UNCW Institutional Risk Management. IRM Overview and Policy Development & Implementation Plan Overview. IRM BOT Audit Committee Background.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Policy Development & Implementation Plan Overview
Institutional Risk Management Presentations to the UNCW Board of Trustees Audit Committee began April 2011 with overview of process and identified risk areas.
Tier 1 Risk Areas with scores (impact, likelihood of occurrence) and heat map presented April 2012.
Interim Report – October 2012
Tier 1 Response Plan – April 2013 – Presented refined risk statements, indicators, mitigations and next steps for Tier 1 Risk Areas with High Rating
The ultimate goal of Institutional Risk Management (IRM) is to help the organization achieve its objectives by identifying, evaluating, prioritizing and managing institutional risks that might endanger the university’s mission and reputation.
No federal, state or UNC requirement to have a comprehensive, systematic process for risk identification and management currently exists.
The Association of Governing Boards (AGB) of Universities and Colleges conducted a joint survey with United Educators in 2008. Survey findings found that higher education was lagging behind in this important fiduciary responsibility (60 percent said they do not use comprehensive, strategic risk assessment). Action steps were recommended.
C 2009 Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, United Educators
C 2009 Association of Governing Boards of University and Colleges, United Educators
Institutional Risk Management (IRM) processes are holistic, flexible and under continuous refinement.
The six types of risks move beyond the traditional focus on financial risks covered by insurance. Risks are broadly defined to represent any impediment to accomplishing institutional goals.
The Tier I risk areas, though broad, are regularly analyzed to ensure a relevant and sufficiently narrow focus exists for each. The figure below illustrates other important IRM process components.
Tier I – Top Tier Risk Areas containing risks with potential to affect the university’s mission, strategies, and goals
Tier II – Shared risks across multiple areas or single area risks with cascading impacts
Tier III - Unit or single area risks which are largely identified and managed at the department level
The Tier I Profile is currently comprised of nine risk areas, each possessing a mission critical nature and risks with higher than average potential impacts. For these reasons, their proper management is considered to be of greatest institutional priority. The top five are all rated “High Risk” and fall within the orange area outlined in bold on theRisk Matrix. Repeating the
steps of analysis and
evaluation for April report.
Tier I High Risk Areas
1. Volatile Essential Resources
2. Regulatory Intervention
3. Human Capital Management
4.Campus Health and Safety
5. Continuity of Operations
Tier II –
Shared risks across multiple areas
Single area risks with cascading impacts
-- Often involve continuous monitoring
-- In various stages of analysis, evaluation, and treatment
Unit level risk assessments aid in the identification, evaluation and prioritization of risks.
The process also aids in developing front line managers’ risk awareness, risk evaluation, and risk mitigation skills.
60 units have completed a unit risk assessment. Further refinement of unit risk assessments planned for 2013-14.
Policy Development & Implementation Plan
In order to facilitate a more disciplined process and move risk identification deeper into the institution, a risk management policy is needed.
Policy Purpose:Serves as a statement of the overall UNCW risk management goals and focus. It is intended to help ensure a consistent approach throughout the university.
Policy Scope:Managed with procedures and tools consistent with industry best practices, including (but not limited to) the International Organization of Standardization’s ISO 31000: Risk Management Principles and Guidelines, and the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of The Treadway Commission’s (COSO) Enterprise Risk Management Framework
Communication Campaign to parallel training and support. Communication campaign to cover unit risks assessments, as well as education and outreach on topics of compliance, continuity of operations, fraud and corruption, insurance, and memorandums of agreement.
Policy Development and Implementation Plan is congruent with best practice research and AGB Recommended Action Steps:
Develop a disciplined process.
Move risk identification deeper into the institution each year.
Keep repeating the process.