ID219 University-Wide Placement Strategy

The Idea

Establishing a University-wide placement governance structure to provide oversight of all placement activity to improve visibility, risk management, and strategic coordination, while preserving Faculty-led delivery.  

Placement activity at Keele is delivered through two distinct teams. The Placements & Projects Team is responsible for coordinating and supporting optional, non-Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB) regulated placement activity across all three Faculties, while the FMHS Placements Team manages the PSRB regulated placement provision required for programmes within the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. While academic Schools and programme teams remain responsible for discipline-specific placement activity, operational support is currently coordinated through the Placements & Projects Team for non-PSRB activity and the FMHS Placements Team for PSRB provision. 

Both teams operate effectively within their respective remits, however, there is currently no dedicated institution-wide placement governance structure providing oversight, coordination and assurance across both PSRB and non-PSRB placement activity. 

Strategic intent: This proposal does not seek to change or centralise operational delivery of placements within Faculties or existing teams. Placement activity would continue to be delivered locally by Faculties and the two distinct teams, reflecting discipline-specific requirements and established expertise. 

Instead, this proposal introduces a university-wide governance and oversight layer across all placement activity (non-PSRB and PSRB placements) supported by both teams.  The proposed committee would not undertake placement delivery, operational decision-making or provider management. The aim is to provide institutional oversight and visibility, escalation and reporting mechanisms for risk management and mitigation, assurance and institutional co-ordination across the full placement portfolio.  

This would include: 

• Clear oversight of where all Keele students are undertaking placements at any given time 
• Improved institutional data to support student recruitment, marketing, and strategic planning 
• Coordinated, timely responses to emerging risks and external incidents (e.g. public health outbreaks, geopolitical events affecting students on placement abroad) 
• A framework for shared risk mitigation, escalation, and cross-Faculty support 

This approach complements and strengthens the governance of existing placement delivery arrangements operated by the FMHS Placements Team and the Placements & Projects Team, without creating a new delivery model or replacing existing responsibilities.

Why This Idea Should Be Considered

Placements are now critical strategic infrastructure for the University, underpinning: 

• Student recruitment and market positioning 
• Regulatory compliance (particularly in professionally regulated programmes in FMHS) 
• Workforce alignment and external partnerships 
• Institutional reputation and risk management 

However, demand for placement intensive programmes is increasing in both PSRB and non-PSRB regulated programmes. In FMHS, the Faculty Placements Team in AY25/26 supported 3,761 students undertaking over 2 million PSRB regulated mandatory placement hours. The Central Placements and Projects Team supported 684 students into placements and are expected to grow significantly as student numbers grow. Also, as new placement modules come online from academic year 2026, and again in academic year 2027 due to curriculum re-design in Business, Law, Humanities and Social Sciences, new programme developments across all faculties, including FMHS.  

This growth brings increasing complexities and diversity to manage, but the capacity, systems and investment decisions remain fragmented across the different placement activity areas across Faculties, with limited institutional visibility of: 

• Where students are on placement at any given time 
• Emerging risks across different geographical locations 
• Opportunities to coordinate a central University response or share intelligence 

This creates challenges in responding effectively to time-sensitive or high-risk situations, for example: 

• Public health incidents (e.g. meningitis outbreaks affecting placement locations, COVID-19) 
• International crises or geopolitical instability affecting students abroad 
• Rapid changes in local conditions impacting student safety or continuity 

A University-wide placement governance approach would ensure: 

• Timely access to accurate placement data 
• A coordinated institutional response to placement related risks and incidents 
• Shared responsibility for a robust risk management and mitigation strategy to support affected areas 
• Stronger communication and collaboration across all Faculties and the two distinct teams supporting PSRB and non-PSRB placement activity 
• Institutional resilience while preserving Faculty-led delivery 
• Shared solutions to common challenges 
• More effective investment planning 
• Support equity and consistency of student experience 
• Strengthen partnerships with external organisations 
• Ensure placements are fully aligned with the University’s strategic ambitions. 

How We Would Implement This Idea

Keele could implement this by establishing a University Placement Committee, focused on oversight, assurance, coordination and escalation and reporting routes, not operational control. This committee would provide institutional oversight and assurance across PSRB placement activity delivered by the FMHS Placements Team and non-PSRB placement activity delivered by the Central Placements and Projects Team. Cross-institutional representation on the committee would include leadership roles from the FMHS Placements Team (PSRB mandatory placements) and Central Placements and Projects Team (non-PSRB optional placements), alongside Faculties Directors of Education and central teams key to the developing complexities in placements (e.g. Health and Safety, MGRA, Immigration and Compliance, Student Support, Global Opportunities, Apprenticeships) to ensure close collaboration. 

This committee would then be embedded into the central University governance framework to ensure there is a reporting and escalation route.  

Faculties and existing placement teams would: 

• Retain full responsibility for placement delivery 
• Continue discipline-specific decision making and provider relationships 

The University Placement Committee would: 

• Provide central visibility of placement activity and risk 
• Coordinate institutional responses where required 
• Support data-informed decision making across the University 
• Share common challenges and solutions 
• Cross-Faculty collaboration across all placement activity (PSRB and non-PSRB) to share best practice and address common risks 
• Explore digital technology to support this activity to reduce manual burden, improve reporting and assurance and student experience

What Success Would Look Like

Success would include: 

• An updated shared code of practice for placements 
• A consolidated institutional view of all student placement locations and risk exposure, supported by shared protocols for risk management, incident response, and escalation. For example, where an international crisis affected placement activity across PSRB and non-PSRB placements, the Committee would provide a formal route for impact assessment, coordinated institutional response, risk mitigation and escalation through existing governance structures. 
• Improved data and insight to support recruitment, marketing, strategic decision-making, and institutional assurance 
• Aligned investment and digital infrastructure, reducing duplication and manual processes while supporting reporting and student experience 
• Inclusive investment across all Faculties, including PSRB placement activity, with measurable growth in placement capacity aligned to student targets 
• Improved student satisfaction, retention, equity, and overall placement experience 
• Stronger, more sustainable partnerships with placement providers 
• Faculty ownership of placement delivery retained by the two distinct teams, supported by effective institutional oversight and supporting infrastructure.