1. Creating a Comprehensive Institutional Measurement System Richland College Teaching, Learning, Community Building 1 Fonda Vera, Dean, Planning and Research For Institutional Effectiveness Texas Association for Institutional Research March 1, 2007 Gloria Washington, Director, Institutional Effectiveness Bao Huynh, Director, Institutional Research

2. Session Overview Performance Excellence Model Approaches Deployment of Approaches Results and Key Learnings Integrating and Sharing Key Learnings 2

3. 3 Performance Excellence Model

4. Deploy Integrate Approach Learn Richland College Cycles of Improvement 4

5. APPROACHES 5 Richland College Cycles of Improvement Teaching, Learning, Community Building

6. Strategic Planning Process 6

7. 7 Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

8. Alignment of Goals 8

9. Interpreting Data 9

10. 1.1.1 Contact hours from dual credit and tech-prep 2006-2007 Target Range 90% – 100% 207,000 – 230,000 2008-2009 Target Range 90% - 100% 360,000 – 400,000 2010-2011 Target Range 90% - 100% 450,000 – 500,000 10 Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

11. 1.5.1 # of on-line contact hours 2006-2007 Target Range 90% – 100% 1,071,000 – 1,190,000 2008-2009 Target Range 90% - 100% 1,178,100 – 1,309,000 2010-2011 Target Range 90% - 100% 1,295,100 – 1,439,000 11 Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

12. 2.1.2 % retained through semester in credit classes 2006-2007 Target Range 90% – 100% 75.60 – 84.00 2008-2009 Target Range 90% - 100% 76.05 – 84.50 2010-2011 Target Range 90% - 100% 76.95 – 85.50 12 Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

13. Major Surveys –Community College Survey of Student Engagement – Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory – Campus Quality Survey – Assessment of ThunderValues Other Departmental Surveys 13 Information Management

14. Administer one major survey every year Segment and Analyze Themes across Surveys Action Plans to Improve User-friendly Reports Distribute Widely Other Departmental Surveys 14 Major Surveys Approaches

15. DEPLOYMENT OF APPROACHES 15 Richland College Cycles of Improvement Teaching, Learning, Community Building

16. Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope. ● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives strategic college-wide initiatives All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope. ● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives strategic college-wide initiatives All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope. ● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives strategic college-wide initiatives All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope. ● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives strategic college-wide initiatives All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions Organizational Actions 16

17. Organizational Action Plans 17

18. 18

19. Departmental Actions Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of: –an Organizational Action or –a department-specific performance gap or initiative. Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions that are relevant for their work area. Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does not exist. 19 Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of: –an Organizational Action or –a department-specific performance gap or initiative. Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions that are relevant for their work area. Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does not exist. Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of: –an Organizational Action or –a department-specific performance gap or initiative. Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions that are relevant for their work area. Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does not exist. Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of: –an Organizational Action or –a department-specific performance gap or initiative. Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions that are relevant for their work area. Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does not exist.

20. 20

21. 21

22. 22

23. 23

24. Process Improvement/Implementation Plan (PIIP) 8-step process to: document implementation of new processes/programs improve existing processes/programs Process Improvement / Implementation Plan 24

25. Process Improvement 5 Pilot/ Implement Approach 4 Develop Solution 3 Identify Root Cause 2 Assign Ownership 1 Identify Improvement Need 6 Measure Impact 7 Disseminate Results 8 Evaluate the Process RLC Evaluation & Improvement Approach Integrate Approach Deploy Learn 25

26. 26 Identify Improvement Need Assign OwnershipIdentify Root Cause Develop Solution

27. Benchmarking Process The Benchmarking Process provides a standardized institutional process for investigating best/better practices. Through this system, best/better practices are: Proposed Accepted for further research and review Assigned to a process owner Adopted, revised or rejected 27

28. 28 Benchmarking Form

29. Thunion Report 29

30. Thunion Report - Layer 1 30

31. Thunion Report - Layer 2 31

32. Thunion Report - Layer 3 32

33. 1.1.1 Contact hours from dual credit and tech-prep 2006-2007 Target Range 90% – 100% 207,000 – 230,000 Performance as of December 2006 85,216 Score 9.26 Adjusted Score 9.26 33 Thunion Report - Raw Data

34. 34 Thunion Report - Raw Data 1.5.1 # of on-line contact hours 2006-2007 Target Range 90% – 100% 1,071,000 – 1,190,000 Performance as of December 2006 303,280 Score 6.37 Adjusted Score 6.37

35. 35 Thunion Report - Raw Data 2.1.2 % retained through semester in credit classes 2006-2007 Target Range 90% – 100% 75.60 – 84.00 Performance as of December 2006 83.78 Score 9.97 Adjusted Score 9.97

36. RESULTS AND KEY LEARNINGS 36 Richland College Cycles of Improvement Teaching, Learning, Community Building

37. 37 Student Success Results - End of Year

38. 38 Dual Credit Contact Hours

39. Market Share of Service Area 39

40. OrganizationNature of Benchmark Activity Ritz-CarltonThunderValue-of-the-Week Texas NameplateDashboard Bank OneCustomer service “Front Counter” Walt Disney CompanyInterview/screening, Orientation Starbucks & the “Experience Music Project” Experience Engineering for T-duck Hall & Future Buildings Southwest, Container StoreEmployee culture Branch-Smith PrintingSupplier/Partner Score Card Presbyterian Hosp of DallasEmployee professional development Saint Luke’s HospitalPerformance Excellence Model Outside Higher Education: Comparative Information 40

41. Enrollment Projections Daily Registration Comparative Reports Facility Use for Class Scheduling Effectiveness Discipline and Program Review Market Share Analysis Trended Grade Distribution Reports Survey Results with Themes & Next Steps Monthly Employee Diversity Reports Types of Analysis 41

42. Daily Enrollment Comparison District Colleges 42

43. 43 On-line Contact Hours

44. INTEGRATING AND SHARING KEY LEARNINGS 44 Richland College Cycles of Improvement Teaching, Learning, Community Building

45. Richland College Shared Learnings Posting of: PIIP documents Benchmarking reports QEP activities and reports Executive summaries and next steps for all major surveys Monthly Thunion Report Card Annual End of Year Report Teaching, Learning, Community Building 45

46. The Richland College Measurement System Philosophy ADLI for Continuous Improvement Data Informed - Not data-driven Measure what is key Segment for greater understanding User-friendly Strategies and Reports Benchmark Best Practices Take action Evaluate 46

47. Creating a Comprehensive Institutional Measurement System Richland College Teaching, Learning, Community Building 47 Fonda Vera, Dean, Planning and Research For Institutional Effectiveness Texas Association for Institutional Research March 1, 2007 Gloria Washington, Director, Institutional Effectiveness Bao Huynh, Director, Institutional Research