1. 1 Establishing Performance Indicators in Support of The Illinois Commitment Presented to the Illinois Board of Higher Education December 11, 2001

2. 2 Presentation Overview The Need for Performance Indicators Developing a System of Performance Indicators: Lessons Learned Overview of the Illinois Higher Education Policy Context Proposed Framework for Developing Indicators and Next Steps

3. 3 Why Establish Performance Indicators? The Illinois Commitment is based on demonstrating accountability for meeting the six primary goals. To date, this has been implemented through the budget and annual Results Reports. Developing a set of performance indicators is a critical next step in further evaluating how well Illinois system of higher education is meeting the goals.

4. 4 Lessons Learned Nationally The impetus, mechanisms, and actual indicators used by other states vary; there is no one best model. The most effective systems of performance indicators: Are driven by specific state goals and objectives (a direct linkage); and, Have been developed with significant input from internal and external stakeholders.

5. 5 Related Issues for Consideration Performance expectations should be clearly set forth at the beginning. Embrace simplicity; Avoid indicator proliferation; Build on existing data and reporting systems to the extent possible. Recognize that institutional starting points in assessing performance will vary.

6. 6 Policy Context for Indicator Development The Illinois Commitment The National Higher Education Report Card Commissions on Persistence and Degree Completion, and Access and Diversity. Other Board policy initiatives have had, or will have, relevance to the development of performance indicators including IAI, Underrepresented Groups report, and ad hoc policy studies.

7. 7 Proposed Guiding Principles The indicators adopted will be directly linked to the goals of The Illinois Commitment. The indicators adopted will achieve a balance between demonstrating progress toward statewide goals while recognizing differences in institutional mission. The indicators will be consistent with National Report card metrics, to the extent possible.

8. 8 Proposed Guiding Principles (Continued) The total number of indicators will be minimized. The indicators will build on existing data sources and reporting mechanisms to the extent possible. Each institution will propose specific performance goals in consultation with the Board of Higher Education.

9. 9 Proposed Guiding Principles (Continued) The indicators will be developed through broad consultation with all stakeholders. The indicators will remain in place for several years. The indicators and reporting process will continue to be refined in the coming years.

10. 10 Proposed Framework Three types of indicators directly related to The Illinois Commitment: State-level – pertaining to performance of Illinois system of higher education as a whole. Core institutional – a common set reported by all institutions. Mission-specific – related to each institutions unique role and mission.

11. 11 Proposed Framework

12. 12 Key Aspects of Proposed Process A broad-based Advisory Committee will be established to assist Board staff in the development of state-level and core institutional indicators. Institutions will be asked to propose their own goals for each core institutional indicator. Institutions will also be asked to propose mission-specific indicators and related goals.

13. 13 Proposed Timeline Proposed Schedule Winter 01-02 – Initial Review and Consultation Winter/Spring 02 – Refinement and Consensus Building (Recommendations on Indicators will be Presented at June Board Meeting) Summer/Fall 02 – Data Gathering and Report Preparation

14. 14 Proposed Timeline (Continued) Proposed Schedule (Continued) Fall 02 – Finalize and Publish Initial Reports (Staff report on state-level and core institutional indicators to be presented at the December 2002 Board Meeting) There will be ongoing refinement of this process with an overall assessment five years out.