1. Institutional Sustainability Assessment (ISA)
Prepared for the Association of College and University Registrars and Liason Officers (ACURLO) Inc, in Region IV-A, CALABARZON
September 4, 2014

2. Outline
Why quality?
What are the multiple missions of Philippine higher education institutions (PHEIs)?
What prompted CHED to advocate and support quality and quality assurance?
What is CHED’s view of:
Quality?
Quality Assurance? (QA)?
What is a Quality Assurance (QA) System?
What is the benefit of having an internal/institutional QA system?
What is the role of CHED?
What is ISA? What are its objectives?
What are the Key Result Areas (KRAs) of ISA
Institutional Sustainability Assessment (ISA)
The Quality Assurance Framework
The ISA Key Result Areas

3. Why quality? Mandate Commission on Higher Education
Philippine higher education

4. R.A – the Higher Education Act of 1994 mandates the Commission on Higher Education to promote, support and ensure that higher education institutions in the country attain the highest level of QUALITY.

5. Philippine higher education institution is mandated to contribute to building a quality nation capable of transcending the social, political, economic, cultural and ethical issues that constrain the country’s human development, productivity and global competitiveness.

6. What are the multiple missions of Philippine higher education institutions (PHEIs)?
1. To produce thoughtful graduates imbued with:
values reflective of a humanist orientation –respect for others as human beings ;
analytical and problem skills;
ability to think through the ethical and social implications of a given course of action;
the competency to learn continuously throughout life;

7. 2. to produce graduates with high levels of academic, thinking behavioral, and technical skills/ competencies that are aligned with national academic and industry standards;
3. to provide focused support to the research required for technological innovation, economic growth and global competitiveness; and
4. to help improve the quality of human life of Filipinos.

8. The Goal
To have a critical mass of diverse HEIs offering quality programs that meet national standards, and international standards for disciplines/professions with acceptable standards.

9. What prompted CHED to advocate and support quality and quality assurance?

10. Lack of critical pool of graduates with the necessary thinking, technical and behavioural competencies
The ASEAN community by 2015
The commitment of the Philippine government to the evolving efforts to recognize and develop a system of comparable qualifications, degrees and diplomas across the Asia-Pacific region

11. What is CHED’s view of Quality?
The alignment and consistency of outcomes with the institution’s vision-mission and goals, demonstrated by learning and service outcomes at exceptional levels, and by a shared culture of quality.

12. Three perspectives of quality based on CHED’s definition
fitness for purpose
exceptional
developing a culture of quality

13. “Fitness for purpose” means the institution’s vision and mission and goals are translated into:
1. learning outcomes, programs, and systems.

14. “Exceptional” means being either distinctive, exceeding very high standards, or conformance to standards based on a system of comparability using criteria and ratings.

15. “Developing a culture of quality” refers to the transformational dimension of the CHED’s notion of quality.

16. This means that both at the global and regional levels, countries need to demonstrate that their education system match world-class standards.
World class standards means a shift:
* from education to life long- learning
* from education as transmission of knowledge to education as building learner competencies including learning how to learn

17. Quality, is therefore premised on the HEI’s ideals and on its commitment to achieve them while involving the organization in the process.
This kind of commitment is translated into having a mindset for quality assurance (QA).
The internal capacity of HEIs to translate policy into quality programs and quality results depends on established internal QA systems.

18. What is CHED’s view of Quality Assurance?
Quality Assurance is about “ensuring that there are mechanisms, procedures and processes in place to ensure that the desired quality, however defined and measured is delivered.”
(Church, 1988, Harvey and Green, 1993) as cited in the ISA Handbook)

19. In short HEIs has an internal capacity to establish a Quality system- a system that can translate policy into quality programs and quality results depends on established internal QA systems.

20. What is a Quality Assurance (QA) System?

21. It is a management system and process which when properly implemented could lead to quality outcomes as well as sustainable programs and initiatives.
The QA systems look at institutional performance in terms of the HEI’s capacity to translate policy (in terms of VMG) into quality programs and quality results.

22. What is the benefit of having aN internal/institutional qA system?
Develop quality HEIs with a competitive advantage
About 2,000 HEIs of varying quality
Quality education that gives opportunity for employment and for good citizenship
Develop Perspective of HEIs
Keep the end in mind
Develop internal QA systems
Reflect the HEI’s capability to survive, to achieve its VMG and its culture of quality

23. Institutional QA Systems
Presence of the system
The mechanisms, procedures and processes exist.
They are defined, known by users, and ideally, documented through a manual or a memo.
Extent of implementation
All users follow the mechanisms, procedures, and processes.
Exceptions to the system are documented and justified.

24. Institutional QA Systems
Outcomes
The system leads to stakeholder satisfaction, HEI policy, HEI reputation, etc.
Effectiveness of implementation
The implementation of the system helps the HEI achieve their goals and targets, as shown by the quantity and quality of outcomes.

25. The HEIs Quality Assurance System
INTERNAL QA SYSTEM
EXTERNAL QA SYSTEM

26. Quality Assurance P R O C E S VMG  Desired learning outcomes
Learning Environment
(Content + Methodologies)
Assessment

27. QA: Towards Mature HEIs
Clear VMG
Definition of desired learning outcomes
Learning environment
Outputs: Program delivery, services
Inputs: Human, physical, financial resources; Systems
Monitoring and assessment
Performance indicators
Appropriate instruments
Internal and external perspectives
Improve and enhance
Plan Do
Check
Act

28. PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTION
HORIZONTAL Typology
PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTION
UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE
AUTONOMOUS
DEREGULATED
REGULATED
AUTONOMOUS
DEREGULATED
REGULATED
AUTONOMOUS
DEREGULATED
REGULATED
VERTICAL Typology

29. What is the role of CHED?
To assist HEIS in developing a QA System through an Institutional Sustainability Assessment (ISA) Process.

30. What is ISA?
ISA is a quality assurance process that assesses the institutional sustainability of an HEI
Through the use of appropriate assessment tools it becomes possible to measure objectively the HEI’s performance as well as check if the mechanisms procedures, and process actually deliver the desired quality.

31. Objectives of ISA
To support HEIs in developing institutional systems that lead to quality outcomes, as demonstrated by students and graduates whose competencies meet internationally recognized standards and are relevant to employment.
To support HEIs in developing a culture of quality, reflected in internal QA systems that will help them perform effectively and efficiently and meet their desired outcomes and performance targets.
To engage HEIs in addressing policy issues, especially those that address the need to improve the quality of higher education.

32. CHED promotes ISA because it can serve as a learning process for the HEIs and contribute to its continuing quality cycle.
The ISA is DEVELOPMENTAL in nature and entails a more reflective review of the institution’s VMG and desired outcomes.

33. The ISA Framework: The 5 Key Result Areas
Governance and Management (including management of resources)
Quality of Teaching and Learning (competency, programs, faculty)
Quality of Professional Exposure, Research and Creative Work (including linkages)
Support for Students (learning resources & support structure)
Relations with the Community (extra-curricular linkages, service learning, outreach)

34. KRA 1: governance & management
A. Core Indicator: Governance
Criterion: Governance arrangements
B. Core Indicator: Management
Criterion: Management, financial control, and quality assurance arrangements
C. Indicator: Enabling Features
Criterion: 1) the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT);
2) resource generation strategies to support its development plans;
3) others

35. Governance and Management
Core Indicator: Governance
Criterion: The institution’s governance arrangements demonstrate probity, strategic vision, accountability, awareness and management of risk, and effective monitoring of performance.
Refers to the systems that reflect the principles guiding the overall use of authority and decision-making of the institution’s governing body
Possible outcomes: Attainment of objectives of the institution; esp. in areas of policy formulation/decision making, sustainability of operations, monitoring, and communication systems

36. Governance and Management
Core Indicator: Management
Criterion: The institution’s management, financial control, and quality assurance arrangements are sufficient to manage existing operations and to respond to development and change.
Refers to the overall systems and processes of the institution
Possible outcomes: Efficient and effective operations; support of stakeholders; speedy and appropriate response to external and internal developments

37. Governance and Management
Indicator: Enabling Features
Criterion: The institution has enabling features, e.g.,
the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for more efficient and effective management; and
viable, sustainable, and appropriate resource generation strategies to support its development plans.
Refers to the particular initiatives of the institution that contribute to efficiency, productivity, and quality of the community environment
Possible outcomes: Efficient and effective operations, well-being of sectors of the community, achievement of development targets

38. KRA 2: quality of teaching & learning
A. Core Indicator: Setting and Achieving Program Standards
Criterion 1: Program Approval and Implementation
Criterion 2: Program Monitoring and Review
Criterion 3: Action to Strengthen Programs

39. KRA 2: quality of teaching & learning
B. Core Indicator: Faculty Profile
Criterion: Faculty members with expertise and competence
C. Core Indicator: Use of ICT and Learning Resources
Criterion: Effective use of learning resources, such as library resources, laboratories, and ICT

40. Quality of Teaching & Learning
Core Indicator: Setting & Achieving Program Standards
Criterion 1: Program Approval and Implementation - The institution has a system for approving programs, which takes into consideration the HEI’s VMG and resources, the desired competencies for its graduates, the development needs of the region/country, and its ability to ensure that its programs enable students to achieve the intended outcomes. It has systems to ensure effective implementation of the program to achieve the intended outcomes.
Possible outcomes: Credibility among stakeholders due to transparency of processes; Programs that are consistent with the HEI’s VMG and desired graduate competencies; Programs that are effectively implemented

41. Quality of Teaching & Learning
Core Indicator: Setting & Achieving Program Standards
Criterion 2: Program Monitoring and Review –
The institution has effective arrangements for monitoring and reviewing the effectiveness of its programs.
Possible outcomes: Effective teaching and learning, outstanding student achievements, innovative and efficient program delivery, performance of graduates of the program in terms of licensure examinations and employability

42. Quality of Teaching & Learning
Core Indicator: Setting & Achieving Program Standards
Criterion 3: Action to Strengthen Programs –
The institution takes effective action to address weakness, build on strengths, and to enhance performance by the dissemination of good practice.
Possible outcomes: Positive feedback on the effectiveness and impact of proposed and implemented changes

43. Quality of Teaching & Learning
Professional Institution
The programs produce graduates with professional competencies that are relevant and responsive to the needs of society.
College
The programs produce graduates with holistic perspective and broad knowledge of issues.
University
The programs produce graduates with specialized competencies and investigative skills.

44. Quality of Teaching & Learning
Core Indicator: Faculty Profile
Criterion: The institution has an adequate number of faculty members with the appropriate expertise and competence to teach the courses offered by the institution.
Refers to the systems and processes of hiring, retaining, and developing faculty with the appropriate expertise and competence
Possible outcomes: Student performance, rate of completion, and faculty competence

45. Quality of Teaching & Learning
Core Indicator: Use of ICT & Learning Resources
Criterion: The institution makes effective use of learning resources, such as library resources, laboratories, and information and communications technology, to support student learning.
Refers to the structures that allow faculty, students, and administrators to effectively use its learning resources
Possible outcomes: Efficiency in delivery of services, innovative programs, utilization of ICT and library resources

46. KRA 3: quality of professional exposure/research/creative work
A. Indicator: Professional Exposure
Criterion: Professional exposure programs (e.g., practicum, internship, and on- the-job training).
B. Indicator: Research Capability
Criterion: Creative research and advanced scholarly activity
C. Indicator: Creative Work and/or Innovation
Criterion: Creative work in the arts and/or innovation in science and technology.

47. Quality of PROFESSIONAL EXPOSURE, RESEARCH, & CREATIVE WORK
Indicator: Professional Exposure
Criterion: The institution has programs that allow students to practice their learned competencies in view of their future careers, such as programs for practicum, internship, and on-the-job training (OJT).
Possible outcomes: Collaboration of sectors and programs, which are relevant and responsive to the needs of society

48. Quality of PROFESSIONAL EXPOSURE, RESEARCH, & CREATIVE WORK
Indicator: Research Capability
Criterion: The institution has a research community of faculty, postgraduate students and postdoctoral research workers that fosters and supports creative research and other advanced scholarly activity.
Possible outcomes: Publications, highly functional and relevant research programs

49. Quality of PROFESSIONAL EXPOSURE, RESEARCH, & CREATIVE WORK
Indicator: Creative Work and/or Innovation
Criterion: The institution has programs that promote creative work and/or innovation in the arts and humanities, science and technology, social sciences, and/or management science.
Possible outcomes: Patents and awards

50. A. Core Indicator: Equity and Access
Criterion 1: Recruitment, Admission, and Academic Support
Criterion 2: Student Scholarships
B. Core Indicator: Student Services
Criterion: The institution has programs for student services, to support the non-academic needs of the students.

51. Support for Students Core Indicator: Equity & Access
Criterion 1: Recruitment, Admission, and Academic Support
The institution is effective in recruiting, admitting, supporting, and graduating students, including those from indigenous groups, the handicapped, low-level income groups, foreign students, and other special groups.
Refers to the processes for recruitment, admission, and academic support of students, taking into consideration special groups
Possible outcomes: Student quality, rate of completion

52. Support for Students Core Indicator: Equity & Access
Criterion 2: Student Scholarships
The institution operates effective arrangements to direct scholarships and study grants on merit to support the most able students on programs that develop competencies needed to support the Filipino economy and to enable the country to compete in global labor markets.
Refers to the processes for promoting equity and access to tertiary education, by providing scholarships
Possible outcomes: Student quality, diversity of student population, rate of completion, employment of scholars

53. Support for Students Core Indicator: Student Services
Criterion: The institution has programs for student services, to support the non- academic needs of the students.
Refers to the structures and processes for delivering non-academic services for students
Possible outcomes: Performance of students, employment of graduates

54. KRA 5: relations with the community
A. Core Indicator: Relevance of Programs
Criterion: Relevance of Programs 
B. Indicator: Networking and Linkages
Criterion: Partnerships
C. Indicator: Extension Programs
Criterion: Extension and Outreach

55. Relations with the Community
Core Indicator: Relevance of Programs
Criterion: The institution offers programs that take into consideration the social, cultural, economic, and/or developmental needs of the country at local, regional, and/or national levels, as reflected in the HEI’s VMG and in consideration of the country’s need to compete effectively in global markets.
Refers to the structures and processes that promote local/ regional/ national development and global competitiveness
Possible outcomes: Student quality, rate of completion, degree of competitiveness

56. Relations with the Community
Indicator: Networking and Linkages
Criterion: The institution is valued as a partner by other higher education institutions; professional, government, and non-government organizations; and industry, within the Philippines and internationally.
Refers to the structures and processes that promote and support partnership with other institutions
Possible outcomes: Partnerships with other HEIs; professional, government and non-government organizations; and industry

57. Relations with the Community
Indicator: Extension Programs
Criterion: The institution is valued by its local community as a provider of extension programs that are responsive to the needs of the community for people empowerment and self-reliance.
Refer to the structures and processes that promote extension programs, which are relevant to the needs of the community
Possible outcomes: Impact of programs on local, regional, and national development

58. The ISA Visit

59. The ISA Visit
Notice to the institutions. CHEDRO notifies HEIs due to be visited of the dates on which it is intended that visit should take place and the deadline for submission to the CHEDRO of the self-evaluation document.

60. The Institutional Sustainability Assessment Tool
The Self-Evaluation Document (SED) is an ISA tool developed to help HEIs in the monitoring and evaluation process.
The SED serves as guide in the design of institutional QA systems and the approaches to implementation.
The SED can be used in helping the HEI understand its systems better, reflect on areas for improvement, and search for solutions given their specific context.

61. Self-Evaluation Document (SED)
The HEI may ask the CHEDRO for assistance in planning the SED.
CHEDRO follows up with the HEI 2 months after the notice.
HEI submits 2 copies of the SED to the CHEDRO within 4 months after the notice.
CHEDRO makes an initial assessment.
If the document falls insignificantly short of meeting the criteria, or incomplete, the HEI will be advised to revise the documents and to re-submit 10 final copies. The HEI should be notified of the need for revision within 3 weeks of the date of receipt of the SED.
CHEDRO supplies all the members of the review team of the SED at least one month before the commencement of the visit.

62. Visit of the Review Team
The Conduct of the Visit – following the spirit of dialogue and cooperation. Usually 2 or 3 days is allocated for the visit.
The evaluation visit - to make the judgment

63. Making Judgments using the following scale:
4 The criterion is fully met and elements of it are achieved at a level of excellence that provides a model for others.
3 The criterion is met, with most elements demonstrating good practice.
2 The criterion is met with most respects, but improvement is needed to overcome weaknesses in some elements
1 The criterion is met in some respects, but much improvement is needed to overcome weaknesses.
0 The criterion is not met.

64. The ISA Indicators by HEI TypePI
College
University
Governance & Management
Governance
Core
Management
Enabling Features
Quality of Teaching & Learning
Setting & Achieving Program Standards
Faculty Profile
Appropriate Learning Resources

65. The ISA Indicators by HEI TypePI
College
University
Quality of Professional Exposure, Research, & Creative Work
Professional Exposure
Required
Research Capability
Creative Work/or Innovation
Support for Students
Equity & Access
Student Services
Core

66. The ISA Indicators by HEI TypePI
College
University
Relations with the Community
Relevance of Programs
Networking & Linkages
Required
Extension Programs
Core

67. The ISA Indicators by HEI Table A2 Minimun Scores to Quality for Autonomous and Deregulated Status.xlsx
Indicator PI
College
University
Relations with the Community
Relevance of Programs
Core
Networking & Linkages
Required
Extension Programs

68. Some References
Commission on Higher Education Strategic Plan
CMO 46, series of 2012
CMO 44, s 2008
CHED OPRKM Data/Report
CHED ISA Primer
Handbook on OBE, Typology & ISA, CHED 2014
RA 7722
Road of Philippine Higher Education

69. Thank you.