URMIA's Peer Review Program

In this episode of URMIA Matters, Julie Groves, Director of Risk Services at Wake Forest University interviews Robin Oldfield, Associate Vice President of Audit, Risk, and Compliance and the Chief Risk Officer at the University of Dayton and Sue Liden, URMIA's Education Manager and former Director of Risk Services at Pacific Lutheran University. Together, they spend a few minutes discussing URMIA's Peer Review Program and how interested campuses can learn more and initiate a peer review. Then, hear from Robin who has been both a client and a consultant of an URMIA peer review and shares her experiences in both roles. Listen now to hear more about this powerful URMIA offering!

Connect with URMIA & URMIA with your network
-Share /Tag in Social Media @urmianetwork
-Not a member? Join ->www.urmia.org/join
-Email | contactus@urmia.org

Give URMIA Matters a boost:
-Give the podcast a 5 star rating
-Share the podcast - click that button!
-Follow on your podcast platform - don't miss an episode!

Thanks for listening to URMIA Matters!

Transcript

Show Notes
URMIA's Peer Review Program

Guests
Robin Oldfield, Associate Vice President of Audit, Risk, and Compliance and Chief Risk Officer- University of Dayton
Sue Liden, Education Manager- URMIA

Host
Julie Groves, Director of Risk Services- Wake Forest University

TRANSCRIPT
Julie Groves: Hi, everyone. I'm Julie Groves, the Director of Risk Services at Wake Forest University, and I'll be your host for today's episode of URMIA Matters. Today, we're going to chat a little bit about URMIA's Peer Review Program. With me are Robin Oldfield, who is the Associate Vice President of Audit, Risk, and Compliance, and the Chief Risk Officer at the University of Dayton.

And Sue Liden, who currently serves as URMIA's education manager. Previously, she was the director of risk services at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington. So welcome to the podcast ladies. Thank you. Um, before we start our discussion, I always like to ask the guests to tell the listeners a little bit about themselves.

So Robin, tell us a little bit about yourself.

Robin Oldfield: So Robin Oldfield, I've been at the University of Dayton for 24 years. And, um, started as an office of one and have seen it grow, uh, tremendously over the years as the risks in higher education continue to grow. 

Julie Groves: And is this your first time on Urmia Matters Podcast?

Robin Oldfield: I believe this is my second time. 

Julie Groves: Okay. Okay. Great. Well, we're glad you're here. Thank you. And you know, Sue, you're famous. So what can you tell the listeners that they don't already know about you? 

Sue Liden: Well, um, I've been doing this, the Education Manager position since January of 2023, and it's been my pleasure to cultivate and curate professional development and work with the great Urmia membership, um, on presentations.

I was at, PLU, Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington for 15 years, but I was happy to jump over and be on URMIA's staff. I'd served on the URMIA's board for a number of years and it's a great community. And you're no longer living in Washington state. Is that correct?  That's correct. We left, um, the rain of Washington behind and moved just a little further over east into Idaho, um, right near one of our favorites, Yellowstone National Park and the Grand Teton National Park.

So, we're enjoying snow and sunshine in the winter instead of rain. 

Julie Groves: Great. Well, why don't we, uh, dive right into our discussion. So, Sue, why don't you just tell us a little bit about the peer review process.

Sue Liden: Sure. URMIA started the peer review process, um, probably a half a dozen years ago, looking into it, um, as a way to help our member institutions who wanted to check out the status of their Risk management programs.

 So to get started, any institution interested can contact me via email at education@URMIA.org or the URMIA office at urmia@urmia.org. Once you reach out, Um, I'm going to give you a  call. We'll schedule a time to meet with you and anyone else from your institution who wants to find out more about the peer review process.

We'll have an informal discussion about the type and scope of review the institution is looking for. And after that discussion, URMIA will propose a formal scope document, and that's going to include the areas we recommend be reviewed. A list of institution documents to review, be reviewed, and a list of individuals by title who we might like to speak with at that time.

We're also gonna discuss who they consider their peers and propose possible peer reviewers. We're gonna put together a team of peer reviewers who are all URMIA institutional members and experienced risk managers. We select those peer reviewers. So that they're from a similar type of institution. For example, if you're a public institution, we're going to grab them from another public.

If you're a community technical college, we'll grab them from there. Similar size  enrollment, et cetera. Once URMIA and the institution have agreed upon the scope and the peer reviewers, then we're going to enter into a contract to conduct the peer review. We charge a small fee for the peer review service.

This fee essentially covers the cost of the review with a slight profit to contribute to URMIA's overall budget. This fee is offered at a reduced cost compared to what you might pay on the open market as a benefit to our institutional members. And once we've got the contract signed. The real work begins.

The institution's going to provide the requested documents and the peer reviewers are going to begin the review in preparation for the campus visit and interviews. We typically spend two and a half days on campus conducting interviews. And when I say two and a half days, it's not two eight hour days.

It's two long days. The peer reviewers start out early. And once we finished interviews, we gather and discuss the information we've found out. We prefer to conduct interviews in person during our campus visit. But we can also conduct them via Zoom if an in person interview doesn't work into the schedule.

Julie Groves: Well, great. And so after an institution goes through this peer review process, what type of information do they receive once it's completed? So on the final day of visit update, let me start over again. 

Sue Liden: On the final day of the visit of the The peer review team is going to have an informal discussion with the institution's contact to ensure that we haven't misunderstood the structure, the program, or any information that was shared with us.

We typically hold an exit briefing with senior leadership or their designees to discuss our findings and then we'll prepare a formal report and provide it to the institution approximately three to four weeks after the on site visit. The form of the report is dependent on what the institution desires.

It can be very detailed or it can be a high level overview if that institution is subject to right to know laws. Some institutions might want it protected by attorney client privilege. In that case, the engagement typically comes from their general counsel's office.

Julie Groves: Great. And Robin, the University of Dayton has used the URMIA Peer Review Service in the past. So how, um, or why, or both how and why, did your institution make the decision to do this peer review? 

Robin Oldfield: In 2017, the university made a strategic decision to bring audit risk and compliance under one umbrella. And at the time, we had been outsourcing our internal audit function Our compliance was very decentralized, and we did not, we were just embarking on an enterprise risk management program.

So it was a really great time to bring in URMIA and do a peer review. So I had suggested that we engage with URMIA because I have been involved with URMIA for a long time. And, um, one of the things that, What was really, um, helpful was just to make sure strategically we were going down the right path.

And, um, I believe it really brought some, some credibility to the process that, that we were undertaking. 

Julie Groves: And how much preparation was required ahead of time?

Robin Oldfield: There was, there was quite a bit of preparation. There was a lot of conversation between. Uh, the university and URMIA, as we were defining the scope, and it's a very engaging process, uh, because the, the peer review process, they want to know why you're doing it, and then that scope is really tailored to the institution.

So in our case, um, we were really looking at enterprise risk management, compliance, risk management, oversight, and reporting, staffing, communications. Um, our risk identification and assessment practices, our risk mitigation process and coordination, and just really holistically at how we were structuring, um, this, this new department.

And, um, the documents that we gathered for the team, um, there, there was quite a bit to gather. Um, there was a lot of questions, but, but I would say in the long run, it really, um, allowed us the opportunity to get very organized and make sure that we had everything and we were able to deliver it in a very succinct way.

So even that exercise in and of itself was, was very beneficial, even though it was a lot of work. 

Julie Groves: And so you had this peer review a couple of years ago. So now that you're a little ways out from it, what were some of the benefits that you've realized from having this peer review?

Robin Oldfield: I would say some of the benefits were, um, really the peer review team, an all star team really brought some credibility into the conversations with leadership, um, while the team was on campus.

interviewed and interacted with over 75 people. And, um, so when, when Sue mentioned two full days, um, you know, we did organize it in a way where it was some, some group conversations, but those conversations allowed, um, the interaction between the team and those participants from campus to really help them understand what we were doing as well.

And to get that feedback was really beneficial. They also worked with our board and really understanding what was important to our board of trustees and our president, which, which also is very, very helpful. Um, and then the debrief at the end, um, was very enlightening, um, and gave us a tool to really, um, help us focus on those things that were identified and, um, also just how we were structured and, and things to consider, particularly around, um, looking at our enterprise risk management and the direction we were going and things like that.

So definitely, um, something that was valued by not just our team, but I think leadership as well and, and, and providing that direction. The other thing that I think was helpful was the high level executive summary that we were able to, when we were interfacing, so I also report to the Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of Trustees, and it really allowed us to have a very candid conversation about, um, the development of audit risk and compliance and this report and, and giving us some goals moving forward.

Julie Groves: And you spoke about how great the, um, peer review team was, you recently had the opportunity to serve as a peer reviewer on a peer review team for another institution. So did you or your institution benefit from that experience at all?

Robin Oldfield: Absolutely. This is really a reciprocal process. Um, being on both sides, we, we learn so much from each other.

And, um, there's, there's, a lot of commonality in challenges that we face in higher education, regardless of the type of institution. Um, and then there's unique challenges to the culture of the institution. And so, um, that reciprocal learning from each other, I, I found very, very valuable. Um, the openness and, um, the ability to really feel like you're helping each other.

Um, and I think that's something that, being a peer review and URMIA being, um, really an industry specific organization that supports each other, I think is different than hiring a consultant to come in, um, that doesn't have that same relationship. So I, I felt like it really served our, um, institution, but hopefully exponentially served that institution that the review was happening.

Julie Groves: So Sue, you talked a little bit about the peer review process. If someone at an institution is interested in learning more about our peer review  program, what should they do?

Sue Liden: They, um, can click on the services tab on the URMIA website homepage and that'll lead them to a peer review service tab. That page includes information about the program as well as an URMIA short video that provides another overview of the program and process. There's also a link to a form there for anybody who's interested in becoming a peer reviewer.

You can fill out that form. And as always, give me a call, email me at education at URMIA. org. And I'd be happy to set up a time to meet and talk with you just to talk through the peer review process. 

Julie Groves: And once someone says, yes, I think I'm interested in this and they send you an email or they call you, how long does the process take before?

Sue Liden: The actual, uh, peer review starts. A lot of that depends on the institution's timing, when they would like it, when it's convenient for them, and then the ability to pull peer reviewers together in the same time frame. If we get started right away, once we agree, And then we have a contract that we have to meet with the institution.

we have to actually agree on a contract. It's usually about a month after that, that we actually head to the campus because the institution then needs to provide us those documents, which is Robin said, there are a lot of them. So then our peer reviewers who, by the way, are also. Working risk managers need to have time to review those documents, um, and then we'll go over that.

So it's typically, it can be about a two month process from the time we sign a contract to the time the final report is, um, provided. 

Julie Groves: Well, great. This is just a really great, um, service at URMIA. offers. And so I think this, I hope this podcast will help people learn more about it and help them to then decide if they want to, um, have a peer review.

And I know Robin, you're a big fan. I believe there's a quote from you on the peer review website within Urmia about you know, your experience. So I know that you would say that you wholeheartedly recommend that anybody, uh, undertake a peer review if they think that will be helpful to their institution.

So, um, before we wrap up, any last thoughts you all would like to share?

Robin Oldfield: The only thing that I would add is that I have had several conversations with people that were considering it, and if they want to talk to somebody that has gone through it, I'm sure I'm not the only one that has participated in a peer review that would be happy to talk to somebody.

about their experience and, um, the commitment that's involved. So, I just wanted to share that. Yeah, that's great because you have done it from both sides. So, yeah. 

Sue Liden: And I would just, as a reminder, we do not have, this is what we're going to come in and review. The institution dictates the scope of that review.

So, we're not coming in saying we're going to check A, B, C, and D. You could say I want to check A, A, C, and oh, by the way, add F and G on there. So it's your decision, your scope. We're not going to dictate that to you. So it's a very flexible flame, framework that people can, can, you know, uh, model after whatever they need done.

Sometimes we've done the entire program. Sometimes we've done one thing like enterprise. risk management or risk financing. It's your call. 

Julie Groves: Well, this has been really, really helpful. I hope that it will help people, you know, understand more about the peer review program. And I really appreciate both of you being here today.

So if you have questions about this, please feel free to reach out to either Sue or Robin. And this wraps another episode of URMIA Matters.