CHANGING THE CULTURE | Page 52

and procedures are embedded and adhered to. This person won’t be responsible for doing all the work but will have ownership over developing and implementing the agreed response.  An effective response must also involve a clear understanding of risk and the identification of individuals within the institution who own specific risks (ownership of different types of risk may sit in different places). The risks encountered may relate to organisational risk, risk to the victim/survivor, risk to the criminal justice process, legal risks, reputation risks or risk to the wider student body. Universities should conduct a risk assessment which seeks to identify and assess risks across relevant functions – for example, disciplinary processes, human resources, student services, codes of conduct, academics, student and staff contracts, investigations, sanctions including suspensions.  It is important to link an institution’s response framework to its corporate governance framework. This is necessary as the university governing body is accountable for institutional activities and has a legal duty (under the Equality Act 2010) to eliminate unlawful discrimination and harassment throughout the institution and to promote equality and diversity in line with the principles in the Higher Education Code of Governance (the Code states ‘The governing body must promote equality and diversity throughout the institution, including in relation to its own operation’). As part of the process of embedding the institutional response in corporate governance frameworks, those operating in a governance role should be suitably equipped to have a clear understanding of the issues that are relevant to their responsibilities, and provided with regular information on the outcomes and effectiveness of the institutional response.  An institution’s response should be understood by, and embedded across, key functions and staff groups – this is important in ensuring that individuals receive joined-up support. Relevant functions are likely to include governance, student services, human resources, academics, disciplinary processes and students’ union.  Policies and procedures across the institution must align – they should not contradict each other  Involvement from the students’ union is essential in developing and implementing a university-wide response. One area to consider is confidentiality between the university and students’ union particularly if students approach the union for support in the first instance. It is sensible to unpick confidentiality considerations between the university and students’ union and identify conflicts of interest or barriers to information flows. Communicating effectively with the students’ union will also help to avoid inconsistencies in policies to tackle sexual violence which could undermine an institution-wide approach. It will also ensure clear case handling processes. 51