The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment

UK’s Administrative Regulations (AR II-1.0-6) Strategic Planning –UK’s Strategic Plan establishes the framework for all institutional planning –Unit-level planning sets strategic goals for instruction, research, and service Program Review –Improves quality by reviewing mission, goals, activities, outcomes every 5 to 7 years –Suggests possible objectives to be assessed in future Annual Reports Annual Report –Assesses annual progress toward selected goals –Indicates needed changes in a unit’s priorities and feeds into program reviews

Highlights of SACS Institutional Effectiveness Criteria Establish mission and goals Engage in systematic, broad-based planning and evaluation Assess the quality of: –Student learning at all levels –Research and service functions –Administrative processes and educational support services Describe methods for analyzing results Use results to improve

Components of a Program Review Review of the unit strategic plan Preparation of self-study report: an in-depth analysis of strengths and weaknesses Review by an external committee to assess the unit’s effectiveness in meeting its goals Prepare a Program Implementation Plan Draft an Assessment Plan (recommended); reflected in Annual Progress Reports Revise the unit strategic plan

The Strategic Plan Identify and prioritize actions to help unit best accomplish goals, fulfill its mission, and realize its vision –Revised periodically to calibrate the course of the unit towards the achievement of the mission and vision Mission statement takes into account the external environment and internal strengths and weaknesses Goals/objectives for research, service, and administrative support Strategies for achieving goals/objectives Measures of progress and evaluation methods

The Self-Study Prepared internally by unit committee Covers time period since prior review, usually 5-7 years Process and report used internally to review current status and trajectory of unit to make internal recommendations for quality enhancements Final report used by External Committee for review

The Self-Study Program Documents: - strategic plan - organizational chart - annual progress reports Resources: - adequacy of budget, facilities, equipment, and human resources - Staff numbers and demographics Adherence to Policies and Procedures: - grievances, promotions, staff personnel actions - leave policies - budget request preparation

The Self-Study Evaluation of Quality and Productivity: - climate for equity and diversity - quality and productivity in research, public service, or operations, - including, as appropriate, the quality of:  staff employees  customer/client satisfaction  business and operating procedures Analysis of Strengths and Recommendations for Quality Enhancement: - synthesis of self-study findings - results in a summary of strengths and recommendations for quality enhancement

The External Committee Review External perspective of the quality and effectiveness of the unit’s programs, services, resources, processes, and operations Objective, unbiased assessment of the unit Comprised of 6 to 8 members, recommended by unit head, charged by head administrator - includes members external to unit - may also include students, staff, alumni, practicing professionals - 1 to 2 self study committee members in ex-officio capacity

The External Committee Review Examines the self study report Engages in additional information-seeking, as necessary Assesses the validity of the conclusions reached in the self-study Identifies additional strengths and recommendations for quality enhancement Prepares a final report

The External Review Committee Develops recommendations that focus on the quality of: Service provided and unit productivity Management practices Recruitment and retention of a diverse staff Planning, evaluation, and resources – efforts to maximize cost-effectiveness of programs

Program Implementation Plan Consider recommendations from all sources in the review Develop program objectives related to accepted recommendations Formulate action steps and identify resources needed to implement objectives Establish a timeline for accomplishing unit objectives

Program Implementation Plan Form Due: June 30

Program Review Flowchart & Timeline

Program Review Calendar

Completion of the Program Review Phase of the Planning Cycle Revise and refine unit strategic plan based on recommendations of unit review committee and self-study Prepare assessment plan: –Systematic, comprehensive evaluation featuring:  Clear, concise objectives  Criteria for determining success  Commitment to continuous improvement

The Annual Review Report Records the unit’s progress toward achieving goals and objectives during the year Consists of a concise report that summarizes accomplishments, adjustments to plans, and goals and priorities for next year Provides data to be used in future self- studies

Annual Review Report Form

Planning & Assessment Activities and Budget Requests Program reviews and annual progress reports support Operating Budget decisions Responsibility of VP’s, Associate VP’s, or directors to use results in preparing budget requests Use of assessment results should be demonstrated to facilitate resource allocation and budgeting decisions in support of strategic plans and to ensure quality enhancement

Where to go for help Deborah Moore Director of Assessment JoLynn Noe Assistant Director of Assessment Connie Ray VP for Institutional Research, Planning, & Effectiveness Roger Sugarman Director of Institutional Research Assessment Website

The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment