1. 2025 Planning Contacts Meeting November 8, 2012 K-State 2025

2. Today’s Purpose: 2025 planning update Guidance resulting from review of college/unit plans Measuring our progress: thematic goal metrics Next Steps Q&A / What’s needed?

3. Initial college/major unit plans submitted (May 2012) Reviewed with deans/comparison of outcomes across colleges (Summer 2012) What we’ve learned –College plans aligning well with university plan –More work needed to address gaps and strengthen quantitative measures Adapted timeline to focus on alignment between university and college plans before linking departmental plans Update on College/Unit/Dept. Planning

4. Alignment Response Chart

5. Update - Continued Deans Retreat held (September 2012) University thematic goal metrics identified by the President and Provost (November 2012) Meeting with key strategic planning college/unit contacts (November 2012) Update 2025 guidance (November 2012) Individual progress check (Nov. – Dec. 2012) Final college/major unit plans (December 21, 2012)

6. Department Heads Retreat to set expectations/discuss departmental planning (January 25, 2013) College/Major Unit/Departmental Plans linked to university plan published on the 2025 website (Summer 2013) Update - Continued

7. Guiding principles –Must work for your unit and align with university plan –Goal setting comprehensive in scope –Involve faculty, staff, students, and alumni –Be inclusive of all levels –Quantitative measures for outcomes –Use Web tools to aid collaboration Will translate into operational plans –Relates to budget and evaluation Guidance: Finalizing 2025 College/Unit Plans

8. Updated Guidance Outcomes across all five-year periods Include both a Mission and Vision Statement –be sure your plan reflects your strengths and vision of where you want to be by 2025 as well as supporting the university’s vision, goals, and outcomes Review for missing strategic goals/priorities, including those that will require major funding Strengthen measurable outcomes by defining quantitative performance targets using “from- to” ranges whenever possible

9. Things to consider… Utilize crosswalk analysis to identify possible gaps, synergies, and examples Be wary of defining outcomes as activities Keep the number of outcomes reasonable for reporting progress on your plan Consider future departmental planning-what is appropriate at College vs. Dept. level Review for alignment with your fundraising goals Consider new university metrics when strengthening your quantitative outcomes

10. Why additional university metrics for thematic goals? –The Visionary Goal benchmark metrics are important measures but not our only measures of success. –Everyone has a role to play in moving K-State toward 2025. –We need additional metrics to track progress to achieving each thematic goal and outcomes. –We identified the need for more quantitative outcomes in College plans. Measuring Our Progress

11. Thematic Goal Metrics Identified by President/Provost in consultation with Deans Council Derived from initial College/Major Unit plans Assumptions used –metrics should be strategic and meaningful for your units as well as the university, and be realistic to track –will be used for this phase of planning –may evolve out of college/major unit and departmental planning this spring –will add appropriate metrics in coming years as needs change and planning evolves

12. Thematic Goals, Outcomes, Metrics

13. Tracking Progress with Metrics Outcomes – “Results we expect to happen” that can be both quantitative and qualitative Metrics – Measures or indicators that can be quantified and used to track progress towards goals/outcomes, i.e., “# of PhDs awarded” Performance Targets – Objectives that define the level of performance towards a goal/outcome, i.e., “increase # of PhDs awarded from X to Y”

14. Aligning Metrics…

15. 1. Is this a measure that we are willing to seek and invest resources in order to make progress? 2. Does it contribute to tracking meaningful progress towards achieving the K-State 2025 vision, goals, and outcomes of your college/major unit and/or the university visionary plan? 3. Is it flexible, adaptable, and meaningful across a wide range of colleges/major units, departments and/or academic areas? 4. Will it be sustainable and useful over a period of years? 5. Will data on this metric likely lead to improvement? 6. Do key stakeholders view it as credible and valuable? 7. Can it be communicated to and understood by a wide audience? 8. Is the cost/benefit relationship sensible in terms of data availability versus value? 9. Can we identify units accountable for providing the data? Criteria for choosing metrics for quantitative outcomes :

16. Next Steps: Colleges/Major Units Review/revise plans, focusing on gaps, metrics and performance targets for quantitative outcomes Annotate outcomes with university metric codes, i.e., “Increase number of PhD’s awarded from 150 to 200 [B-5, T3-6]” Progress check by mid-December

17. Next Steps: 2025 Support Team Update FAQs and 2025 website with new guidance and information Develop simplified template for departmental planning Post College/Major Unit plans by mid- January 2013

18. Questions/Concerns?