AGENDA - keele.ac.uk

1

UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY STEERING GROUP

Tuesday 12th June 2018, 2.00 - 4.00pm

in CM2.02, Claus Moser Building

AGENDA

1. Welcome and Apologies 2. Actions List – 14th March 2018

Actions list attached 3. Chair’s Remarks

4. Key Projects 4.1 EAUC Annual Conference, Keele, 19-21st June 2018 – Update (RMO/ZR/SB)

4.2 SEND and HyDeploy (RMO/IM/PB)

4.3 2018 Sustainability Report (HE/ZR)

5. Estates and Operations 5.1 Environmental Manager’s Update (Attached) (HE)

5.2 Energy and Carbon Update (Attached) (EJ)

5.3 Fairtrade Accreditation (SW)

5.4 Removal of Paper Towels (EJ)

5.5 Recycled paper (LS)

5.6 Single Use Plastics (HE)

6. Leadership and Governance 6.1 Divestment and Ethical Investment (RMO) 7. Education and Research 7.1 NUS Responsible Futures Feedback Report (Attached) (ZR/SB)

7.2 Education for Sustainability Developments (ZR)

2

8. Updates from the Students’ Union

9. International Activities 9.1 Sustainability and Internationalisation (ZR) 10. Any Other Business

11. Date of Next Meeting

October/November 2018

1

University Environment and Sustainability Steering Group (ESSG)

Actions List

14th March 2018

1. Attendance and Apologies Professor Mark Ormerod (MO) Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Provost (Chair) Phil Butters (PB) Director of Estates and Development Sam Gibbons (SGi) Environment and Campus Officer, Keele SU Sarah Briggs (SB) Sustainability Project Officer Dr Zoe Robinson (ZR) Director of Education for Sustainability, School of Geology,

Geography and Environment Dr Ian Madley (IM) Head of Partnership Development (Natural Sciences), Research

Innovation and Engagement Susan Warrender Head of Catering and Retail Dr John White (JW) Deputy Director of IT Howard Bell (HB) Executive Support Officer, Vice-Chancellor’s Office (Secretary) 1.1 Apologies Huw Evans, Elliot Jones and Linda Sutton

Item Decisions/Actions Responsibility 3. Chair’s Remarks 3.1 Meeting Protocols • The Chair to write to members to remind them of

need to circulate papers in good time in advance of the meeting to give group members sufficient time to read the papers.

MO

3.2 Ethical Investments • Business Review Committee would be considering the issue of ethical investments at its meeting on 23rd March. The University’s investment advisors will advise the University on what was feasible. Both the VC and the DVC&P were keen for the University to make a clear and strong commitment on the issue of ethical investments.

4. Key Projects 4.1 EAUC June 2018 • A draft programme outlining the EAU Conference

sessions with Keele involvement was tabled. Possible nominations for the Keele Panel at the end of the conference were made. These included Simon Burgess of Siemens and David Healey, Professor of Practice (SEND Project).

4.2 SEND and HyDeploy • Siemens had begun delivering on their impressive stakeholder engagement campaign.

• A request for more details from a research perspective was made. In particular, to attract interest and involvement of social scientist researchers in the SEND Project.

• The group was informed of a call for bids for funding

2

Item Decisions/Actions Responsibility from Innovate UK in support of the Industrial Strategy. IM to pass the call to ZR to circulate round the network of sustainability researchers led by Zoe.

• DEFRA wanted to visit Keele to talk about SEND and its link with the SME community.

• HyDeploy – Very successful formal launch took place on 27th February.

• ZR and IM to meet to discuss how best to get to get Social Science researchers involved in the HyDeploy project. Professor Simon Pemberton (Human Geography) was suggested as a key contact.

IM ZR&IM

4.3 2018 Sustainability Report

• Looking to publish in time for the EAU Conference in June 2018.

5. Estate and Operations 5.1 Environmental Manager’s Update

• The Environmental Manager’s update would be circulated to members early next week.

• Sustainability Network: MO to meet with HE and ZR to talk about what more can be done to increase engagement across the University with the network.

• Single use plastic/products. The group discussed possible measures to reduce single use plastic /products on campus, including a 25% levy on use of disposable cups. The use of compostable bio gradable cups. The impact of the 10% discount for using your own cup.

• The return and wash system at University of Chester was discussed.

• Members agreed that the issue required a systematic approach in terms of solutions that they were environmentally sustainable.

• SW, HE and SB to draft an options paper on the possible measures the University should adopt to reduce single use plastic /products on campus.

MO, HE & ZR SW, HE and SB

5.2 Annual Environmental Objectives and Targets

• MO and HE to meet and discuss annual environmental objectives and targets.

MO & HE

5.3 Energy and Carbon Update

• Gas and Electricity consumption: The group noted the significant impact of decommissioning the Hawthorns campus had on the University’s gas and electricity consumption.

• The Group agreed that the significant impact should be publicised widely. MO to talk with Russell Reader about this.

• The University’s approach to carbon reduction was changing towards a greater emphasis being placed on renewable energies.

MO

6.Leadership and Governance

3

Item Decisions/Actions Responsibility 6.1 Sustainability Strategy and Target Setting

MO and ZR to meet to discuss MO & ZR

7. Education and Research 7.1 Education for Sustainability Developments

• A document highlighting 16 best practice modules which have been mapped to the QAA Education for Sustainable Development descriptions and the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

• Keele was involved in the NUS’ first ever “SDG Teach In”, to raise awareness of why the Sustainable Development Goals should be at the heart of further and higher education.

• Lecturers and teaching staff across UK universities and colleges pledged to include the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) within their teaching, learning, and assessment on their course(s) during the week of 19-23 February 2018.

7.2 Institute for Sustainable Futures

• ZR provided the group with a table mapping the 6 key grand challenges for the Institute for Sustainable Futures against indicatives areas and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

• An ILAS workshop was being held to work out a research strategy for the Institute.

• Work was underway on generating external funding for the new institute.

8. Students’ Union Update

8.1 Keele Communities Together (KCT) Group – Water Dispensers

• The KCT group would like the visibility of water dispensers/fountains across campus to be more prominent.

• The KCT group was asking for all new build capital projects to have water dispensers

• The group welcomed the interest of the KCT in the sustainability agenda at Keele and its support for the group.

• PB to arrange for an audit of water dispensers/fountains across campus.

PB

8.2 The Great Donate • The Chair stated the University’s commitment to the Great Donate and with working in partnership with Staffordshire University on this initiative.

8.3 Food Waste Pilot in Halls

• The group supported a proposal to introduce a food waste pilot in student halls.

• PB to arrange for a small working group with membership to include Huw Evans, Sue Underwood, Andy Carnall and Sam Gibbons to discuss the objectives of such a pilot.

PB

8.4 Recycled Paper • Students would like the option to use recycled paper for printing out handouts in the library.

• MO to ask Anne Loweth to speak to Linda Sutton about the issue of recycled paper.

MO

4

Item Decisions/Actions Responsibility

8. International Activities

8.1 Sustainability and Internationalisation

• Nothing of note to report.

9. AOB 9.1 Soil Association. • SW reported that the Refectory was hoping to

improve on its Bronze Soil Association Food for Life Award by bidding for a Silver award in the next few weeks. The report relating to the award of the Bronze award would be circulated to the Group’s next meeting in June.

SW

Date of Next Meeting Tuesday 12th June 2pm -4pm

ESSG Environmental management update June 2018

Environmental Management Update Environment and Sustainability Steering Group (ESSG) 12th June 2018 HUW EVANS, ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER


Contents Z:\ebpool\PLANNING\ENVIRONMENT\ESSG\ESSG Environmental management Update June 2018.docx - _Toc515978470

1. ECO Campus / ISO 14001 ............................................................................................................ 1

2. Construction and refurbishment environmental standards ....................................................... 1

3. Sustainability Network ................................................................................................................ 1

4. Student switch off Campaign (SSO) ............................................................................................ 2

5. Waste, reuse and recycling ......................................................................................................... 2

6. The Great Donate (Formerly the ‘Green Move out’) .................................................................. 3

7. UI Green Metric .......................................................................................................................... 3

8. People and Planet Universities League ....................................................................................... 4

9. The Know - all about Sustainability ............................................................................................. 4


1

1. ECO Campus / ISO 14001 Eco Campus is a national Environmental Management System (EMS) and award scheme for the higher education sector. Participants gain recognition at each stage of the process through a series of awards from bronze through silver, gold and platinum. The platinum award conforms to the requirements of the international environmental management standard ISO 14001.

The scope of EMS at Keele University relates to the whole campus activity that have an impact on the environment. The standard requires procedures and processes to be in place for managing environmental impacts e.g. energy, waste, transport etc and most of these fall under the remit of the Estates and Development Directorate

An Eco Campus Silver audit surveillance visit was passed on the 8th of March 2018 and work is ongoing to achieve the Gold level. The actions to progress includes action/s to be taken on, and further documenting of, the following areas

• Communication • Roles and responsibilities • Competence, training and awareness • Operational control and document control

2. Construction and refurbishment environmental standards Environmental sustainability measures should be considered within all capital and minor works projects and when relevant environmental standards are applied. Currently there are three projects where specific environmental standards are being applied. These include:

• Halls Infrastructure Project- BREEAM Very Good rating being considered. A workshop is planned to establish sustainability measures.

• Lennard Jones Repurposing project- currently in concept design stage (RIBA stage 2). The environmental assessment tool ‘SKA rating’ is being piloted for the project. once the project moves into the detailed design stage (RIBA stage 3) a review will be undertaken to identify SKA measures to be targeted and overall SKA target of bronze, silver or gold.

• Smart Innovation HUB- targeting BREEAM Excellent rating

3. Sustainability Network It’s been challenging due to time constraints to work on the sustainability network to recruit sustainability representatives and teams. However we’re pleased with the framework that is now in place to provide schools and directorates to embed sustainability in their areas. This includes a workbook of sustainability actions and


2

activities to implement, supported by a suite of resources. The network also improves the communication links and incentive to engage in sustainability by way of the awards.

To date we have 10 sustainability representatives confirmed. We’ll work with these sustainability representatives to implement the benchmark award in their School/Directorate with an award event taking place in the autumn.

We’ll continue to recruit sustainability representatives to ensure we have coverage within all Schools and Directorates and aim to have more teams signed up to the benchmark criteria in the new academic year.

4. Student switch off Campaign (SSO) Barnes Halls of Residence were the winners of the student switch off competition. Report to follow.

5. Waste, reuse and recycling University Recycling Rate (Year to date, August 2018 – March 2018)

• Halls of Residence recycling rate = 25% • Academic and Central Services buildings recycling rate = 46%

The year to date recycling rates are slightly down from last years (2017/18) total. However the annual recycling rate could increase with still four months left of the year.

Lindsay Halls

Working with the Accommodation Manager, Philip Brown we’ve improved the waste recycling bins and communications at Lindsay Halls of Residence which has had a positive impact on engagement and recycling levels. This will be used as best practice to roll out to the other Halls of Residence for the new academic year.

Single use plastic

Catering services have ceased purchasing single use plastic straws and is reviewing the alternatives for single use plastic cutlery.

Reusable coffee cup campaign & coffee cup recycling

Working with procurement, marketing and catering we’re aiming to source keele branded reusable coffee cups to be sold on campus and potentially change the pricing of coffee/hot drinks as a disincentive for use of disposable cups.

After discussions involved with the EAUC conference, Costa have been in touch to provide coffee cup recycling bins within Chancellor’s for the conference and potentially permanently. This is part of a national initiative to incentivise waste collection companies to collect coffee cups from clients.


3

Warp-it

Warp-it continues to be utilised for reuse of furniture items. Staff can now add stationary items. To date a total of 40 transactions have been completed saving approximately £8,000 in procurement costs, 3 tonnes of CO2 and 1.5 Tonnes of waste.

6. The Great Donate (Formerly the ‘Green Move out’) Working closely with Sam Gibbons and the SU, the local food bank and the British Heart Foundation (BHF), students living in Halls of Residence have been encouraged to donate unwanted items when vacating. This year’s scheme is similar to last year’s which was very successful. The donations include:

• British Heart Foundation (BHF)- clothes and bric a brac donated to collection banks at each Halls.

• Food bank donations- donation trays have been placed within each kitchen diner in the Halls of Residence where students can donate unopened unperishable food items. Accommodation and portering staff will collect the items for donation to the foodbank when the students vacate.

• Kitchen items and other items- students can donate kitchenware and other items to their Halls common room to be collected, cleaned and stored by volunteers.

Last year 3 Tonnes of food items were donated, 8 Tonnes to the BHF and a significant amount of kitchenware items reused by a new cohort of students.

7. UI Green Metric The UI GreenMetric World University Ranking is an initiative of Universitas Indonesia which was launched in 2010. Keele University are among a dozen or so UK participants and were ranked 17th in 2017. Although there are questions over the credibility of the methodology, the league table is a great opportunity to promote sustainability on an international level.

The UI Green Metric have revised the guidelines and methodology to be more transparent and objective in portraying worldwide university efforts to deal with sustainability issues based on inputs and suggestions from the participating universities in 2016.

Sarah Briggs and Huw Evans attended the inaugural meeting of the UI Green Metric UK Network Meeting at Nottingham University. Reasons for attending were to find out more about the methodology and how other institutions interpret some of the criteria.

It was agreed at the meeting that a network of participating Universities would meet again before the UI green Metric submission date of 30th of October 2018. This would enable us to come together and feedback to the UI Green metric steering group, specifically to:


4

A) Apply a consistent interpretation to specific questions B) Agree on any issues we wish to raise with the UI Green Metric administration as UK participants C) Identify any areas for development

Information about GreenMetric and the 2017 rankings can be accessed in http://greenmetric.ui.ac.id.

8. People and Planet Universities League People and Planet haven’t made any announcement on a 2018 league table assessment yet. The 2017 assessment started in July and therefore we need to work towards a similar timeline until informed otherwise. This means we need to ensure all evidence relating to the criteria is available on the University Green Keele webpages by the end of June.

9. The Know - all about Sustainability The next edition of the University magazine ‘The Know’ is all about sustainability. The publish date should be the second week in July with a content deadline of June 25th.

Heather Djuranovic, internal comms. Officer is coordinating the content and has been in touch with a number of staff involved in sustainability. However If any members of the ESSG group wants to suggest content they should get in touch ASAP.

http://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/

1

Environment and Sustainability Steering Group (ESSG)

Energy & Carbon Management Update Report

June 2018

1. 2017/18 Energy & Water Performance to Date

Carbon

Carbon Footprint

No interim Carbon Footprint update available until August as consumption and recharge data is only consolidated once per year.

Carbon Reduction Commitment

The Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) scheme requires the University to calculate the carbon emissions that result from gas and electricity use in buildings and by allowances for each tonne emitted.

As each year’s reporting takes place in July, there is no update in this report.

The CRC is due to end following the 2018/19 reporting year and although a replacement scheme has been suggested by the National Government no details have yet been provided.

2

Energy

Gas

Gas consumption for the period Q3 (Feb-April) is 11% below the normalised forecast. This is down primarily to:

• Hawthorns decommissioning • Modifications to Horwood Energy Centre to increase efficiency and lower utilisation of

the Combined Heat and Power (CMP) unit than expected • Tighter temperature control on the Building Energy Management System (BEMS)

Year to date consumption of gas is now 3.7% below the forecast exclusive of weather correction. As the weather to date has been very average the actual consumption is 3.8% lower than the weather corrected forecast.

Impact of Hawthorns decommissioning

As shown in the graph below, the closure of the Hawthorns Halls of Residence has led to a significant decrease in campus gas consumption. Comparing the variance since January 2018 between the Hawthorns forecast and the new Barnes Blocks a total saving of 1,648,467 kWh has been achieved (300tCO2e).

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

kWh

Gas Consumption

Actual Previous year Normalised forecast

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

kWh

Impact of Hawthorns Decomissioning - Gas

Hawthorns Total Gas

Barnes Y&Z

Hawthorns forecast

Barnes forecast

3

Electricity

Grid electricity consumption for the academic year to date is down by 6.2% against the projection.

Electricity consumption for Q3 was down by 5.3% respectively against the forecast. This is as a result of:

• Partial shut-down of Hawthorns ahead of decommissioning • Energy efficiency projects, particularly LED lighting replacements

Impact of Hawthorns decommissioning

As shown in the graph below, the closure of the Hawthorns Halls of Residence has led to a significant decrease in campus electricity consumption. Comparing the variance since January 2018 between the Hawthorns forecast and the new Barnes Blocks a total saving of 137,328 kWh has been achieved (52tCO2e).

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1400000

kWh

Grid Electricity Consumption

actual Previous year Forecast

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

kWh Hawthorns Total Elec

Barnes Y&Z

Hawthorns forecast

Barnes forecast

4

Water

Year to date water consumption is down to 33.6% above the forecast in comparison to 40% at the last update. Q3 consumption is above the forecast by 24.7% but the previous three months have been lower than the levels observed in the same period of 2016/17.

The proactive processes which were put into place leading into the winter period allowed us to identify and rectify leakage quicker and as a result have managed to limit the impact on consumption. Since January 1st we have identified and fixed seven significant water leaks, the most significant of which was fixed in mid-May. There is one outstanding leak on the reservoir water supply which is proving to be difficult to fix however this is expected to be repaired in the next two weeks.

Consumption levels on the main ‘Village’ network which serves more than 50% of campus is now at a three year low. Whilst there is some investigation work to be carried out following the repair on the outstanding leak on the Reservoir network, we expect that consumption levels should begin to track the forecast going forward.

There are three major projects which will be completed by August which will see us reduce the quantity of ‘at-risk’ pipework on campus by more than 500m.

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

m3

Water Consumption

actual Previous year Forecast

5

Low Carbon Generation

Solar Photovoltaic (PV)

Total generation levels are up against the average by almost 25% in Q3 due to the new Barnes arrays being commissioned and the sunniest May on record. The forthcoming Central Science Laboratory building will also have a PV array on the roof.

CHP

Year to date performance of the gas fired Combined Heat and Power unit at Horwood Energy Centre is down by 3.2% owing to two issues; a significant fault which caused the loss of almost a full week of generation in April and the warm weather in May limiting the heat demand. The extension to incorporate the Lennard-Jones heat network is on target to complete in August 2018 and will lead to increased utilisation of the unit, particularly in summer months.

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Campus Solar PV Generation

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

CHP Electricity Generation

Actual Forecast

6

2. Energy Management Strategy EnPI’s

2017/18 Q1 (Aug-Oct 2017)

Q2 (Nov – Jan 2018) Q3 (2017) Q3 (Feb –

April 2018) Q4 (May – July 2017)

Monitoring, Targeting & Control

EnPI01 Number of core sub meters which are reporting data automatically (AMR) 164 166 152 166 164

EnPI02 Percentage of core non-AMR meters which have been read at least twice a year 98% 98% 96% 100% 99%

Behaviour Change

EnPI03 Number of students/staff directly engaged in behavioural change programmes 1100 1100 734 1100 734

Energy Efficiency

EnPI04 Number of feasible projects identified (not yet implemented) 111 111 101 126 111 EnPI05 Percentage of projects achieving or surpassing the expected savings 100% 100% 100% 100% 100 EnPI06 Percentage of buildings formally audited within the last three years 50% 50% 40% 46% 52%

EnPI07 Percentage of Display Energy Certificates with Operational Ratings better than 100 94% 94% 94% 92% 94%

EnPI08 Total qualifying electricity consumption1 2,626,774 3,505,495 3,574,461 3,508,085 3,037,709 EnPI09 Total qualifying gas consumption 5,681,748 13,087,015 10,756,795 11,914,735 3,671,458 Energy Generation from Low-Zero carbon sources

EnPI10 Percentage of total generation delivered on-site 7% 4.4% 5.3% 4.7% 9.7% EnPI11 kWh of electricity from CHP 204,905 269,004 268,391 264,048 245,665 EnPI12 kWh of heat from CHP 337,800 436,400 443,300 427,400 404,000 EnPI13 kWh of electricity from Solar PV 31,135 11,132 28,821 36,797 49,676 EnPI14 kWh of biomass 9,229 7,300 8,564 886 9,639 EnPI15 kWh of additional LZC sources employed on site 2,111 10,984 7,448 10,804 1,161

1 Including domestic housing and recharged tenants

7

3. Energy/water Management Projects

Completed:

Claus Moser room level heating control - Phase 2

Underway:

Building Management System Improvements (Completing July 2018)

Streetlighting Phase 2 (Completing July 2018)

Reservoir main replacement (Completing July 2018)

Central Drive water main and heat network project (Completing August 2018)

Crime Scene House Heating Replacement (Completing June 2018)

Responsible Futures Feedback Report

,r5

A confidential report for Keele

University Students’ Union

and Keele University

Meg Baker, Education for

Sustainable Development – Senior

Project Officer, May 2018

Responsible Futures Feedback Report – Keele University

1

Contents

1.0 Introduction 3 1.1 Responsible Futures 3 1.2 Overview of the Audit 5

2.0 Your Results 8 2.1 Your Accreditation 8 2.2 Score Overview 8 2.3 Explaining Your Accreditation 8 2.4 Key Findings 9 2.5 Feedback 10

2.5.1 Baselines and benchmarks (BB01 to BB07) 10

2.5.2 Partnership and Plan (PPL001 to PPL003) 11

2.5.3 Leadership and Strategy (LS001 to LS007) 13

2.5.4 Policy and Commitment (POC001 to POC008) 15

2.5.5 Interventions (IN001 to IN009) 16

2.5.6 Impact and Outcomes (IO001 to IO004) 19

2.5.7 Outreach (OU001 to OU004) 20

2.5.8 Self-defined criteria (SD001 to SD003) 22

2.6 Key Recommendations 24 2.6.1. Recommendations 24

2.7 Lead Auditor Summation 25

3.0 General Information 27 3.1 What does my accreditation mean? 27

3.2 How long will the accreditation last? 27

3.3 How do we use the logo? 27

3.4 What’s next? 27

3.5 How do we keep improving? 27

3.6 How do we compare? 27

3.7 I would like to be re-assessed, what can I do? 27


2

Overview

Education for sustainable development is the process of equipping students with the knowledge and understanding, skills and attributes needed to work and live in a way that safeguards environmental, social and economic wellbeing, both in the present and for future generations.

QAA ESD guidance 2014


3

1.0 Introduction

Responsible Futures is

certification of a whole

institution’s commitment to

social responsibility and

environmental

sustainability, and having

an enabling environment

for it to thrive, rather than

an endpoint.

1 NUS survey results can be found here:

https://sustainability.nus.org.uk/our-

1.1 Responsible Futures

Responsible Futures is a whole-institution

approach to embedding social responsibility and

sustainability across the formal and informal

curriculum across both HE and FE. It is a

supported change programme and accreditation

mark that works to put sustainability at the

heart of education.

The framework facilitates a close working

partnership between students’ unions and their

institutions and was with significant guidance

from an advisory group made up of

representatives from the EAUC, People and

Planet, UCU, SOCENV, HEA, AOC, Learning for

Sustainability Scotland, and the Knowledge

Transfer Network, as well as individual

institutions and students’ unions. The criteria

represent best practice not only within the UK,

but internationally.

Responsible Futures was created because, for

the last eight years, NUS’ surveying of students

has consistently shown that c60% of students

have either agreed or strongly agreed with the

statement ‘Sustainable development is

something which I would like to learn more

about’, and c85% with the statement

‘Sustainable development is something which

Universities should actively incorporate and

promote’ (base c15k students)1.

Responsible Futures was piloted in 2014-15 by

13 institutions, including 5 Further Education

institutions and 8 Higher Education across

England and Scotland. Following feedback from

the pilot cohort, significant developments were

made to the programme and it was launched in

summer 2015.

To date, nearly 30 partnerships across the UK

have joined Responsible Futures and they

collectively, they represent over 500,000

students.

research/our-research/skills-and-

sustainable-development

Contacts:

Responsible Futures

Website: www.nus.org.uk/responsiblefutures

Email: [email protected]

NUS Department for Sustainability

Website: www.nus.org.uk/sustainability


Lead Contact

Meg Baker


http://www.nus.org.uk/responsiblefutures

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.nus.org.uk/sustainability




4


5

1.2 Overview of the Audit

As part of the accreditation process, each

Partnership must undergo a two-day audit. The

purpose of the audit is to determine the

partnership’s score, accreditation level, and

conduct in-depth research on the impact of

Responsible futures through:

• A documentary review of evidence to verify

score,

• Interviews with key individuals,

• And student focus groups.

There are 45 total criteria, of which 10 are

mandatory and must be completed to achieve

accreditation and 35 are optional. An additional

three criteria are self-defined meaning that the

Partnership can highlight unique actions they

have taken which are not discussed through

other criteria.

To achieve the Responsible Futures

Accreditation Mark, the Partnership must meet

or exceed the score threshold of 200 points,

out of the maximum 300 points, not including

2 www.greenimpact.org.uk/responsiblefutures

the three self-defined criteria (allowing for up

to an additional 30 points).

If the partnership does not meet the threshold

of 200 points but their score exceeds 100

points, they will be awarded the “Working

Towards” Accreditation.

Prior to the audit, each Partnership has

submitted documentary evidence through the

online workbook tool2.

1.2.1 Documentary Evidence Review

In keeping with the student-centred nature of

the scheme, NUS trained teams of student

auditors at each institution to lead the audit.

This begins with a documentary review of

evidence. Through this process, students

determined the scores, with assistance from the

lead NUS auditor.

1.2.2 Interviews

A key component of the audit was interviews

with three key individuals: one representative

from the students’ union, one from the

institution, and one other individual who was

Student Auditors. April 2018: Martin, Kieran, John, Nicola, Elena and Temi.

http://www.greenimpact.org.uk/responsiblefutures


6

less actively involved in the partnership working

group. These informed the audit process as well

as providing insights which have contributed to

this report and the broader research conducted

on the programme.

1.2.3 Focus Groups

The third component of the audit was two

student focus groups. The first was the

intervention focus group, made up of students

who have been actively involved in

sustainability and social responsibility within the

formal or the informal curriculum. The second

was the non-intervention group, made up of

students who, to the best of the partnership’s

knowledge, had not been involved in

sustainability or social responsibility initiatives.

The student focus groups were for the purpose

of research relating to Responsible Futures and

therefore its results did not determine the

partnership’s accreditation. The resulting

findings have been included throughout this

report.


7

Results and Feedback

“Great effort, it is easy to see how much effort is put into embedding sustainability throughout the formal, informal and hidden curriculum at Keele, with the key staff members involved in sustainability consistently going above and beyond.” Student Auditor


8

2.0 Your Results

2.1 Your Accreditation

Keele University and Keele University Students’

Union gained the Responsible Futures

Accreditation with a score of 262.

2.2 Score Overview

Section Your Score Total

Possible

Baselines and

Benchmarks

28 40

Partnership and

Planning

16 20

Leadership and

Strategy

45 50

Policy and

Commitment

36 45

Interventions 35 50

Impact and

Outcomes

64 80

Outreach 13 15

Self-Defined

Criteria

26 Up to

maximum

of 30

Total 263 330*

*Points threshold for accreditation is 200

2.3 Explaining Your

Accreditation

As your partnership was awarded the

“Responsible Futures Accreditation” you have

been awarded the full accreditation. This means

that you have exceeded the score threshold of

200 and have demonstrated and evidenced

your partnership’s commitment and progress

for embedding sustainability and social

responsibility across the whole institution. This

accreditation will be valid for three years, until

April 2019, at which time another audit will be

required to re-validate your accreditation.

Massive congratulations to Keele University and Keele University Students’ Union on this significant achievement! Thank you for your dedication to creating a learning environment in which students develop the skills, knowledge, and attributes to be agents of change.

Robbie Young

VP Society and Citizenship, NUS


9

2.4 Key Findings

Keele’s cultural engagement with sustainability is a credit to and reflection of the passionate and

highly committed staff and students working to drive this forward across the institution and

Students’ Union. Interviews and focus group sessions drew out the narrative of Keele’s long-term

efforts to lead in this area, which naturally draws like-minded personally and professionally devoted

sustainability staff into the institution, regardless of their discipline. Consequentially, the institution

also attracts a number of already committed sustainability minded students. Responsible Futures

has not necessarily stimulated Keele’s efforts for sustainability, however it has provided a

framework and structure to identify and evaluate this work.

Specific thematic feedback is provided with each section below, however some overarching

impressions and headlines are outlined here:

• The Root and Branch campaign has been demonstrated as a fantastic awareness raising

campaign with targeted and wide-spread communications visibly installed across the campus.

• Efforts to evaluate and embed Education for Sustainable Development in the curriculum are

highly commendable with clear development and progress made since the previous audit.

• Sustainability, particularly environmental sustainability, has been showcased as an implicit part of

Keele life for both students and staff, however it has been identified that a large amount of the

delivery of this work falls on the responsibilities of a small number of staff.

• There is great breadth of co-curricular sustainability opportunities available to both students and

staff, with many events being open to all, which creates a sense of campus community

• A real challenge recognised by key staff and highlighted by student focus groups is overcoming

the risk of ‘preaching to the converted’ and ensuring Keele’s efforts for sustainability reach the

less engaged groups for truly a whole-institution approach

• Student Focus Groups highlighted the sustainability learning achieved through positive informal

and formal social interactions through general university life and being part of clubs or societies.

• There are some really positive examples of community engagement taking place in a wide range

of areas – this is particularly commendable with Keele’s out of town campus location.

“Keele seems to have a lot of 'green' students, maybe it’s the marketing of the Uni’ that makes it

more green… sporty friends are perhaps less engaged...I don't see sustainability to be something

my friends are thinking of. Outside of the engaged students I don’t think it's very pushed.” –

Student Focus Group, 2018

“There is a core group of really engaged students, others who drop in and out, and some who join

in during targeted events (e.g. Be more - exam plus) that aren't purely sustainability but have

elements embedded.” – Staff Interview, 2018

“I don’t do a sustainability course and I don’t see much of it covered within my course, although

now doing an environment module. It's a bit of a bubble - the green stuff.” – Student Focus Group,

2018

“I came to uni aware of sustainability and an environmentalist but have become even more

engaged and change came through contact with friends and societies rather than academic

learning.” – Student Focus Group, 2018

On Responsible Futures: “There are many things we would do anyway but RF gives structure and

timeframe for reflecting and evaluating our work. Reaccreditation has heightened the emphasis on

the need for a structured partnership between institution and SU.” – Staff Interview, 2018


10

2.5 Feedback

2.5.1 Baselines and benchmarks (BB01 to BB07)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score

Student Auditors’ Comments

BB001 Within the last three

years, the Partnership

has completed an

institution-wide survey

of students on their

attitudes towards, and

expectations on, social

responsibility and

sustainability SRS and

published the findings.

5 5 The survey provides useful and relevant

information which is published. The interview

revealed that a return rate of 100 would be

satisfactory so the response rate of 268

students is really positive.

BB002 The Partnership has

completed a follow-up

to the survey conducted

in BB001 and published

the findings.

0 0 Note: where no comment is provided, auditors simply agreed with the assessment made by the partnership working group.


carried out a thorough

baseline curriculum

review or audit on SRS

and published the

findings.

10 10 Curriculum reviews were provided for the years

2014-2015 and 2016-2017 are in depth and

thorough. The review is published and staff and

students will benefit as a result of this.

Methodology is described in detail providing a

thorough and robust approach with areas for

improvement identified.



curriculum review or

audit on SRS and


7 7 Follow-up curriculum review has been completed

with the same methodology but adapted to find

modulus with potential for imbedding ESD. This

has been published and can be accessed by staff

and students. Program level analysis is well

thought out with action plans for modules that

may be harder to achieve.

BB005 The Partnership

routinely asks students

about SRS in evaluation

surveys.

5 4 Learner involvement is present with

sustainability voice representative being

reintroduced and trained. Evidence of

sustainability in course and program review is

provided. No clear evidence of evaluation

surveys.

BB006 Within the last three

years, the Partnership

has completed a survey

of teaching staff on

their understanding of

SRS, and published the

findings.

2 2 A review has not been completed since 2013.

The auditor felt that this was a fair score

considering a focus group has been held. They

appreciate this could result in a survey overload

as other institutional surveys have taken place.



0 0 Note: where no comment is provided, auditors simply agreed with the assessment made by the

partnership working group.


11

survey to the survey

conducted in BB006 and


Strengths and weaknesses within this area

• The module evaluation for ESD is commendable – this is a thorough and robust piece of work that

showcases good practice and appropriately identifies areas for improvement in terms of

embedded ESD.

• Student focus groups highlighted some references to a general focus on environmental

sustainability with a need for greater provision of social responsibility and intersectional learning

opportunities. Continuing to refer to sustainability at Keele in terms of “environmental

sustainability” may be embedding this student perception.

• Introduction of Sustainability Voice Representatives is an innovative approach to progressing ESD

in the student learning experience in a way that meets the needs and interests of students. The

SVR training manual provides a great resource for students, it will be important to ensure ESD

remains to be explained in terms of innovative pedagogies as well as sustainability content.

Recommendations for improvement

• It will be interesting to monitor the impact and outcomes of Student Voice Representatives and

their influence over curriculum as this role develops. Perhaps increased emphasis on ESD

pedagogies may support SVRs to recognise the range of potential entry points for ESD in the

curriculum.

• The auditors were happy with a focus group approach to obtaining staff understanding of SRS,

and they recognise the issues of survey overload for both students and staff. It will be important

to ensure such approaches capture a fair and even representation of teaching staff in all areas

and to avoid reliance on institutional sustainability champions.

2.5.2 Partnership and Plan (PPL001 to PPL003)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


PPL001 The [Partnership] has a

working or coordinating

group that formally leads

on efforts to attain, or

retain, Responsible

Futures.

5 4 There is a clear demonstration of good

partnership working between the Students’

Union and institution although it is unclear

whether meetings have taken place beyond

7th Feb’ 2018. The partnership’s close

working with Student Voice Reps is also

highly positive for progressing SRS work. It

would be good to see greater breadth of staff

representation in this group

PPL002 The [Partnership] has an

active [SMART action

plan] relating to the

[issues related to

Responsible Futures].

6 5 From the evidence provided, there is a clear,

concise, smart action plan of the steps

intended to promote sustainability.

Endorsement by a senior member of staff,

Zoe Robinson who is the director of education

for sustainability, supports the plans

institutional influence. As above, it would be

good to see this being delivered by greater

variety of staff.


12

PPL003 Within the current

academic year, the

[Partnership] has

proactively engaged key

stakeholder groups in the

[issues related to


9 7 There is clear evidence that they have

engaged more than 3 key stakeholders such

as the course reps, teaching staff and

institutional leadership team. More evidence

can also be seen in the different lectures and

seminars held throughout the year. Trade

union reps have been engaged and the

partnership helped to further boost the voices

of students in matters of the university

through training and different events like root

and branch, exploring wicked problems

exhibition, Go green week and exam plus.

There is some evidence that they have tried

to reach teaching staff and the institutional

leadership teams. Meeting with the

partnership found that they reached the

students and teachers the same way through

the events listed above and the lectures and

seminars.


• The partnership working between the Students’ Union and sustainability staff on the institution

side is highly commendable and will help in progressing SRS across the whole institution.

• Staff representation on the Responsible Futures working group is fairly limited, whole institution

engagement for sustainability will be more attainable with representation from a range of

stakeholder groups and departments of the university.

• The SMART action plan for Responsible Futures highlights fantastic work and commitment by a

small number of staff, expansion of those committed to delivering on this would be beneficial.

• Wide ranging activities and events are enabling the partnership to engage a broad spectrum of

students and staff in sustainability.


• Endorsement and support of the partnerships SMART action plan by the Director of Sustainability

increases the influence of this work, however it would be beneficial to seek support from Senior

Leadership Team outside of sustainability.

• Diversifying the stakeholders, staff and departments engaged with progressing with SRS and

issues relating to Responsible Futures would support capacity building and encourage a truly

whole institution approach to this work.

Key quotes from interviews and focus groups to back this up

“There is also clear discussion of their plans amongst each other and they all seem to share the

same ideals” – Student Auditor, 2018

“This academic year is the first time since 2015 we've had a full-time Sustainability Projects Officer,

now having Sarah in this role is a massive improvement for the future and she sees the benefit of

working with the SU… also helps that she is an ex-student.” – Staff Interview 2018


13

2.5.3 Leadership and Strategy (LS001 to LS007)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


LS001 The [Partnership] has

gained the support of a

high-level champion within

both the students' union

and institution for their

efforts to attain

Responsible Futures.

7 7 The SU and Institution have champions for

RF, in the form of Sam Gibbons the Activities

and Community Officer, (ACO) at SU, who

sits on senate and the ESSG. Sarah Briggs

the sustainability projects officer (SPO), at

Institution, who sits on ESSG and Zoe

Robinson, the Director for education for

sustainability (DES).


gained the support of their

trustees and/or governors

within both the students'

union and institution on the

[issues related to

Responsible Futures] and

their efforts to achieve

accreditation.

5 4 Evidence suggests that the institution has

endorsed and is committed to issues around

and pertaining to RF through Senate, Union

council, and executive support. However,

although approved by Senate which contains

representatives of the SU, and RF is

supported by senate, there is no evidence of

the trustees of the SU supporting issues

relating to RF, therefore full marks cannot be

awarded.


developed a statement on

[SRS] through a

consultative process that

defines what it means to

the institution in relation to

its educational purpose and

values.

7 5 Evidence demonstrates that the institution

has indeed created a thorough document

explaining what RF means in terms of

education and across the university as a

whole. The auditors would have liked to see

evidence of student/SU engagement through

this process. The interview, found that it is to

be put forward to trustee board soon, to

ensure their endorsement.

LS004 The institution's overall

strategic plan, and/or the

publicly-stated learning,

learner or graduate

outcomes, skills or

attributes, or core learning

outcomes include

supportive references to

the [issues related to


10 10

Evidence clearly demonstrates a commitment

to RF in the strategic plan of the University.

Strategic aim 5 specifically relates to RF and

a commitment to embedding Education for

Sustainability in all courses.

LS005 The institution's learning

and teaching strategy,

academic strategy, or

equivalent, includes

supportive references to


Responsible Futures], or it

will do after the next

review.

10

10

Evidence demonstrates a commitment to

issues of RF within the "universities Learning

and Teaching Strategy". The 3rd aim refers

directly to an interdisciplinary approach for

better educating students. The 5th aim refers

to educating specifically on issues related to

sustainability. There is no doubt this criterion

is being met at Keele.


14


embedded the [issues

related to Responsible

Futures] into the

institution’s sustainability

strategy (or equivalent).

4 4 Evidence suggests that the sustainability

policy does highlight commitment from

university towards RF issues within university

goals.

LS007 [SRS] is embedded in the

internal communication

strategies for both the

institution and the

students' union, and/or the

[Partnership] has

successfully reached good

numbers of staff and

students across the

institution with proactive

communications relating to



5 5 Evidence demonstrates a wide and

varied method of distribution of the

campaign related to RF.


• There is clear high level strategic prioritisation of SRS and ESD at the institution through explicit

inclusion in the whole institution Strategic Plan and the Learning and Teaching Strategy, which

will greatly support the partnership to move this agenda forward.

• The institution’s ESD strategy demonstrates positive and ambitious targets for embedding ESD in

the curriculum and with that providing staff with appropriate support and training to achieve this.

• The Root and Branch campaign appears to be a successful mode of communicating the broad

spectrum of sustainability and the institution’s commitment to this work. The reach of this was

highlighted during a student focus group where most students were aware of this campaign.

Some misunderstanding did exist with students knowing of the campaign but not understanding

what it is aiming to communicate, this may be worth revisiting.


• Interviews found that prioritisation of SRS within the Activities and Community Officer role in the

SU has happened organically due to Sam Gibbons’ personal commitment and passion for

progressing this work. It would be beneficial to ensure this is explicitly embedded in a role of one

or more sabbatical officers to ensure continuity of effort.


“Our ESD policy is for all students to be engaged with sustainability during their time at Keele… It’s

difficult to get metrics for this though and surveys may not help. We are able to get anecdotal data

though, which provides qualitative data for measuring engagement.” - Staff interview, 2018

“There is an institutional culture of working towards sustainability. Keele has high level messaging

and our previous VC was very passionate about ESD which supports this being part of institutional

culture. Institutional high level supports helps staff move from personal interest to making this part

of their professional role.” – Staff interview, 2018


15

2.5.4 Policy and Commitment (POC001 to POC008)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


POC001 The institution has

provided professional

development on the

[issues related to

Responsible Futures]

for relevant personnel.

7 6 Evidence of online CPD course for staff and offline workshop that all new teaching staff must complete. Verbal evidence of participation and positive feedback, however they had some difficulty gaining attendance. One-to-ones with medicine, modules have embedded sustainability. Evidence of sustainability

exchange events with other institutions but could include evidence for impact of this.

POC002 The students’ union

has formally passed

and publicised a policy

commitment to

embedding [SRS] in

the formal and

informal curriculum.

4 4 All points are evidenced in policy documents, however, there is scope to do more in terms of sustainability- for instance banning plastic

cutlery and cups.

POC003 One or more named

elected student officer

has agreed to lead on

[SRS] issues for the

students' union this

academic year.

4 3 Activities and Community Officer- verbally evidenced this. For long-term commitments to this, it would benefit the SU to ensure SRS is embedded in the role descriptor for all or one of the elected officers.

POC004 The [Partnership] has

made sufficient staff or

student resource

available to

substantively progress



10 8 It is a shame to see the Director of Education

for Sustainability’s role reduced to only a small

percentage of her overall role specification but

this seems to have been managed with

recruitment of Sustainability Projects Officer -

unclear how much seniority/ leverage this role

has but clearly very well networked within the

university, which is a credit to Sarah’s work

ethos.


made effective use of

the relevant quality

framework and/or

outcome agreements

to progress the [issues


Futures].

5 4 Note: where no comment is provided, auditors simply agreed with the assessment made by

the partnership working group.




Futures] into their

human resource

processes.

3 3 Fair effort. The auditor is satisfied that the

criteria has been met.




5 5 Sufficient effort has been made to fulfil the

criteria.


16

Futures] into their

induction processes for

all types of new starter

(students, staff,

governors, etc.).


worked with the

institution's student

recruitment and/or

widening participation

department(s) to

incorporate issues

relating to [SRS] into

their work.

4 3 The prospectus seems to be sufficient, but further engagement with Widening Participation would ensure Keele is reaching out to all students.


• There is clearly a strong culture at Keele of engagement with sustainability which ensures this

work remains on the agenda.

• Professional development opportunities for staff to progress their capacity for embedding

sustainability and social responsibility in their work is commendable, however strategies need to

be developed to increase attendance and uptake.

• Recruitment of the Sustainability Projects Officer and their apparent talent for networking and

engagement is supporting the progression of sustainability at Keele.

• Inclusion of Keele’s commitments to sustainability in the prospective will encourage the culture is

recognised by students before they even start at the University.


• Collaborating with student recruitment teams organising open days and outreach work to ensure

SRS is embedded in the identity of Keele from the moment prospective student hear about the

University would further integrate sustainability into the culture of the institution.

• It will be important to ensure formal pathways for engagement and recognition of SRS are

encouraged across the whole institution, to prevent siloed working with disparity between the

highly engaged and less engaged.

• More formalised processes may ensure legacy of the good work taking place in the Students’

Union by extremely passionate and committed officers with their inevitable future absence.

• Ensuring SRS opportunities and communications reach out to and consider accessibility for all

widening participation students will support the embedding of this culture for all students.


“We don’t necessarily see ourselves as leaders in being progressive, but we see this as an integral

part of who we are.” – SU Staff Interview, 2018

2.5.5 Interventions (IN001 to IN009)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


IN001 Within the current

academic year, the

[Partnership] has run one

or more internal event

4 5 Brilliant effort of bringing together students

and staff. The auditor assumes the green car

exhibition was a product of industrial

engagement.


17

bringing together staff

and students on the

[issues related to


IN002 Within the last five years,

the [Partnership] has

taken part in, or is

booked onto, an external

change programme on



3 2 Congratulations on hosting WSEN 2016. The auditor would have liked to see the

partnership’s engagement with a more active participatory change programme beyond that of People and Planet Green League, although with the evidence upload it has been explained that this is used as an institutional tool for progressing SRS at Keele.


academic year, the

institution has made

funding, or related

resources, available to

staff and students so that

they can develop their

own projects that support

the aims of Responsible

Futures.

7 6 The criterion has been met but the question of future efforts comes into consideration. Maybe a larger scale event should be considered once these events gain enough support.

IN004 During the last 12

months, three or more

schools / depts. have

done one or more of the

following in relation to

[SRS]: discussion-based

and participatory

learning; problem based

learning; simulation

activities; and/or debates

on [issues related to


8 8 The evidence demonstrates a great way of blending the intended values related to SRS

within the modules. The auditor recommends that continuing to develop how this works is presented could help in catching students' interest effectively. The Greening Business example provided is very carbon and environment focussed with social responsibility seeming to be secondary to

this, perhaps some more explicit learning for social responsibility would support this work

going forward. However, the ESD Module Case Studies document provides a fantastic resource and portfolio of efforts.

IN005 The institution's estates

team routinely

collaborate with learning

and teaching staff to

create educational

opportunities through

their [SRS]-related work.

4 2 The effort documented looks more of an

individual based project with very minimal collaboration between students and staff. The auditor would recommend promoting more student and staff combined projects or volunteering opportunities as it creates a chance for the flow of knowledge.


academic year, the

[Partnership] has actively

made use of student

coursework and/or

dissertations to support

one or more of the other

criteria in this workbook,

or has made firm plans

for next academic year.

4 3 Communications between the University

Estates Manager and Greening Business

Module Leader demonstrate staff actively

seeking to and sharing opportunities to make

use of student course work, plans to take this

forward are not explicitly demonstrated.

IN007 The [Partnership]

actively facilitates

2 2 The auditors were impressed by the efforts

but felt there was limited documentation


18

structured

interdisciplinary

experiences, linked to the

[issues related to

Responsible Futures],

through the formal

curriculum.

showing inter-disciplinary participation. More

inter-disciplinary participation with topics that

can catch interests of students from different

background would be good to see.

IN008 There are good levels of

informal curriculum

activity that is supportive

of the aims of

Responsible Futures.

8 7 The number and range of events seems

interesting with good breadth of interests.

The auditor would like to have seen some

metrics for these interventions to quantify

participation. Post-event stories would also

support wider awareness raising.

IN009 The [Partnership] has

conducted an in-depth

analysis of a specific

intervention listed above.

-

- Note: where no comment is provided,

auditors simply agreed with the assessment made by the partnership working group.


• There are some fantastic examples of very positive interventions taking place across the

institution, these are particularly well demonstrated at an academic level through the ESD Module

Case Studies and the breadth of co-curricular opportunities for students and staff.

• Some strategic interventions for interdisciplinary working and increased opportunities for

engagement between students/ academics and professional departments could create an even

deeper institutional engagement with SRS.

• The auditor would have liked to see wider engagement external change programmes in more

recent years for progression of SRS and knowledge exchange beyond the institution’s walls.

• The voluntary electives naturally provide opportunities for interdisciplinary working, this was

mentioned in a focus group as something which may be lost with future institutional changes

which would be a shame given the positive comments made about these.


• The auditor recommended exploration of opportunities to work more closely with estates

colleagues for students to gain real-world applied learning opportunities whilst supporting the

institution to solve its on-campus sustainability challenges.

• Increasing interdisciplinary opportunities where students are able to work in partnership with

others to apply their course specific expertise may be a positive way of creating new

opportunities if electives are lost through institutional re-organisation.

• Collecting metrics and narratives from events and interventions would support evaluation of reach

and impact.


“…students sometimes come to Keele with no engagement or background knowledge of

sustainability through their course and the hidden curriculum at Keele their engagement has grown

and I have seen it happen through their student journeys. Students taking the Greening Business

course have increased and they often take learnings from this through their time at Keele, giving

everyone the opportunity to have sustainability in their course is really positive for engagement

with sustainability through their whole journey.” – Sabbatical Officer, 2018

“Less students studying environmentally related disciplines are engaging with sustainability

initiatives... the bungalow seems to have become less of a hub of engagement… Competition for the


19

places have gone down, it could be to do with the standard of the bungalow and the garden there.

Students don’t seem to be taking up opportunities they used to.” Student Focus Group, 2018

“Yes, [I have] got more involved and more concerned [about sustainability since coming to Keele].

The module on human impact and the environment raises lots of concerns… it's elective for some

courses but compulsory for others - human bio, biology, geography, environmental Sustainability

students all together.” – Student Focus Group, 2018

“Open days - drinks are offered in disposable cups - there could be more cohesion, this would make

incoming students conscious from the outset.” – Student Focus Group, 2018

2.5.6 Impact and Outcomes (IO001 to IO004)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


IO001 The [Partnership] has

reflected on and

identified demonstrable

positive progress in

relation to embedding

[SRS] across the formal

curriculum.

20 18 There is good evidence of reflection and

identification of progress made, most notably

within HUMSS.

Regarding programme analysis, it is sufficient

that free standing electives are available for

students that wish to expand their pre-

existing interest in sustainability issues

however, where possible, it would be good to

see an effort during subsequent phases to

push for trojan mice infiltrating all

programmes in their own right. This seems

especially important given that there is a

general decline across the university for dual

honours degrees.


reflected on and

identified demonstrable

positive progress in

relation to its institution-

wide collaborative

approach.

20 17 The evidence clearly shows that collaboration

is a cornerstone of the partnership's

approach. It is also clear to see that both

vertical and horizontal collaboration has been

taken seriously and mapped out accordingly.

Initiatives like Green week are a good

example of staff and student collaboration

but could be improved with endorsement

from upper-management if possible.


reflected on and

identified their short-

term impacts and

outcomes in relation to

positive outcomes for

students.

20 15 The number of events, largely concentrated on Green Week is impressive along with other

events evidenced such as WSEN 2016. The auditor would have liked to see more quantitative data for participation to gain a deeper understanding of the short-term

impacts.


reflected on and

identified their long-term

impacts and outcomes in

relation to positive

outcomes for students.

17 14 Some aspects don't have as much evidence as the auditor would have liked, e.g. screen shots of one dissertation could be supplemented by others. However, the mapping of the SDGs within Geology is impressive. The curriculum audit that has

taken place at module level is undoubtedly impressive.


20


• Free standing electives are a positive means of engaging the already engaged or partially

engaged students in deeper levels of thinking for SRS.

• The curriculum audit is clearly a huge piece of work that has massively benefitted the institutions

progress towards embedding ESD in the formal curriculum across all courses however there is

clearly work to be done to extend the great practice that is taking place more widely. Progress

has clearly been made in this area since the 2015 Responsible Futures audit.

• The Keele Sustainability Network launch is an innovative approach to engaging staff in

progressing this work.

• Keele’s approach to offering a wide range of engagement opportunities for both students and

staff is impressive.


• Applying the trojan mice approach to embedding ESD across the whole institution would be

innovative, progressive and a massive step beyond the free-standing electives approach. The

module audit for ESD will greatly support next steps for this work.

• Implementing an evaluation process for engagement events and initiatives will help Keele to

assess the impact and reach of their work in this area.

• Some students in the focus group shared concerns about the extent to which departments like

geology are connected with, and receive funding from, big mining and fossil fuel companies and

saw this as being contradictory to the SDG mapping work which had been produced.


“Identification of best practice for ESD will greatly support Keele in moving forward to further

embed sustainability across the board at the university in alignment with the institution's strategic

ambitions. Greater emphasis on exploring future aims of how to support those where EfS is still less

evident in the curriculum would be beneficial for future RF developments” – RF Auditor, 2018

On my psychology module we had an essay asking how we could persuade people to change their

behaviour with regard to climate change… it’s (sustainability) being tackled within course

assessments rather than whole modules… It helped us explore behaviour change, it’s interesting

because it’s a global perspective. I think it’s important this is part of my course…” – Student Focus

Group, 2018

“Aligning courses with SDGs is amazing but a lot of that departments work relies upon placements etc with fossil fuel and mining industry, this is maybe not sustainably responsible... Lots of PhDs are funded directly by big fossil fuel companies (Shell, BP etc.).” – Student Auditor, 2018

2.5.7 Outreach (OU001 to OU004)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


OU001 The [Partnership] has



Futures] into their

community outreach

activities.

4 3 Interesting work taking place with outreach

activities/ educational activities particularly

with a wide range of community groups,

students and the institution for SRS. There is

evidence on Raising and Giving and

volunteering from societies that contributes


21

to this criterion. Committee conference

coming up next month and Rachel has put

sustainability on this agenda, generally

student societies and club engagement is

good i.e. in Go Green Week. To achieve full

points, the auditor would like to see this

embedded in an outreach plan/ strategy.

OU002 Within the current

academic year, the

[Partnership] has

proactively engaged one

or more students' union

or educational institution

on the [issues related to


3 3 It is really positive to see this work being delivered by students and that the institution is supporting/ facilitating these opportunities for students and the community.

OU003 Within the last three

years, the [Partnership]

has presented on their

work relating to the

Responsible Futures

agenda at a sector

event.

3 3 Note: where no comment is provided,

auditors simply agreed with the assessment made by the partnership working group.

OU004 The [Partnership] has

published case studies

case studies promoting

[SRS]-related

achievements, impacts

and outcomes.

4 4 Some good examples, clearly already doing

it. Procurement strategy work looks really

good. Any SU examples (Green Impact)?

What would you do next? Are there more

courses you want to pinpoint for

engagement? Impact and difficulty as 2+2 so

do you feel what could be done to increase

the impact of this criteria?


• The institution and Student Union’s embedding of SRS related work in their community outreach

has been demonstrated as broad, educational and interesting.

• Keele’s approach to opening its doors for students in the community and community members

locally and internationally seems to be a positive step in the right direction for outreach and

supports the reformation of public perceptions of universities.


• To enhance the partnerships efforts to engage with the community, it is recommended that SRS

is formally embedded in the institution/SUs outreach strategy/ plan.


“Students through sustainability have been saying they didn’t want to get involved in clubs/

societies but as sustainability voice reps students have found their own paths for engagement…

Students are also asking to volunteer in sustainability roles with the community.” – SU Staff

Interview, 2018


22

2.5.8 Self-defined criteria (SD001 to SD003)

Criteria

Number

Criteria Estimated

Score

Student

Auditors’

Score


SD001 Self-defined

(Social enterprise work)

10 9 There are a lot of unique activities evidenced which have been completed to increase student engagement with sustainability and the sustainable development goals. They are interactive informal educational opportunities which engage students in creative ways such as introducing global citizenship via student

postcards on the world map. The introduction of different types of media such as the twitter pledges to engage students is a really good idea and also involving technology/IT by using QR codes could help students and staff

make a link between IT and sustainability.

SD002 Self-defined

(ESSA project)

10 9 Very good methods of monitoring and

increasing engagement with sustainability.

Ownership of individual school's sustainability

is encouraged through the institution's 'Green

Impact' audit. The use of students for this

increases collaboration between students,

staff and the sustainability team.

Collaboration between staff is encouraged by

the staff sustainability network. The Root and

Branch scheme aims to encourage university-

wide participation in sustainability issues and

this is evidently well communicated via email.

The awards to recognise individual and school

sustainability efforts with a celebration event

is a really positive way to engage staff.

Collaboration between academic staff,

estates, accommodation and procurement is

facilitated with focus groups.

SD003 Self-defined

9 8 The introduction of Sustainability Voice Representatives is a great way to facilitate bottom-up change and to increase student engagement with sustainability. However, as it is such a new development there is not yet

evidence of what changes these roles have affected. Verbal evidence given of plans to facilitate more collaboration with other course student voice reps (regular) so that the outreach from this initiative can be maximised. Great idea/ concept and

initiative, as it is still in its early days,

measuring of the impact of this is still to be seen but so far, a fantastic way of actively engaging students in curriculum developments for ESD.


• Empowering students to audit their institution for the embedding of SRS in curriculum is a

positive way of raising students’ awareness to their learning opportunities and provides a

transparent approach to curriculum auditing/development.


23

• A huge amount of effort is being led by key SRS staff in the institution and SU to progress an

institution wide culture of furthering and enhancing Keele’s work for sustainability. The Root and

Branch campaign is a really positive initiative for raising the voice for sustainability very visibly.

• The Exploring Wicked Problems intervention is a great example of an engagement activity open to

students from a wide range of courses and backgrounds. It would be good to see how this was

communicated as widely as possible to reach students across the institution.

• Introduction of Sustainability Voice Representatives is an innovative and unique approach to

promoting and facilitate bottom up change for sustainability in the curriculum.

• The wide-ranging sustainability engagement opportunities support a culture shift within the

student body more generally with less students wanting to join clubs or societies (informed by SU

staff interview).


• The auditors have high hopes for the roles of the Sustainability Voice Representatives. It will be

beneficial to see collaborative working between these and the general Student Voice

Representatives to ensure awareness raising goes beyond the already sustainability engaged

students.

• Increasing the clarity of the message for the Root and Branch campaign may support its success.

Focus Group feedback found that there were some mixed levels of understanding regarding what

the messages are behind the Root and Branch campaign. Although all students were aware of its

existence, the purpose and message of the campaign seemed to be unclear for some students.


“Informal curriculum work is particularly good - e.g. activities, engaging with engaged students etc.” – Student Auditor, 2018 “It’s Good to be focussing on the university but Stoke and Newcastle are small so could expand to the local towns beyond just the campus (plus Keele village) i.e. signage and communications of sustainability.” – Student Auditor, 2018


24

2.6 Key Recommendations

Focus Groups and interviews repeatedly heard that there is a group of students and staff who are

deeply and passionately engaged with sustainability which contributes to the institutional culture.

Commitments to sustainability at a high level within the institution’s Strategic Plan is undoubtedly

greatly beneficial to Keele’s success in terms of explicitly stating commitments to continue to grow

this cultural identity.

2.6.1. Recommendations

• The greatest challenge for Keele is to ensure interventions and engagement opportunities for

students within the formal, subliminal and informal curriculum reach beyond the core group of

already passionate sustainability advocates.

• To ensure Keele’s approach to Social Responsibility and Sustainability meets student demand and

interest the SU would benefit from embedding this within the role of a full-time member of staff

and a formal commitment for one or more elected officers.

• In the future it would be interesting to gain a wider insight to the institutional perceptions of ESD

and SRS at Keele through interviews with non-sustainability/Responsible Futures engaged staff.

• It is important to also be aware some students have the perception that sustainability at Keele is

very environmentally focussed with a lack of inclusion of social aspects.

• With a strong institutional sustainability identity, the partnership need to ensure high level

commitments disseminate throughout all departments of the institution and SU.

• Collation and use of engagement metrics would support the partnership identify impact,

successes and areas for improvement.

• Continue to promote knowledge exchange and interdisciplinary opportunities for both students

and staff to avoid siloed working.

“I would like to see a vision for 5 years’ time with this relationship [SU/institution RF partnership]. A long-term vision will help longevity, currently the roles are quite dependent on specific personalities but there needs to be a contingency plan. Would like to see institutional memory within role specifications. e.g. Tom's (union development and democracy officer) role but also for a permanent member of staff.” – Student Auditor, 2018

“In terms of social responsibility, it does well to push the green agenda but doesn’t push further to

consider how to be more inclusive to minorities experiences, this also needs to be thought of each

time when social responsibility is part of the conversation.” – Student Focus Group, 2018

“The uni seems to have big ideas and projects but this doesn’t get passed down to smaller

departments…like I work in the shop and it doesn’t seem to be considered by consumers here.” –

Student Focus Group, 2018

“Lots of fast food, would like to have food that makes me feel better as I eat more on campus

during stressful workload times and then I eat badly and feel rubbish… We need more tasty and

diverse veggie/vegan meals, could do with asking the students what they want to see on menus - it

has improved but still room for improvement.” – Student Focus Group, 2018

“I think attitudes are changing towards sustainability. Now half my lacrosse team are vegan.

Impacts of meat make people more aware of environmental degradation as a whole” - Student

Focus Group, 2018


25

Discussing the benefits of participation in Responsible Futures: “Looking at sustainability in

a different way… I hadn't previously thought about it from so many different aspects, now I'm

engaging with the Sustainable Development Goals… not just recycling and lights off.” – Staff

Interview, 2018

“I’ve realised the breadth of sustainability engagement availability, previously I was very carbon

centric but now seeing the bigger picture plus the role of plastics and their end of life…” – Staff

Interview, 2018

“Continue treating all optional fields as mandatory - great attitude to see them working to the highest possible level - very admirable. [They are] Clearly leaders in this work and they should be proud.” – Student Auditor, 2018

2.7 Lead Auditor Summation

Eight students led the audit process for Responsible Futures, gaining valuable employability and

ESD skills as a result. At the close of each day of the audits students participated in reflection

activities to track their development over the two days. At the end of the audit, they had the

following to say about their personal experience:

• “One of the things I appreciate the most is the effort they put in Sustainability and their will to

promote creativity and always renew and rediscover their activities”

• “I think it would be very responsible to have a future with this partnership. Seriously though, I

think it would be of benefit to continue to work with responsible futures given its impact on the

staff to collaborate with colleagues more and to consolidate the work that institutions already do.

Also, if an institution doesn't do much, it could reasonably have the impact of providing needed

focus on how to move forward. Its flexibility is appropriate for what will always be a dynamic

entity.”

• “Efforts at Keele towards Responsible Futures has been quite extraordinary, even as a student

who is engaged with forwarding the sustainability agenda at this university, I found that there

was much more engagement than I realised. Their goal to embed sustainability in all that they do

is certainly underway if not already exceeded.”

• “The efforts to attain responsible futures is obvious and so is the passion of the whole

department.”

• “Great effort, it is easy to see how much effort is put into embedding sustainability throughout

the formal, informal and hidden curriculum at Keele, with the key staff members involved in

sustainability consistently going above and beyond.”

• “I am very impressed with how much effort the University has put into gathering the information

and evidence.”

The two-day audit with Keele students and staff was a pleasure to deliver and thanks must be given

to the individuals who contributed a huge amount of time and effort to ensure this process was a

positive one for all. The University and SU are clearly making strategically embedded meaningful

change for sustainability that impacts institutional culture as well as student attitudes to and

understanding of sustainability. Student focus groups highlighted the well-rounded sustainability

knowledge Keele students have as a result of long-term commitment and dedication for change

being led by a small number of passionate, influential staff members.

Thank you for the enthusiasm and drive being demonstrated by both SU and university staff

throughout the audit and the Responsible Futures programme as a whole. We look forward to

continuing to work with you and support your ESD work in the future.


26

Further Information


27

3.0 General Information

3.1 What does my accreditation mean?

The “Responsible Futures Accreditation” means

that you have gained the full accreditation by

exceeding the score threshold of 200 (out of

300) and have demonstrated and evidenced

your partnership’s commitment and progress

for embedding sustainability and social

responsibility across the whole institution.

The “Responsible Futures – Working Towards

Accreditation” recognises your commitment and

progress when you have not met the score

threshold to be awarded the full accreditation.

Through being awarded the “Working Towards

Accreditation” your partnership should request

a follow-up audit when you feel that you are

prepared to go for accreditation. Follow-up

audits will be charged the standard audit fee.

3.2 How long will the accreditation last?

Accreditation is valid for two years, so until

April 2020, at which time another audit will be

required to re-validate your accreditation.

3.3 How do we use the logo?

Each institution will be given the appropriate

logo – please use this widely to recognise your

accomplishment and your partnership’s

commitment to sustainability and social

responsibility. If you would like to provide

further information about the programme,

please link to

www.nus.org.uk/responsiblefutures

3.4 What’s next?

The 2018 Responsible Futures Awards

Ceremony will take place in Autumn 2018,

further details to come.

Following the awards ceremony, you will be

provided with a photograph of your team

receiving your award and the physical

certificate. We encourage you to make use of

local media outlets to celebrate your

achievements.

After achieving accreditation, the annual

membership fee will cover all future audits to

maintain accreditation as well as ongoing

support. This membership fee is £500 +VAT for

higher education partnerships and £100 +VAT

for further education partnerships.

3.5 How do we keep improving?

We encourage you to use the feedback from

this report and through the audit process to

inform your work moving forward.

In conducting your next audit, we would hope

to see progress against the recommendations

outlined in this report.

The Responsible Futures accreditation will push

the sector for continuous improvement and we

hope you will continue to actively engage with

other institutions in the cohort to share learning

and good practice.

3.6 How do we compare?

Responsible Futures is not a league table and

therefore individual scores will not be

published. NUS will not share your scores;

however, you are welcome to share them with

others if you wish.

Note that 2014/15 pilot year participants

worked to a maximum score of 260 points

which the accreditation threshold being met at

130 points before the threshold was raised to

200 points out of a maximum 330 in summer

2015.

3.7 I would like to be re-assessed, what

can I do?

If you not agree with your score/accreditation

and would like to be re-assessed, please

contact the Responsible Futures team on

[email protected]. The

documentary review can be re-conducted if the

partnership feels that the assessment is

inaccurate.

http://www.nus.org.uk/responsiblefutures


Documents

AGENDA - keele.ac.uk