Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities Evaluations Standards 2.B, 2.F, 2.G HR/Finance/Physical Infrastructure November 4 th, 2014 Steve Ward Vice President, Finance and Administration Centralia College

Onsite vs. Offsite Basic methodology is the same – Read self study, look at exhibits, follow links – Develop feeling for core themes, strengths and weaknesses On-site allows for visual inspection, verifying facilities, technology, etc.. – Satellite campus inspections Face to face allows opportunity for visual cues in meetings

Onsite vs. Offsite (cont.) Offsite will require more verification – Independent facilities review – Satisfaction surveys – External verification/evidence Phone interviews need to be scheduled with specific times – Onsite allows people to catch up easier (one room) Either lock yourself in your office or work from home – Time constraints the same as onsite

Before Arriving/Virtual Visit Set up interviews and visits based on the administrative and governance structure – Vice presidents, directors, in the finance, foundation, plant areas – Other key staff identified in the first reading (i.e. off campus centers directors) – Committee representatives for key processes – Faculty and student representatives (may be with entire team set up by chair) – Visits to satellite or campus extensions – Be cognizant of time, or the lack thereof…. Ask for copies of supporting documents if not provided with self evaluation

Standard 2.A.1 (Governance) The institution demonstrates an effective and widely understood system of governance with clearly defined authority, roles, and responsibilities. Its decision-making structures and processes make provision for the consideration of the views of faculty, staff, administrators, and students on matters in which they have a direct and reasonable interest. Will be not be your primary responsibility, but a substantial amount of review needs to consider this Input to other evaluators and chair critical in developing overall assessment of institutional climate and culture

Standard 2.A (Human Resources) The institution maintains and publishes its human resources policies and procedures and regularly reviews them to ensure they are consistent, fair, and equitably applied to its employees and students. Employees are apprised of their conditions of employment, work assignments, rights and responsibilities, and criteria and procedures for evaluation, retention, promotion, and termination. The institution ensures the security and appropriate confidentiality of human resources records. Look to published policies (ie. Web) Check for dates reviewed updated In interviews, ask for evaluation and position description update frequency

Standard 2.A.30 The institution has clearly defined policies, approved by its governing board, regarding oversight and management of financial resources—including financial planning, board approval and monitoring of operating and capital budgets, reserves, investments, fundraising, cash management, debt management, and transfers and borrowings between funds. Find out where the policies are, review in advance, ask about them in interviews, look in board minutes for action Chair typically meets with board members independent from administration, form appropriate question for setting

Standard 2.B (Human Resources) Read the report section, look at all exhibits, follow all links First review the published policies for evaluation procedures and position description updates, and locations (ie web) Specifically check the policy for faculty evaluation (2.B.6) Check for dates reviewed updated (usually shown on policy) In interviews, ask for evaluation and position description update frequency Look at faculty/student ratios

Standard 2.B (Human Resources) 2.B.1 - The institution employs a sufficient number of qualified personnel to maintain its support and operations functions. Criteria, qualifications, and procedures for selection of personnel are clearly and publicly stated. Job descriptions accurately reflect duties, responsibilities, and authority of the position. 2.B.2 - Administrators and staff are evaluated regularly with regard to performance of work duties and responsibilities. 2.B.3 - The institution provides faculty, staff, administrators, and other employees with appropriate opportunities and support for professional growth and development to enhance their effectiveness in fulfilling their roles, duties, and responsibilities. Combine review of self study, policies with interviews Have fellow evaluators ask questions during their interviews Look for budgets and programs to support professional development

Standard 2.B (Human Resources) 2.B.4 - Consistent with its mission, core themes, programs, services, and characteristics, the institution employs appropriately qualified faculty sufficient in number to achieve its educational objectives, establish and oversee academic policies, and assure the integrity and continuity of its academic programs, wherever offered and however delivered. 2.B.5 - Faculty responsibilities and workloads are commensurate with the institution’s expectations for teaching, service, scholarship, research, and/or artistic creation. Approach this topic carefully Self study should address, provide candid assessment Coordinate with fellow evaluators, particularly instruction CBA may be in play Balance faculty and administration perspectives

Standard 2.B (Human Resources) 2.B.6 - All faculty are evaluated in a regular, systematic, substantive, and collegial manner at least once within every five-year period of service. The evaluation process specifies the timeline and criteria by which faculty are evaluated; utilizes multiple indices of effectiveness, each of which is directly related to the faculty member’s roles and responsibilities, including evidence of teaching effectiveness for faculty with teaching responsibilities; contains a provision to address concerns that may emerge between regularly scheduled evaluations; and provides for administrative access to all primary evaluation data. Where areas for improvement are identified, the institution works with the faculty member to develop and implement a plan to address identified areas of concern. Refer first to self study Look for policies, CBA for language (in advance is advised) Best to confer with fellow evaluators to get pulse

Standard 2.F.1 (Finance) The institution demonstrates financial stability with sufficient cash flow and reserves to support its programs and services. Financial planning reflects available funds, realistic development of financial resources, and appropriate risk management to ensure short-term solvency and anticipate long-term obligations, including payment of future liabilities. Look over included financial statements Utilize your knowledge and background to assess Ask questions in interviews, and for documents listed or referred to in self evaluation While your own organization may view factors differently, it is critical to look with independent eyes

Standard 2.F.2 (Finance) Resource planning and development include realistic budgeting, enrollment management, and responsible projections of grants, donations, and other non-tuition revenue sources Parallels 2.F.1, Adds dimension of planning, enrollment trends Look for reserve policies, projections Ask questions in interviews

Standard 2.F.3 (Finance) The institution clearly defines and follows its policies, guidelines, and processes for financial planning and budget development that include appropriate opportunities for participation by its constituencies Participation process, governance structure, other posted information Meet and interview committee members if applicable Ask about process in interviews, particularly with faculty and staff group session

Standard 2.F.4 (Finance) The institution ensures timely and accurate financial information through its use of an appropriate accounting system that follows generally accepted accounting principles and through its reliance on an effective system of internal controls First look to independent auditor reports and financial statements Some states (i.e. Washington for community colleges) have a combined or consolidated audit, look for other reports Internal audit reviews or assessments Interviews with fiscal or business office staff

Standard 2.F.5 (Finance) Capital budgets reflect the institution’s mission and core theme objectives and relate to its plans for physical facilities and acquisition of equipment. Long-range capital plans support the institution’s mission and goals and reflect projections of the total cost of ownership, equipment, furnishing, and operation of new or renovated facilities. Debt for capital outlay purposes is periodically reviewed, carefully controlled, and justified, so as not to create an unreasonable drain on resources available for educational purposes. Work in connection with 2.G, leverage information gathered and interviews Understand the financial environment, funding sources, planning systems Review budget documentation, compare to master plan Walk the campus, satellite or off campus centers Interview appropriate staff, have fellow evaluators ask questions in their meetings Look at debt policies

Standard 2.F.6 (Finance) The institution defines the financial relationship between its general operations and its auxiliary enterprises, including any use of general operations funds to support auxiliary enterprises or the use of funds from auxiliary services to support general operations. Work in conjunction with 2.F.1, look for separation in financial statements Review budget development for separate identification Look for fund transfers

Standard 2.F.7 (Finance) For each year of operation, the institution undergoes an external financial audit, in a reasonable timeframe, by professionally qualified personnel in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Results from the audit, including findings and management letter recommendations, are considered in a timely, appropriate, and comprehensive manner by the administration and the governing board. Review in conjunction with 2.F.1 and 2.F.4 Public institutions may have to follow different practices (i.e. WA) Most cases, audited reports are available with management letters Look for evidence of Board review

Standard 2.F.8 (Finance) All institutional fundraising activities are conducted in a professional and ethical manner and comply with governmental requirements. If the institution has a relationship with a fundraising organization that bears its name and whose major purpose is to raise funds to support its mission, the institution has a written agreement that clearly defines its relationship with that organization. Look for signed understanding documentation Current? Check on state requirements for public institutions (most likely the case if separate organization, ask in advance) If independent, usually has separate audited statements Meet with staff and representatives of board (if separate)

Standard 2.G Physical and Technological Infrastructure Combination of documentation, inspection and interviews Often candid assessments in self evaluations Internal opinions may vary greatly across campus – watch for agendas

Standard 2.G.1 (Physical Infrastructure) Consistent with its mission, core themes, and characteristics, the institution creates and maintains physical facilities that are accessible, safe, secure, and sufficient in quantity and quality to ensure healthful learning and working environments that support the institution’s mission, programs, and services. Self evaluation should give an advance indication Tour facilities (including off campus and satellite), use your background – General conditions, deferred maintenance, age, etc Interviews with staff, group sessions Ask about surveys, OCR audits, complaints

Standard 2.G.2 (Physical Infrastructure) The institution adopts, publishes, reviews regularly, and adheres to policies and procedures regarding the safe use, storage, and disposal of hazardous or toxic materials. Look to the self evaluation –If policies and procedures not attached, request copies in advance –Interviews will reveal breath of understanding Interview chemical hygiene officer If not on instructional side, work with other evaluators to get better understanding

Standard 2.G.3 (Physical Infrastructure) The institution develops, implements, and reviews regularly a master plan for its physical development that is consistent with its mission, core themes, and long-range educational and financial plans. Start with self evaluation Look over current master plan, policies in section 2.F.5 Compare to the capital budget, long range plans

Standard 2.G.4 (Physical Infrastructure) Equipment is sufficient in quantity and quality and managed appropriately to support institutional functions and fulfillment of the institution’s mission, accomplishment of core theme objectives, and achievement of goals or intended outcomes of its programs and services. In self evaluation, look to core themes and outcomes and identified strengths and weaknesses Tour facilities observe equipment Interviews and group sessions will provide insight Other evaluators may grasp strength and weaknesses in their processes Combine information with technology infrastructure review

Standard 2.G.5 (Technological Infrastructure) Consistent with its mission, core themes, and characteristics, the institution has appropriate and adequate technology systems and infrastructure to support its management and operational functions, academic programs, and support services, wherever offered and however delivered Again, self evaluation often reveals strengths and weaknesses Look to core themes and outcomes for alignment Interviews, groups sessions will provide additional perspectives

Standard 2.G.6 (Technological Infrastructure) The institution provides appropriate instruction and support for faculty, staff, students, and administrators in the effective use of technology and technology systems related to its programs, services, and institutional operations. Self evaluation, look for strengths and weaknesses, specific mention of training Inspect evidence of training – Physical space – Calendar of training opportunities – Budget for training Interviews, group sessions

Standard 2.G.7 (Technological Infrastructure) Technological infrastructure planning provides opportunities for input from its technology support staff and constituencies who rely on technology for institutional operations, programs, and services. Self evaluation, look to the governance structure and processes – Interview committee or equivalents Ensure that this question is asked of faculty and staff – litmus test Discuss with Directors and VP to get balance

Standard 2.G.8 (Technological Infrastructure) The institution develops, implements, and reviews regularly a technology update and replacement plan to ensure its technological infrastructure is adequate to support its operations, programs, and services. Review in conjunction with 2.G.4, 2.A.1 Self evaluation will provide direction – Evidence of policies, ask in advance if not provided Budget review, other funding sources

Digestion Sensory overload at end of each day Advance preparation important – Provides general direction – Site visit validates self study, or identifies opportunities for improvement Team meeting at end of each day should help form opinion of institution – Strengths will resonate, as will weaknesses Sharing of possible commendations and recommendations will fall in place

Standard 3.A.5 Institutional Planning The institution’s planning includes emergency preparedness and contingency planning for continuity and recovery of operations should catastrophic events significantly interrupt normal institutional operations Standard 3 will usually be outside of a Year 3 site visit, but helps to review. Look to established policies, procedures Great opportunity to obtain ideas for your own campus.

Writing Your Report Section Begin writing your section immediately – It will change as you gather more information – Start with pasting in the standard itself The initial assessment might change as: – Interviews progress – Additional factors surface – Fellow evaluators add perspectives By the end of the second night (yes, night) the initial draft should be formed

Wrap - Up Follow the “golden rule” and evaluate as you would prefer to be evaluated – Objective – Fair – consider as much as possible – Honest – there is always room for improvement – Complimentary – we all do something well – Helpful Avoid telling them how you do things at your campus – Unless they ask Walk away a better higher education colleague as a result of the visit

Questions, comments?? For copies of this presentation, me at: –