IMTS Procurement Policy
From Wikquality Impact Assessment
All feedback is welcomed from internal and external sources. Please email your comments to email@example.com.
The next scheduled review of this impact assessment is on Saturday 6 December 2014.
|Faculty or Service Area: Information Media and Technology Services|
|Name of policy owner: Rob Moore|
|Original policy document: IMTS Procurement Procedures Nov 2011.pdf|
|Creation date: 2011/11/01|
|Purpose of the policy being assessed:|
|The IMTS Procurement Procedures are related to and supplement the University’s Purchasing and Finance procurement procedures. They additionally form part of This policy was reviewed by a group of IMTS staff, most of whom were members of the IMTS Advisory Group. The policy was considered to be very strong and inclusive. The only recommendations made were in terms of strengthening the language around support for people with disabilities.|
|Customer groups affected by the policy: Staff, Students|
|Relevant protected characteristics affected by the policy: Disability|
|Examples of how these protected characteristics are affected by policy with evidence, justification and course of action:|
| Under Objectives, point 5, it is recommended that the sentence be changed to “5. To understand the changing user requirements of a broad range of customers including those with specific needs relating to disability, and to communicate new opportunities and technologies as they arise.”
In the Objectives section but under the sub-heading ‘Other considerations…’ it is recommended that the final sentence of point 6 is changed to “Examples of this would be AV support through John Lynch, procurement support through the purchasing team or specific user needs assessments through Disability Services and Occupational Health.”
In Appendix 1 under Technical and Market Knowledge it is recommended that a sentence is added to describe the knowledge base that IMTS has access to from departments across the University. Primarily it is recommended that Disability Services is highlighted for technical and market knowledge of users with special requirements.
In Appendix 1 under Security it is recommended that strict adherence to Data Protection, Freedom of Information and Management of Records is mentioned.
The group also made recommendation for the flow chart on page 4 but these were outside of the equality impact assessment process. the IMTS Service catalogue.
|Supporting evidence: None.|
|Feedback from Equality Forums and other interested parties:|
|A thorough impact assessment. All updates agreed with no further recommendations.|
| • Two updates on page 1.
• Two updates in Appendix 1.
|Consultation open: Feedback on this impact assessment is welcome, but it is not officially under consultation at this time.|
|Review date: 2014/12/06|