we teach, learn and work. It may also be a determining factor in the retention of staff and recruitment for students.
The Biodiversity Framework
Policy and Strategy / Action Planning / Stakeholder Engagement / MeasurementThe university's Biodiversity Action Plan is produced in support of local and national priorities.
Activity is reviewed on a regular basis.
There are clear reporting lines into formal university management structures. / Action Plans, which incorporate objectives and associated targets, drive the cycles of activity across the university in relation to biodiversity / Key stakeholders (including staff, students and contractors) actively inform the review of the Biodiversity Action Plan and shape its development. / The impacts and benefits of the Biodiversity Action Plan are routinely monitored and evaluated as part of existing university practice.
There is evidence of continual improvement and feedback loops.
Communication / Training & Support / Implementation / Curriculum Links
The Biodiversity Action Plan is in public domain. There is a planned approach to commun-icating to relevant stakeholders the Action Plan, its associated activities and their implications.
The Action Plan has clear, high-level support within the university. / Commitments and/or targets are linked to named individuals or teams within the university.
Staff have either appropriate biodiversity skills and knowledge, or opportunities to develop them through access to specialist support. / There is evidence of staff and student-led biodiversity activity across the university and beyond via the Student Union, student societies, staff groups, trade unions or individual sustainability champions / Biodiversity practice links to and where appropriate is embedded into formal and informal curriculum activity.
Sustainable ICT Framework Team Leader: ?????
Information and Communications Technology (ICT) plays a critical, central part of daily university life. Technology to advance rapidly and increasingly the ICT community and those who use ICT are working to ensure progress is focused on serving individuals, universities and broader society in an efficient and sustainable manner.
Information and Communications Technology (ICT) plays a critical, central part of daily university life. Technology continues to advance rapidly and increasingly the ICT community and those who use ICT are working to ensure progress is focused on serving individuals, universities and broader society in an efficient and sustainable manner.
Why is it included?
ICT stands forInformation Communications Technology. The term ICT can be applied to any piece of technology that helps people communicate and interact with one another. ICT equipment is PC’s and monitors, data centres, server rooms, network cables and routers, printers and copiers, phones and video conferencing equipment etc.
All of this equipment requires the use of resources in manufacture (plastics, metals etc) and electricity to operate. Sustainable (or green) ICT refers to the minimal use of resources and energy in the manufacture, use and disposal of ICT equipment.
ICT-related energy and environmental issuesare of utmost importancein higher education.
The energyconsumption of data centers,networks,computers andtheir peripherals continues to growand theWEEE Directive has created new requirements for end-of-life disposal of ICT equipment.
Therunningcosts associated with theuse of technology isrising. In 2008 JISC estimated the ICT-related electricity bill of the UK further and higher education sectors to be in the region of£120 million per annum.
Expanding ICT use coupled with rising energy costsare likely toincrease running costs even further. This expansionreflects the increasingly important andcentralrole ICT plays in enhancing the studentlearningexperience while maximizingthewider social benefits.