A view looking at the memorial gate

the approval process

governance at the university can seem complex.  you can view more about our governance, including the scheme of delegation at www.gla.ac.uk/governance

the following explains how we approve projects with funding, how we prioritise our projects and a typical terms of reference for a project governance board.

project approvals

Local financial apporoval for investments <£500k and already in the Investment Plan
  • Colleges go through their College Management Group
  • Estates projects go through the Capital Programmes Steering Group (CPSG)
  • Technology projects go through the IT Financial Planning Committee (ITFPC)
  • See your Finance Business Partner for more information about your own

Financial apporoval for all other investments
  • <£500k and not in the Investment Plan go to Investment Committee
  • >£500k goes to the Investment Committee
  • >£3m goes to Senior Management Group and Finance Committee
  • >£25m goes to Finance Committee, Senior Management Group and Court

Additional business case approvals required
  • Significant technology spend may also be reviewed by the Information Policy and Strategy Committee
  • Significant Estates spend may also be reviewed the Estates Committee
  • See your Finance Business Partner about possible other reviews required

Working Groups and Delivery Boards

  • Many programmes and projects establish a Working Group to complete the initial activities up to and including writing the busienss case

  • Upon formal approval, the majority of projects will establish a Delivery Board chaired by the Sponsor to oversee the delivery and handover stages of the project

Corporate and academic governance
  • You can find out more about our corporate and academic governance structure, including the Scheme of Delegation, at www.gla.ac.uk/governance

project change requests - general

Making a change after the business case has been approved is managed through the CHANGES tab in the project workbook within PPMA.  This covers request to increase budget, resources, change scope and adjust plans.

Click here to see a visual of the change approval scheme of delegation

 Head of FinanceDirector of functionExec Director of functionInvestment CommitteeLocal Committee or BoardFinance Committee
<£50kOverspend <£50k with available contingency is approved locally unless there is a major change to scope, plans or benefits; in these cases, contact your Head of Finance
£50k - £200kcan approvecan approvecan approvecan approvecan approvecan approve
£200k - £500kcannot approvecannot approvecan approvecan approvecan approvecan approve
>£500kcannot approvecannot approvecannot approvecan approvecan approvecan approve

project change requests - estates

Approval of investmentsDirector of Construction and Capital ProgrammeExecutive Director of EstatesInvestment CommitteeEstates CommitteeFinance CommitteeUniversity Court
Total application value (incl. VAT) <£250k £250k - £500k £500k - £3m £3m - £25m £3m - £25m >£25m

project change requests - information services

Approval of investmentsExecutive Director of Information ServicesIT Financial Planning CommitteeInvestment CommitteeIPSCFinance CommitteeUniversity Court
Total application value (incl. VAT) <£250k £250k - £500k £500k - £3m £3m - £25m £3m - £25m >£25m

project change requests - transformation

Approval of investmentsExecutive Director of TransformationIT Financial Planning Committee and Transformation BoardInvestment CommitteeIPSCFinance CommitteeUniversity Court
Total application value (incl. VAT) <£250k £250k - £500k £500k - £3m £3m - £25m £3m - £25m >£25m

project prioritisation matrix

We use the following criteria to help determine the category of a project; this helps inform decision making about which projects to tackle first.

RegulatoryBusiness ContinuityStrategic GoalsSustainabilityCapability
P1. Statutory or legislative requirement P1. Failure to invest in this will result in almost certain loss or disruption to business critical services P2. Failure to invest would mean we could not achieve our strategic goals P2. Would have a direct positive contribution towards reducing our carbon footprint and meeting sustainability goals P2. Will result in a new service, process or technology that demonstrates a competitive advantage for the University
P2. Potential statutory or legislative requirement P2. Failure to invest will result in a high risk of loss or disruption to business critical services P3. Failure to invest would mean we could not achieve certain themes in our strategy P3. Indirectly supports a positive contribution to reducing our carbon footprint and meeting our sustainability goals P3.Failure to invest will lead to a loss in the quality of services, processes or technology
  P3. Failure to invest will result in a signficant impact to business services and operations P3. There may be some impact on the University Strategy   P3. Failure to invest has the potential to result in a loss in the quality of services, process or technology
  P3. Failure to invest will result in some impact to business services and operations P3. This may have an indirect impact on our strategy P4. Does not relate to our sustainability goals  
P4. This is not a statutory or legislative requirement P3. Failure to invest will not result in any impact to business services and operations   P4. Would result in an increase to our carbon footprint P4. This will not lead to improvement in services, processes or technology
         
P1: Priority 1 MUST DO P2: Priority 2 SHOULD DO P3: Priority 3 COULD DO P4: Priority 4 WOULD DO Priority is determined by the highest score