Annual Planning Development Task Force (APDTF) Recommendations MARCH 3, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The PRR: Linking Assessment, Planning & Budgeting PRR Workshop – April 4, 2013 Barbara Samuel Loftus, Ph.D. Misericordia University.
Advertisements

360 Degrees: Conducting a Comprehensive Evaluation of Your Integrated Planning Processes Bri Hays Jill Baker San Diego Mesa College RP Conference April.
School Improvement Through Capacity Building The PLC Process.
Introduction to Assessment – Support Services Andrea Brown Director of Program Assessment and Institutional Research Dr. Debra Bryant Accreditation Liaison.
2025 Planning Contacts Meeting November 8, 2012 K-State 2025.
Decision Making Tools for Strategic Planning 2014 Nonprofit Capacity Conference Margo Bailey, PhD April 21, 2014 Clarify your strategic plan hierarchy.
Institutional Effectiveness Operational Update Presentation made to the Indiana State University Board of Trustees October 5, 2001.
STOCKTON 2020 Strategic Planning Implementation SWOT / Vision Initiatives Alignment Measures How and Why Objectives Themes Reporting Results Students,
The Pathway to Success Goal IV Strengthen and Leverage Programs of Strength and Promise.
2010 Performance Evaluation Process Information Session for Staff
Columbia-Greene Community College The following presentation is a chronology of the College strategic planning process, plan and committee progress The.
 The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is a voluntary, non-governmental, membership association that is dedicated to quality assurance and.
NAVIGATING THE WATERS: USING ASSESSMENT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE Amy Harper, Area Coordinator, Fordham University Greer Jason, PhD, Assistant Dean of Students,
Session Goals: To redefine assessment as it relates to our University mission. To visit assessment plan/report templates and ensure understanding for.
Presentation for Flex Day June 7, 2011 LATTC Accreditation
© 2003 IBM Corporation July 2004 Technology planning for not-for-profit organizations IBM volunteer name Title, organization.
2009 NWCCU Annual Meeting Overview of the Revised Accreditation Standards and New Oversight Process Ronald L. Baker Executive Vice President and Director,
Performance Management Open Information Session for Individual Contributors.
COD Institutional Effectiveness Process (IEP) Planning, Assessment, Allocation Learn More.
1. Continue to distinguish and clarify between Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Service Area Outcomes (SAOs) 2. Develop broad SLOs/SAOs in order to.
Academic Assessment Task Force Report August 15, 2013 Lori Escallier, Co-Chair Keith Sheppard, Co-Chair Chuck Taber, Co-Chair.
Assessment Cycle California Lutheran University Deans’ Council February 6, 2006.
Educational and Facilities Master Plan: In-Flight Update Flex Day January 26, 2006.
Year Seven Self-Evaluation Workshop OR Getting from Here to There Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.
Communication System Coherent Instructional Program Academic Behavior Support System Strategic FocusBuilding Capacity.
Outcome Assessment Reporting for Undergraduate Programs Stefani Dawn and Bill Bogley Office of Academic Programs, Assessment & Accreditation Faculty Senate,
Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013 Greg Nelson Vice President of Administrative Services Tammeil.
Mission and Mission Fulfillment Tom Miller University of Alaska Anchorage.
2009 NWCCU Annual Meeting Overview of the Revised Accreditation Standards and New Oversight Process Ronald L. Baker Executive Vice President and Director,
Annual Plan Database Training October 4, 2006 Annual Plan Database Training October 4, 2006.
Accreditation follow-up report. The team recommends that the college further refine its program review, planning, and resource allocation processes so.
Thompson School District Organizational Systems Alignment December 2, 2008 Thompson Leadership Team.
University Planning: Strategic Communication in Times of Change Cathy A. Fleuriet Ana Lisa Garza Texas State University-San Marcos Presented at the July.
University of Idaho Successful External Program Review Archie George, Director Institutional Research and Assessment Jane Baillargeon, Assistant Director.
Periodic Program Review Guiding Programs in Today’s Assessment Climate LaMont Rouse Executive Director of Assessment, Accreditation & Compliance.
Meeting the ‘Great Divide’: Establishing a Unified Culture for Planning and Assessment Cathy A. Fleuriet Ana Lisa Garza Presented at the 2006 Conference.
The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Strategic Planning System Sacramento City College Strategic Planning System ….a comprehensive system designed to form a reliable, understood system for.
CCC Planning & Assessment “Wrap Up” Findings & Recommendations By: Diane Drebin, Kate Gray and Judy Redder (a.k.a.“The Wrappers”) 06/02/08.
1 EMS Fundamentals An Introduction to the EMS Process Roadmap AASHTO EMS Workshop.
Performance Management A briefing for new managers.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) Facilitating District-wide Improvement in Instructional Practices and Student Performance.
CIWQS Review Phase II: Evaluation and Final Recommendations March 14, 2008.
Ascending to Assessment Greatness in presented by the Division of Institutional Effectiveness Helena Mariella-Walrond, PhD Vice President Cory.
2008 Spring Semester Workshop AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP T. Gilmour Reeve, Ph.D. Director of Strategic Planning.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
CONTEXT FOR ACADEMIC STRATEGIC PLANNING AT UM Foundation for upcoming Accreditation process Identify key issues and opportunities to address over the next.
Time to answer critical and inter-related questions: Whom will we serve? What will we offer? How will we serve them?
Annual Planning Task Force (APTF) Recommendations NOVEMBER 18, 2014.
Promoting the Vision & Mission of the School Governing Board Online Training Module.
Leadership Guide for Strategic Information Management Leadership Guide for Strategic Information Management for State DOTs NCHRP Project Information.
Accountability & Program Assessment Governing Board Online Training Module.
QCC General Education Assessment Task Force March 21 and 22, 2016 Faculty Forum on General Education Outcomes.
KEYS TO GREATNESS IN STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT Presented by Helena Mariella-Walrond, PhD Provost and Senior Vice President Cory Potter Executive.
Standard Two Les Steele Executive Vice President.
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
How an Assessment Framework helped revitalize Program Review at JCCC
COD Institutional Effectiveness Process (IEP)
Strategic Planning Council (SPC)Update
Focused Midterm Report
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
NWCCU update February 13, 2018.
Assessing Academic Programs at IPFW
Strategic Enhancement
Accreditation follow-up report
Institutional Self Evaluation Report Team Training
Presentation transcript:

Annual Planning Development Task Force (APDTF) Recommendations MARCH 3, 2015

APDTF Membership Rebecca Chawgo (returning)James Craswell (returning) Faisal Jaswal (returning)Jarka Gurthova Kelly PaustainKent Short Sylvia UnwinJorja Gunderson Co-conveners Patricia James and Tracy Biga MacLean

Recommendation document (available at President’s Cabinet portal site) Rationale for reinstating annual planning Key features Response to the president’s charge to the APDTF Definitions Next steps

Rationale for reinstating annual planning NWCCU Accreditation: Emphasis on Institutional Planning Strategic Plan: Rebuild Our Foundations College Policy 1300 Improved resource allocation process

College Policy 1300 (1996) Bellevue College believes that developing, maintaining and implementing an ongoing process for planning is integral to the college’s progress and continuous improvement. … For any planning to be effective it must fully integrate fundamental enterprises related to the college’s operation, such as budget allocation and distribution, hiring, program development, organizational planning, and enrollment planning…. [T]he college shall implement an ongoing, coordinated and multifaceted planning process that considers the needs of the institution as a whole. These processes may include, but not be limited to, regularly updated strategic and master plans, institutional effectiveness program, outcomes assessment, program effectiveness measures, annual budget development planning, and/or other planning tools which help provide focus and institutional effectiveness.

Key Features of the recommended process Vice presidents will provide written feedback—these responses will be returned either to the plan preparer or to a dean/director who has provided the executive summary (depending on the unit). Standard work distinguished from priority initiatives Timeline established to coordinate with AY data as well as the budget cycle Annual planning will be integrated with Program Review All units will develop at least two indicators to be measured annually Unit descriptions and value-added will be publically available and current Resource allocation will be tied, clearly, to the annual planning process Some aspects of the annual planning process will depend on the governance structure currently being developed.

Charge to the APDTF Deliverables Guiding principles for unit designations Guiding principles for metrics Calendar for submitting plans, rolling up, resource allocation decisions, and feedback Functional flowchart that clarifies how strategic and operational plans should relate to each other and to the core themes Feedback mechanism Planning template Communication and implementation program

Guiding principles for unit designations Unit designations will be determined by vice presidents in collaboration with deans, directors, and other personnel; they will determine which functions require an annual plan and will designate a plan preparer. [See the Annual Planning Unit Designation spreadsheet available in the Annual Planning Document Library. ] There are approximately 50 instructional programs and 72 support units currently identified. Units are based on functions rather than on individuals or job titles. In order for planning and assessment to be most meaningful, units should stay as consistent as possible from year to year. Employee turnover and changes in responsibility shouldn’t alter the basic functions being performed. Changes to the basic unit structure should be communicated and recorded. Reorganizations, or changes to the basic unit structure, should be recorded as part of a reorganization proposal. Changes should be broadly communicated and updated in the planning section of the Future Vision public facing webpage.

Guiding principles for metrics All units should measure some aspects of their operations. Measures should be clearly connected to operational goals or priority initiatives. Measures can be quantitative (e.g., student/instructor ratio) or qualitative (e.g., focus group results), with a preference towards quantifiable information. Emphasis on routinely gathered information. Emphasis on benchmarking either over time or against comparable institutions or units. Measures are most meaningful when they are tracked across time, at least three years, allowing the college to measure continuous improvement. Developing and collecting metrics sufficient to establish an evidence-based culture may require additional data gathering, analysis, infrastructure, training, and support.

Calendar for submitting plans, rolling up, resource allocation decisions, and feedback All plans should be written to align with the Strategic Plan. They may map onto the President’s Goals, or other plans, which themselves should be mapped onto the Strategic Plan. All units should review data from the previous year in October, when data from the previous AY is available. All units should finalize their Annual Unit Plan, intended to address the following academic year, in January. VPs, deans, and directors should respond to the plans in order to inform the budget process that begins in Feb/March.

Planning template A planning template/form has been designed, which distinguishes standard work from priority initiatives, encourages metrics, and allows for resource requests [see separate document]. The form will be accessible through SharePoint. The form will establish clear links to Program Review and will become part of the Program Review submission.

Feedback mechanism Plan preparers and others who contribute to a unit’s function will receive feedback on formatting and content. Deans and directors will provide written feedback for plans that roll up to them and provide an executive summary for the VP level. VPs will provide written feedback for plans that roll up directly to them and written feedback on executive summaries. Plans will be considered during the resource allocation process. A collective annual plan will be prepared and used to inform the annual review of the Strategic Plan.

Communication prior to implementation Announcement from president to the BC community about upcoming planning workshops designed to fine tune the process. Recognize planning efforts of all the planning task forces with a celebration. Schedule time beginning Spring 2015 to familiarize faculty and staff with the planning process and documentation.

Implementation requirements Devote time and resources into the process, including, but not limited to adjustment time on the part of VPs, deans, and directors to give meaningful feedback; and additional demands for data gathering. Messaging from VP level to prioritize planning efforts. Tie college resource allocation to the planning process. Workshop the provisional annual planning process (as demonstrated on the planning form) with deans, directors, and unit plan preparers from across the campus. Workshops will include task force members from either the APTF or the APDTF Create an annual written report to summarize the work of annual planning. This would honor employee work, help with communication, and provide a valuable record for institutional memory and accreditation.

Definitions 1: Unit description and value added Describes what the unit does and what it aspires to accomplish to further the institutional mission. [This field replaces the former “unit purpose.” The change is intended to more fully describe the unit’s activities and be more aspirational.]

Definitions 2: Standard work operations Methods to produce a desired outcome and fulfill the unit’s value added. Standard work operational goals represent the basic work of a unit, providing a baseline against which to measure progress and encourage continuous improvement. [“Standard work” is a Lean term. It recognizes that most activities within a unit don’t change from year-to-year and that important— continuous—improvements can be made in these areas.]

Definitions 3: Operational goal Regular work of the unit expected in most cases to remain consistent from year to year. Operational goals identify key areas to measure in order to assess continuous improvement. Each operational goal should include an indicator of achievement and a target. [These goals replace the former “forever” goals, but don’t function in exactly the same way. Operational goals are much more specific and measurable. The broader goals of any unit should derive from the college’s core themes and the strategic direction of the college as expressed in the core themes, Strategic Plan, Academic Master Plan, and President’s Goals.]

Definitions 4: Priority initiative Refers to a new activity, decision to discontinue an existing activity, pilot idea, or particular attention devoted to one aspect of standard operations expected to be completed within a limited timeframe. [The term “priority initiative” was selected to reflect the language of the Strategic Plan. Unit priority initiatives should map onto one of the priority initiatives of the Strategic Plan.]

Definitions 5: Next Level Reviewer Dean, director, or VP. The person to whom the unit rolls up and the person designated by the VP to provide feedback to the plan preparer and other individuals involved in the work of the unit.

Next Steps Solicit feedback and support from President’s Cabinet. Request affirmative VP sign-off on Annual Unit Planning, particularly on all of the key features. Hire a vendor to design a form (probably in MS Word or Adobe for the first iteration). Schedule workshops.