1. Institutional Development Institutional Effectiveness Public Information

2. Major Functions Institutional Effectiveness Provide leadership for CFCC strategic planning and assessment (IE) process to demonstrate how well CFCC is fulfilling its mission and goals

3. Major Functions Institutional Effectiveness Ensure that CFCC IE process meets  SACS Criteria for Accreditation  legislative and state board accountability requirements  our own CFCC requirements

4. Major Functions Institutional Effectiveness Provide research support for Institutional Effectiveness  collect and compile college data  publish internal/external documents & reports  respond to ad hoc requests

5. Who’s Who Staff  G. Shaver, VP of Institutional Development  Patsy Lackey, Administrative Assistant Clients  internal: faculty& staff ; 90+ planning unit managers  external: SACS, Feds, NCCCS, community, other colleges

6. Assessment of Functions (SWOT)  President’s feedback  Institutional Effectiveness Committee  Peer Review  Compare to other college’s best practices  Anecdotal Feedback  Faculty/Staff Survey  Quality of Products  Critical Self-evaluation

7. FT Faculty and Staff Survey Results 1. Staff is courteous and helpful. 82% Agree/Strongly Agree 15% NA 2. Requests for services or information are handled within a reasonable time. 82% Agree/Strongly Agree 15% NA 3. Assistance provided to departments in planning for IE is satisfactory. 58% Agree/Strongly Agree 36% NA

8. FT Faculty and Staff Survey Results 4. The process and procedures for planning and IE are effectively communicated. 61% Agree/Strongly Agree 27% NA 5. Products (FACT BOOK, Program Review Reports, and other documents) are of good quality. 65% Agree/Strongly Agree 30% NA

9. Trends / IE Challenges Communication  Trends - growing college; employee turnover  Challenges - resources; customer service; perceptions/attitudes Technology  Trend - electronic communication is the norm  Challenges - employee resistance to use technology (e-mail, SPOL, Internet, Intranet); resistance to change; information overload

10. Strengths President’s leadership IE leadership at all levels of college Bottom-up process Flexibility IE process brings us together  to take stock  to recognize & work towards shared goals

11. 2001-2002 Planning Priorities Improve Communication of Institutional Effectiveness Process and Procedures (College Goals #3, #11, #13) Develop a new, user friendly IE web page  who, what, when, where, & how of IE  links to IE information & documents  resource for everyone

12. 2001-2002 Planning Priorities In partnership with IRCC and CPCC, develop and implement training modules in Strategic Planning On-Line (SPOL) to inform & help users with process & procedures  Tutorial menu  Tips on writing good objectives with examples  PowerPoint  Voice narrated & close captioned  printable

13. 2001-2002 Planning Priorities Strengthen procedures for linking planning and budgeting  work with C. Rice to include CFCC budget info in SPOL  test system  train users on budget portion  use system to prepare FY2002-2003 budget requests

14. 2001-2002 Planning Priorities Evaluate Annual Program Review Process  no longer an NCCCS mandate  an instructional function  51+ curriculum programs; 12 pre-majors  meet with instruction & evaluate APR purpose  amend as needed

15. 2001-2002 Planning Priorities Increase access to college data and information analysis tools  attend training to utilize NCCCS data warehouse and analytical tools for creating ad hoc reports

16. 2001-2002 Planning Priorities Update SACS On-Line Compliance System  modify system to include revised SACS Criteria (after December 2001)  involve users in review and update

17. COMMENTS ? QUESTIONS ?