Project approach The approach involved: Mapping of each university’s relevant documentation to the prioritisation, management, evaluation and implementation processes they undertake in relation to HEPPP funded initiatives. Thematic analysis of the stakeholder interviews across the six partner universities. Analysis of case studies prepared by each partner university drawing on their knowledge of processes undertaken within their university, their relevant documentation and analysis of semi-structured interviews conducted with key stakeholders from their university. Developing good practice guidelines informed by the findings. Final reporting and drafting of recommendations for the Commonwealth Government. Key findings The key findings of the project were drawn from the three sources of data (mapping of relevant documentation, thematic analysis of stakeholder interviews and case studies prepared by each partner university). Analysis of university documentation The findings from mapping each university’s relevant HEPPP/equity related documentation identified four typical approaches to the allocation of HEPPP funds: 1). a senior executive leadership group determines the funding of initiatives that it regards are likely to have the greatest impact on improving equity outcomes for the university; 2). a hybrid approach in which senior leaders quarantine some funds for institution wide projects, with the remainder of the funds being allocated to initiatives selected following an open call for proposals; 3). a research centre advises a senior leadership group about the allocation of funds; or 4). all HEPPP funds are allocated to initiatives selected by a senior leadership group following an open call for proposals. The partner universities were found to share common forms of documentation including access and participation plans, and specific HEPPP reporting templates and progress reports. However, universities also have key documents that are more specific to their context. It was also evident that HEPPP documentation exists within a broader student equity context, with universities also having in place other types of equity-related documentation including disability support plans, Indigenous support plans, and student equity strategies that incorporate, but are not limited to, HEPPP priorities. Stakeholder interviews Participant responses to the semi-structured interviews conducted with key stakeholders who were involved with HEPPP or HEPPP related initiatives in some manner at each university were shaped by the institutional context in which they were located and their role in the university. There was variation in the awareness levels of staff depending on their role at the university, with more senior staff having a clearer understanding of the broader equity context and the importance of evaluation of HEPPP funded initiatives informing future decision making than staff at the project level, though most stakeholders recognised
Project approach The approach involved: Mapping of each university’s relevant documentation to the prioritisation, management, evaluation and implementation processes they undertake in relation to HEPPP funded initiatives. Thematic analysis of the stakeholder interviews across the six partner universities. Analysis of case studies prepared by each partner university drawing on their knowledge of processes undertaken within their university, their relevant documentation and analysis of semi-structured interviews conducted with key stakeholders from their university. Developing good practice guidelines informed by the findings. Final reporting and drafting of recommendations for the Commonwealth Government. Key findings The key findings of the project were drawn from the three sources of data (mapping of relevant documentation, thematic analysis of stakeholder interviews and case studies prepared by each partner university). Analysis of university documentation The findings from mapping each university’s relevant HEPPP/equity related documentation identified four typical approaches to the allocation of HEPPP funds: 1). a senior executive leadership group determines the funding of initiatives that it regards are likely to have the greatest impact on improving equity outcomes for the university; 2). a hybrid approach in which senior leaders quarantine some funds for institution wide projects, with the remainder of the funds being allocated to initiatives selected following an open call for proposals; 3). a research centre advises a senior leadership group about the allocation of funds; or 4). all HEPPP funds are allocated to initiatives selected by a senior leadership group following an open call for proposals. The partner universities were found to share common forms of documentation including access and participation plans, and specific HEPPP reporting templates and progress reports. However, universities also have key documents that are more specific to their context. It was also evident that HEPPP documentation exists within a broader student equity context, with universities also having in place other types of equity-related documentation including disability support plans, Indigenous support plans, and student equity strategies that incorporate, but are not limited to, HEPPP priorities. Stakeholder interviews Participant responses to the semi-structured interviews conducted with key stakeholders who were involved with HEPPP or HEPPP related initiatives in some manner at each university were shaped by the institutional context in which they were located and their role in the university. There was variation in the awareness levels of staff depending on their role at the university, with more senior staff having a clearer understanding of the broader equity context and the importance of evaluation of HEPPP funded initiatives informing future decision making than staff at the project level, though most stakeholders recognised
66_CQU_DeniseWood_Accessible.docx