1. CRITERION 2: PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE

2. CORE COMPONENT 2a: The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple societal and economic trends.

3. Core Component 2a: 1. Understanding Capacity

4. Core Component 2a: 2. Planning Priorities

5. Core Component 2a: 3. Decision Making Grid

6. Core Component 2a: 4. Mission and Assessment

7. Core Component 2a: 5. The Master Plan and Societal Change

8. Core Component 2a: 6. Generational and Multi-Cultural Influence

9. Core Component 2a: SUMMARY

10. Core Component 2a: STRENGTHS: 1.Significant work has been given to the Master Plan which has become a living document for the university to help guide planning and decision- making in view of a changing society and the university. 2.The university has taken into account the on-going changes in both the church and society as it makes decisions for academic programming. It has the ability to adapt and yet be true to core values because of the grids for decision making. 3.The university has a strong awareness of its present capacity with clear goals for future development. 4.There has been significant improvement in the technological infrastructure of the university which will position it better for the future. 5.The university has integrated assessment data into the strategic planning process which helps inform itself on current effectiveness and future growth areas.

11. Core Component 2a: Specific Measures: 1.It would be beneficial to include a current staff person or hire a part-time person who is a demographer/researcher. This could be invaluable to the university in making decisions on recruitment strategies, program development and vision casting. Right now the university engages environmental scanning and research on societal change, but it tends to be anecdotal or specific to a particular agenda of the person presenting. 2.There should be an on-going flow of feedback and input for new ideas may emerge that would supersede some of the initial proposals. 3.It is important that the university continue the expansion of the technology to provide opportunities in on-line education etc. 4.While the planning process has included a realistic understanding of university capacity, it could pursue a few items each year through new sources of funding. This is especially true for innovative programs that are responding to current and future trends in society and the church. These links could then be made to foundations, churches, and even donors.

12. CORE COMPONENT 2b: The organization’s resource base supports its educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future.

13. Core Component 2b: 1. Revenue Growth

14. Core Component 2b: 2. Cash Management

15. Core Component 2b: 3. Budgeting Process

16. Core Component 2b: 4. Property Acquisition and Facility Development

17. Core Component 2b: 5. Advancement and Capital Campaigns

18. Core Component 2b: 6. Endowments

19. Core Component 2b: 7. Faculty and Staff

20. Core Component 2b: 8. New Programs and Initiatives

21. Core Component 2b: SUMMARY

22. Core Component 2b: STRENGTHS: 1.The university has proven to effectively and efficiently manage its resources to provide the services it has stated in its mission by operating in the black over the past ten years. 2.The university has recognized the need to improve facilities and completed significant upgrades in order to be more competitive in the recruitment of the modern day student that is used to a higher standard of living. 3.There is a systematic method for donor development and relations which has led to the largest annual financial support from the donor base in the history of the university. The capital campaigns have had success because they are tied to the mission of the university and have promoted a growing trust and integrity with donors. 4.The establishment of endowments is a positive step toward meeting this criterion in both academic and scholarship areas. 5.A growing track record has been established that shows the accomplishment of goals that have been set through the planning processes of the university.

23. Core Component 2b: Specific Measures: 1.There is a need to establish new endowments for various departments, for buildings and for scholarships. A downturn in enrollment could undermine the strength of the educational programs across the board. 2.While the amount of dollars received from donors has grown, the university should continue to expand the donor base. This may require additional personnel to connect the donor to the university. 3.The competition for students that have numerous opportunities in higher education is growing in both alternative delivery systems and in college courses through high school. The university should continue the development of its technology and consider ways to link these students to on-line courses in collaboration with the high schools. 4.There are still older residence buildings that need upgrading which is critical for recruiting and maintaining students. 5.A more thorough strategy and plan should be established for investing in the human resources of the university. Beyond budgeting dollars for development, the university should establish a method that promotes investing in their people rather than an entitlement method.

24. CORE COMPONENT 2c: The organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous improvement.

25. Core Component 2c: 1. Assessment Committee Process for Assessment Projects

26. Core Component 2c: 2. Examples of Assessment a. Career development preparation in the Psychology Department

27. Core Component 2c: 2. Examples of Assessment b. Improvement of the Student Teaching Seminar in the Education Department

28. Core Component 2c: 2. Examples of Assessment c. Linking Children’s Ministry Majors with those in the field that are professionals in children’s ministry

29. Core Component 2c: 3. Constituent Survey Data

30. Core Component 2c: SUMMARY

31. Core Component 2c: STRENGTHS: 1.A formal process exists for gathering feedback and improving programs to meet the needs of the organization and continuous improvement. 2.Many areas of the institution have used this process to improve the organization’s programs. 3.Feedback is made available to everyone on campus via the internal website, and specific feedback is given to involved groups. 4.Feedback from constituent groups is valued by the institution, and used by groups for continuous improvement. 5.Assessment and evaluation is carried out by the Assessment Committee in a manner that provides reliable and valid feedback.

32. Core Component 2c: Specific Measures: 1.Each area of the organization should make greater attempts to follow through with the formal procedures developed by the Assessment Committee. Although informal efforts at evaluation are occurring, it is recommended that a more formal, institution- wide plan be established and carried out. 2.Increase and intensify the measures taken to disseminate evaluative information to the remainder of the organization on the website, in reports, to students, to the Board, to prospective students, to alumni, etc. 3.Make attempts to further develop a central clearinghouse for assessment data, and underscore the importance of the feedback loop. 4.Hire a full-time individual to coordinate and centralize assessment efforts on campus. 5.Make greater attempts to make organizational decisions based on assessment and evaluation data. 6.Cooperate with other Assemblies of God institutions on assessment efforts to better meet the needs of the A/G constituents, clarify market niches, and to direct the institution’s efforts to meet future needs of the organization.

33. CORE COMPONENT 2d: All levels of planning align with the organizations mission, thereby enhancing its capacity to fulfill that mission.

34. Core Component 2d: 1.Inculcation of the University’s Mission a. Students

35. Core Component 2d: 1.Inculcation of the University’s Mission b. Staff

36. Core Component 2d: 1.Inculcation of the University’s Mission c. Faculty

37. Core Component 2d: 1.Inculcation of the University’s Mission d. Administration

38. Core Component 2d: 2. Description of University’s Planning Processes

39. Core Component 2d: 3. Case Studies of Implementation of Mission-guided Planning Initiatives

40. Core Component 2d: SUMMARY

41. Core Component 2d: STRENGTHS: 1.North Central University’s planning processes are well-aligned with its mission at all levels. 2.Construction of the “grid for decision making”, a component of the Master Plan, provides for ongoing use of the university’s mission for major decisions. This guide helps to preserve this important step regardless of personnel turnover. 3.Planning documents, in particular the Master Plan, give evidence of awareness the university’s decisions are complex, and that many factors must be considered. Not only is the university’s mission vital, but also the changing trends in student needs, marketing potential, resource development viability, job placement potential and environmental issues are considered. 4.The planning processes of the university incorporate internal constituents and external constituents. All have personnel who serve as representatives of their area that are directly linked to the President’s cabinet and Strategic Planning committee.

42. Core Component 2d: Specific Measures: 1.All directors and academic department chairs should be trained on the “grid for decision making.” This excellent tool is well-used in some departments and not in others. As proposals are developed at the department level, these issues can be planned for from the ground floor, helping the proposal to be well rounded and have greater success of being accepted. It also would engage more constituents with the complicated nature of the organization’s planning process and help with morale and communication as proposals are not accepted or budgeted. 2.Formalize and inform all levels of documentation process (meeting minutes, proposal formats) to provide consistency in tracking the planning process. 3.Hire an individual for full-time university assessment. This would enhance the university’s ability to make decisions on well-founded evidence that comes from an objective source, rather than on evidence brought by individual departments. 4.Establish a tracking system for unbudgeted proposals. Many good ideas are brought to the table that may be good for the future, but are not good or feasible for the university currently. Tracking these ideas in a system other than meeting minutes would assist in good ideas not being overlooked or forgotten as environments change. 5.Provide specific feedback to departments as to reasons initiatives which appear to be missional in nature, are not funded. Allow for retooling for future presentation of ideas. Also, encourage areas to think creatively for ways to partner with other departments for resource efficiency and development. Use accepted proposals and processes as examples for other areas of the university (such as the process involved in the development of the Center for Youth and Leadership).