REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Institutional Effectiveness Committee
Monday February 14, 2011, 2:00 p.m.
Boardroom
AGENDA
1. Call To Order
2. Approve meeting minutes
3. Action Items
3.1 Approve BP/AP 3250 (attached)
3.2 Approve Institutional Planning Narrative (attached)
3.3 Approve model
4. Discussion Items
4.1 None
5. Reports
6. Adjournment
Next meeting: Thursday, February 17, at 3:30 p.m.
Proposed Agenda Items:
Institutional Effectiveness Indicators
Integrated Planning Summit
Planning Agenda
1
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Institutional Effectiveness Committee (IEC)
7351 Tompkins Hill Road, AD 201 (Boardroom)
Thursday, February 3, 2011
NOTES
PRESENT
Dan Calderwood, Zach DeLoach, Sally Frazier, Anita Janis(phone),
Roxanne Metz, Keith Snow-Flamer, Lorie Walsh, Maggie White and
Bruce Wagner.
OTHERS PRESENT
Pat Girczyc, Coni Simpson
DISCUSSION
ITEMS
REVIEW OF BP/AP
3250
There was discussion regarding BP/AP 3250 Institutional Planning.
Keith noted that this draft was created using the template provided by
the Community College League and examples. He also noted that the
committee will need to review BP/AP 3250, make any necessary
changes and then forward to College Council for their approval. He
would like the draft to be reviewed at the next IEC meeting which is
scheduled for
February 17.
PLANNING MODEL
& PLANNING
NARRATIVE
Keith stated that we need a document that shows how the institution
does planning. He asked that committee members review and give
feedback on the draft Institutional Planning Model (IPM) Narrative.
There was extensive discussion by committee members and
suggestions were made regarding formatting and content. It was
decided by the committee to send feedback to all committee members
for review. Keith and Lorie will work together to edit the draft. Keith
noted that the model came from Marin Community College and we
need something that closely resembles their document. College
council has been calling for the narrative for the past 3 months so it is
important to complete it.
IEC PLANNING
AGENDA
Discussion took place regarding how committees relate and
communicate with one another. As a district we need to document
what we do and then evaluate it. Institutional Effectiveness is a way
to look at the processes and determine what is missing. If committees
are not documenting what they are doing or how they are interfacing
with each other it is the IEC’s job to report what isn’t working.
Roxanne noted that it would provide continuity if committees would
all use the same template for their pages on the CR website. Keith
stated that we need to talk about what the process is going to be for
2
IEC and the charge needs to be clarified. The narrative will not be
sent to College Council until the language has been refined.
ASSESSMENT
SURVEY
Keith suggested that it may be helpful to conduct an Assessment
Survey to find out from the college community how effective the
current planning processes are working. He noted that there is a
difference in opinion as to where we are depending on who you talk
to. Bruce stated that it may be necessary to include the ACCJC rubric
with the survey.
Pat suggested that a pilot survey be done among a select group prior
to sending it out to the entire district.
Keith would like to have the pilot survey developed and sent out
within the next month as this will help to guide the future dialogue of
the committee.
Next Steps:
The committee agreed to create a survey and send it out to a select
group as a pilot.
NEXT
MEETING
The next meeting of the IEC will be on Thursday, February
17, at 3:30 p.m.
FUTURE
AGENDA
ITEMS
Approve AP/BP 3250 Institutional Planning
Approve IPM Narrative
Draft Indicators
Draft Survey
Draft Planning Agenda
ADJOURNED
The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
SUBMITTED
BY
lw
3
DRAFT 020811
Redwoods Community College District
Board Policy: BP 3250
Institutional Planning
The Superintendent/President shall ensure that the College has a comprehensive, broad-based
ongoing planning and evaluation cycle that is driven by the College’s Mission and Goals, and
supported by institutional effectiveness research. This institutional planning process involves
appropriate segments of the College and is inclusive of all constituent groups. The planning and
budgeting systems shall be linked, and planning priorities shall be established annually.
The institution assures the effectiveness of its ongoing planning processes by systematically
reviewing, evaluating and modifying, as appropriate, all parts of the planning processes,
including institutional and other research efforts.
The planning system shall include plans required by law, including, but not limited to the long
range educational master plan, facilities master plan, technology master plan, and strategic plans
which shall be updated periodically as deemed necessary by the Board of Trustees
The Superintendent/President shall submit to the Board those plans for which Board approval is
required by Title 5.
The Superintendent/President shall inform the Board about the status of planning and various
plans, and seek Board input during their development as appropriate.
Reference:
Accreditation Standard 1.B
Title 5, Sections 51008, 51010, 51027, 53003, 54220, 55080, 55190, 55250, 55510,
56270 et seq.
4
DRAFT 020811
Redwoods Community College District
Administrative Procedure: AP 3250
Established committees, with representation from faculty, administration, classified staff, and
students, will review and recommend planning decisions related to human, facilities, technology,
and budget resources.
Applying the criteria of accreditation standards, the planning process will be guided by adopted
vision, mission and core values statements and will facilitate development of specific goals,
objectives and strategies, which will have measurable outcomes and specific accountability.
Action plans will be reviewed and revised annually and approved by the respective planning
bodies.
Academic Senate will be the representative body for faculty in all academic and professional
matters, as defined by Title 5, Section 53200.
Institutional effectiveness research, program reviews and individual unit plans are utilized in the
planning process, which is intended to complement and inform the resource allocation and
decision making processes.
The Board may assist in developing the general institutional mission and goals for the
comprehensive plans through various means, including, but not limited to, the President’s
evaluation process, the Board retreat, and any time the Board reviews curriculum items.
Planning documents will be submitted to the California Community College (CCC) System
Office in a timely manner when required.
The initial recommendation for integrating institutional planning rests with the Institutional
Effectiveness Committee (IEC).
Processes for developing, reviewing, updating, approving, and implementing plans include:
A. Mission
1. Reviewed and updated every three years by the College Council. The updated Mission
will be approved by appropriate governance council(s) as a recommendation to the Board
of Trustees.
B. CR District’s Educational Master Plan (EMP), the Facilities Master Plan, and the
Technology Master Plan.
1. Reviewed annually and updated every five years by the College Council. The updated
EMP will be approved by appropriate governance council(s) as a recommendation to the
superintendent/president.
5
2. The program-review process and the budget-development process, as well as planning
and budgeting within each division of the college, shall be implemented on an annual
basis.
2. Strategic Plan
1. Reviewed annually and updated every four years by the Institutional Effectiveness
Committee. The updated Strategic Plan will be approved by College Council as a
recommendation to the superintendent/president.
D. Program Review Process
1. Reviewed and updated annually by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and and
recommended to the College Council.
2. Implemented annually by all programs and services.
E. Program Review/Budget Development Linkage Process
1. Reviewed annually and updated as needed by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee
and Budget Planning Committee and recommended to the College Council.
2. Implemented annually by all programs and services and supervised by the Budget
Planning Committee.
F. Integrated Planning Process
1. Reviewed annually and updated as needed by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee
and Integrated Planning Committees and recommended to the College Council.
G. Budget Planning Calendar
1. Reviewed and implemented on an annual cycle and updated and approved as needed
by the Budget Planning Committee.
Reference: Accreditation Standard I.B; Title 5, Sections 51008, 51010, 51027, 53003,
54220, 55080, 55190, 55510, 56270 et seq.
6
Draft Institutional Planning (IP) Narrative
020811
Purpose of Planning
Planning allows the college to efficiently distribute resources and coordinate action plans that
contribute to achieving the college’s mission. College of the Redwoods is committed to
comprehensive institutional planning that is strategically focused, ongoing, and outcomes
orientated. Planning and evaluation are included in college- and unit-level planning, budgeting,
and evaluation processes. The planning process includes institutional review of the college’s
educational programs, student services, and administrative areas. Through planning, the college
ensures that its policies, budgets, and decisions are reflective of its mission.
Planning is an ever evolving process. Over time, as the needs of the college change and gaps are
identified, the college continually engages in planning in its drive to meet accreditation standards
for program review, planning, learning outcomes and ultimately institutional effectiveness.
College Mission
The college mission statement is central to planning. The mission statement is reviewed every
three years in a cycle that puts that review one year prior to the development of the District’s
next Strategic Plan.
In keeping with the schedule identified later in this narrative, the college’s mission will be
reviewed in 2011, 2014, and 2017. The draft college mission statement is presently under
consideration at College Council.
The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges standard most relevant to the
development and review of college missions is:
I.A. Mission
The institution has a statement of mission that defines the institution’s broad
educational purposes, its intended student population, and its commitment to
achieving student learning.
1. The institution establishes student learning programs and services aligned with its
purposes, its character, and its student population.
2. The mission statement is approved by the governing board and published.
3. Using the institution's governance and decision-making processes, the institution
reviews its mission statement on a regular basis and revises it as necessary.
4. The institution’s mission is central to institutional planning and decision making.
7
Timeline and Process for Review of the Mission
September 2010, 2013, 2016
College Council forms a task force to review the college mission.
Mission Review Task Force develops a review process to ensure college-wide feedback.
October 2010, 2013, 2016
The Mission Review Task Force submits the process plan to the College Council for feedback.
Mission Review Task Force modifies the review process as appropriate.
November 2010, 2013, 2016
Mission Review Task Force conducts the review so that input from the college community is
solicited regarding potential modifications to the college mission.
January 2010, 2013, 2016
Mission Review Task Force modifies the mission as appropriate and submits to the College
Council for review and recommendations.
The College Council ensures college-wide review of the proposed revision to the college mission
prior to approval.
March 2011, 2014, 2017
College Council revises the mission if appropriate and recommends forwarding the mission to
the Board.
The Superintendent/President submits the revised mission statement to the Board of Trustees for
approval. Following this approval, the revised mission statement is circulated college-wide for
use in all publications.
8
Strategic Plan
The Strategic Plan identifies the specific actions that the college must take to implement the
recommendations identified in the Educational Master Plans. This planning process is initiated
by reviewing the Educational Master Plan recommendations and determining which will serve as
the college’s top priorities for the next three-four years. From these priorities, a number of
specific strategic objectives are identified. In turn each strategic objective is translated into a
number of concrete, measurable action steps to be used to achieve the strategic objectives. Each
action step includes a timeline for completion, a description of indicators of success, and the
assignment of parties responsible for implementing the action.
The Strategic Plan promotes continual improvement over time because the process calls for the
prioritization of a reasonable number of strategic objectives for college-wide concentration each
year.
Each year the college will produce an annual institutional effectiveness report that documents
progress on the strategic objectives to reinforce and sustain the dialogue on results of the
college’s long-term and short-term goals.
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee calls for the subsequent Strategic Plan when the term
of the current Strategic Plan expires or when all strategic objectives have been achieved. The
schedule is:
Strategic Plan 2008-2012 (spring 2008 through spring 2012)
Annual Institutional Effectiveness Reports in spring 2011
Final Institutional Effectiveness Report of Strategic Plan 2008-2012 in spring 2012
Strategic Plan 2012 - 2015 (fall 2012 through spring 2015)
Annual Institutional Effectiveness Reports in spring 2013 and spring 2014
Final Institutional Effectiveness Report of Strategic Plan 2012 - 2015 in spring 2015
Strategic Plan 2015 - 2019 (fall 2015 through spring 2019)
Annual Institutional Effectiveness Reports in spring 2016 and spring 2018
Final Institutional Effectiveness Report of Strategic Plan 2015 - 2019 in spring 2018
These final Strategic Plan progress reports feed into the Educational Master Plan to be
developed in the 2018 – 2019 academic year.
9
Timeline and Process for the Developing Strategic Plans
Strategic Plan 2012 – 2015, and 2015 – 2019
February 2012, 2016, 2019
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee (IEC) analyzes the recommendations in the
Educational Master Plans and recommends the college priorities for the next three- four years.
February - March 2012, 2016, 2020
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee develops a draft Strategic Plan made up of a
reasonable number of strategic objectives and action steps for each college priority. The action
steps identify specific tactics, a timeline for completion, and the party/parties responsible for
completing each task.
The draft Strategic Plan is distributed college- wide for feedback.
April 2012, 2016, 2020
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee incorporates the feedback from the college- wide
review and prepares the final Strategic Plan.
The Strategic Plan is presented to the Superintendent/President and College Council for review
and approval.
Annually in late spring, IEC prepares an Institutional Effectiveness Report which documents and
quantifies the progress on each of the college’s strategic objectives and the unit plans presented
in program reviews.
Assessment of Progress on Institutional Effectiveness Measures
The annual Institutional Effectiveness (IE) report, a widely distributed report of the college’s
progress on its goals and plans, will be a key benchmark of accountability in the integrated
planning process.
10
Timeline and Process for Assessing Institutional Effectiveness Measures
May 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC calls for progress reports IE indicators which are documented in the IEC minutes.
June 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC reviews reports and compares the reported achievements against the goals.
IEC identifies specific barriers to success for unmet goals/plans. The Superintendent/President’s
Cabinet removes barriers where possible.
July 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC prepares the annual report on Institutional Effectiveness to document and quantify the
progress on each of the college’s measures.
September 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC distributes the report on Institutional Effectiveness college-wide and presents the report to
the College Council.
Assessment of the Integrated Planning Process
In keeping with the accreditation standard on institutional effectiveness the college must
routinely assesses its planning process. The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will create and
publicize an ongoing venue for providing feedback on any aspect of the college’s integrated
planning process.
In addition, each year the IEC will dedicate one meeting to an informal review of the posted
comments and a celebration of the college’s planning process. Members of the college
community are invited to share comments on any aspect of the process; these comments will
result in revisions of processes as appropriate.
11
Timeline and Process for Assessing the Integrated Planning Process
February 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC creates a venue for dialog among appropriate groups and individuals to provide feedback on
the integrated planning process.
April 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC consolidates the feedback on the planning process and distributes this feedback to College
Council and the integrated planning committees.
IEC recommends changes as needed in the planning processes and submits its recommendations
to the College Council.
September 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
IEC updates the Institution’s planning narrative as needed for use in the planning cycle that begins
the following year
The Integrated Planning Model (IPM)
The goal of the integrated planning process is the improvement of student learning and service
efficiencies through assessment of outcomes and other measures of institutional effectiveness.
The integrated planning model diagrams the flow of program review information and the
continuous communication process between the PRC, the integrated planning functional
committees, the Cabinet and within CR as a whole.
The following descriptions detail the functions within the IPM.
Divisions (Instructional, Student Services, Administrative Services).
Within divisions each discipline/department/unit submits annual or comprehensive program
reviews each year as dictated by the program review calendar. Each discipline/department/unit
is also responsible for ensuring assessment that occurs annually.
12
Program Review and the Program Review Committee (PRC)
Program Review is an institution-wide process of departmental/unit/program evaluation,
planning, and improvement of all instructional and non-instructional functions. Each unit will
develop an annual unit plan for the following fiscal year. Each unit review may contain
information that describes the previous year's goals and intended outcomes, student achievement
and student learning outcome data (if applicable), efficiency measures (if applicable), and the
results from the review/assessment processes.
Programs and departments also undergo periodic comprehensive review. Academic programs
and Career Technical programs are evaluated every five years while Student Services and
Administrative programs are evaluated every three years. A calendar of comprehensive reviews
is available via the Program Review web site.
Specifically, the periodic review phase of the planning and review cycle includes the following
three components: (1) preparation of a self-study report by the unit (2) evaluation by a
department members (3) revision of the unit's review plan as indicated by the evaluation
conducted by Program Review Committee.
The specific purpose of the PRC is to evaluate units and programs based on the following
criterion:
To evaluate instructional programs, support services, and administrative services within
the context of the vision, mission, and strategic goals of the College.
To improve the quality of instruction and services, to meet accountability mandates, and
to demonstrate institutional effectiveness.
To identify the goals and plans for any improvements or changes that will enhance
student learning outcomes and overall program efficiency and effectiveness.
To more closely connect the program review, assessment, and planning functions.
To ensure that student success and achievement are more thoroughly discussed.
To provide a means for tracking and evaluating the actions taken to improve program
effectiveness and efficiency.
To identify trends within a program and/or service.
To review all degrees and certificates while continuing to review disciplines.
To serve as a basis to assist the college in initiation, expansion, reduction, consolidation,
and discontinuation of programs and services.
To allow the entire college community to evaluate its strengths and identify and address
its challenges so the college can better set priorities to meet the student and community
needs.
To evaluate the college’s progress in addressing the inclusion of basic skills education in
its programs, courses, and disciplines.
13
Characteristics of program reviews:
Reviews are forward-thinking.
Reviews are evaluative, not just descriptive. Plans for improvement require judgment about
the program, students, curriculum (if applicable), learning outcomes, resources, and future
directions.
Reviews provide a concise, honest appraisal of programs and department/discipline strengths
and weaknesses.
The PRC is an evaluating and reporting committee with three main tasks to support college
planning. The first task is to evaluate program reviews (annual or comprehensive) via three
subcommittees. The three subcommittees, Trends, Assessment and Budget, evaluate different
sections of the program reviews to assure quality evaluation. The Trends subcommittee reviews
student success, student achievement, enrollment, retention, and basic skills components of each
program review. The Assessment subcommittee reviews learning outcomes, annual goals, action
plans (if applicable) and other relevant assessment data (connections between annual plans and
assessment results). The Budget subcommittee reviews the budget of each program in relation to
program function, supplies/equipment, staffing/faculty needs and professional development. All
three subcommittees provide feedback to the authors and allow authors the opportunity to revise
their program reviews before final submission.
Each year the PRC will consolidate all programmatic needs into one executive summary to be
shared with the President, Board of Trustees (BOT), and the District as a whole. This task
finalizes the process of evaluating program evaluation work completed throughout the District
and synthesizes the information to be shared with the various master planning committees.
Integrated Planning Functional Committees
The integrated planning functional committees (IPFC) utilize areas of expertise to make effective
program recommendations for the college. The function of each committee is to evaluate
information within their specialized area. Each IPFC will comply with the following:
The purpose and processes will be contained in the Operating Agreement document
published annually. If applicable, the committee will define projects and reports, and
have targeted due dates.
The committee co-chairpersons are responsible for completion of these responsibilities.
Each committee will make every effort to have representatives from collegial
consultation (Academic Senate, CSEA, and ASCR) as members of the committee.
Committees will plan with regard to improving institutional effectiveness measures, and
the college mission, values, vision and strategic goals. The work of the committees will
be data driven and reflect an assessment-planning-implementation-evaluation cycle.
Committees will develop a format for meeting minutes that highlight the results off the
committee’s work.
Committee executive summaries and budget requests will be submitted to BPC for
review and consideration.
14
Protocols and policy discussions are submitted to the College Council.
Communication between committees and “establishing priorities between committees”
occurs at the IPFC level. Committees will communicate with one another regarding
requests/information as needed.
Budget Planning Committee (BPC)
The allocation of college resources is based on a clear description of the relationship between the
resource requested and its impact on student learning, unit effectiveness, and the vision, mission,
and strategic goals of the college.
The BPC evaluates and assesses the ranked priorities coming from each of the appropriate
integrated planning committees as well as the initiatives coming from the administration, student
government, and the Academic Senate regarding potential programmatic changes and faculty
prioritizations. The BPC will essentially reconcile the ranked requests with available resources,
and recommend a reasonable “cut-off” point for these requests.
Since resources are allocated nine to twelve months following the first submission of unit plans,
the Cabinet may exercise discretion in allocating final resource awards to meet the current needs
of the district, but will make every effort to use the broad allocation models as defined by the
unit plans and the collegial consultation process.
Resource Allocation
The resource allocation processes link program reviews and Strategic Planning to the resources
needed to accomplish the college goals. The guiding principles for resource allocation processes
are as follows:
1. Resources include all assets of the college including its fiscal resources, facilities,
equipment, and the time and talents of its faculty and staff.
2. The processes for allocating resources are transparent. All members of the college
community are informed about the routines and components of planning that lead to
resource allocations.
3. The resource allocation processes begin in January of each year with the development of
budget assumptions that forecast the available discretionary general fund resources for
the coming fiscal year and thereby may set the parameters for program reviews and work
plans.
4. Priority will be given to resource requests that support
- achievement of college strategic objectives and
- health, safety, and accessibility.
4. To the extent that it is fiscally possible, the college will sustain an innovations fund
(excess reserves) to support faculty/staff ideas and start ups.
15
Cabinet
The Cabinet provides initial FTES targets for the EMC and BPC. Cabinet also reviews and
either denies or validates the priority rankings. If changes are made, Cabinet will provide
rationale for changing the ranked priorities created by the IPM process and report back to the
BPC, the PRC, and the Divisions as appropriate.
Institutional Effectiveness Committee
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee ensures that the college is moving forward in meeting
ACCJC/WASC requirements as "essential in carrying out the integrated broad based planning
process required by ACCJC that leads to good decision making, planned budgeting, and a system
that works toward institutional effectiveness." Recommendations developed by the Committee
are forwarded to the College Council for dissemination and discussion by the constituencies and
the college community at large. The IEC accomplishes its purpose by:
1. Indentifying, defining, reviewing, and reporting performance measures of institutional
effectiveness;
2. Providing the accountability needed to ensure continued efficacy to the college planning
processes (strategic and operational) and review processes;
3. Monitoring and adjusting the ongoing planning process so that the college's needs are
met;
4. Providing assessment of the integration of the resource allocation process and the
Strategic and annual plans (budget, staff development, staffing, etc);
5. Establishing annual communication with the campus community regarding the
institutional planning process and gaining input from the college community regarding
planning issues;
6. Providing an annual assessment of the effectiveness of the various planning communities
and the institutional planning process to the College Council.
College Council
The College Council ensures that the collaborative process of institutional planning is adhered to.
If the process is not followed, the College Council will provide a report to the Institutional
Effectiveness Committee as to how the process may be improved.
IPM Implementation
Because the institutional plans in this narrative include both program review activities and
Strategic Plan action steps, the implementation of the plans will vary significantly. Therefore, no
single timeline and process will be described.
The individual(s) responsible for implementing plans are identified in the source documents, and
they are charged with:
16
- developing appropriate timelines and processes;
- assessing success after the plans are implemented; and
- reporting the activities and results to IEC each February/March
January-March 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
All program reviews are submitted by authors to the PRC.
The PRC subcommittees (Trends, Assessment and Budget) appraise each program review
according to a set of committee agreed upon rubrics.
Late March/Early April 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
The PRC creates a final executive summary for each updated program review.
The PRC forwards budget requests to the Budget Planning Committee for inclusion in
preliminary budget.
Outcome assessments will be forwarded to PRC in the program review documents. The PRC
will summarize their assessment/outcomes findings and forward their summaries to the
appropriate Vice President, who will then work with departments to discuss the information and
make any necessary changes.
Staffing requests will be processed through the appropriate Vice President with final prioritized
recommendations forwarded to Cabinet for review.
May-June 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
IPFCs review each committee specific “tear off” for all program reviews and evaluate resource
requests/information using rubric.
IPFCs create ranked priorities based on the evaluated specialized needs using a rubric based in
outcome assessment and student achievement data, or other appropriate efficiency measures.
July-August 2011, 2012, 2013
IPFCs forward their ranked priorities to the Budget Planning Committee (BPC) for
consideration.
The BPC forward their ranked priorities to the Cabinet for review. If any alterations are made to
the BPC version of the ranked priorities, the Cabinet will report back to the Divisions and the
IPFC.
17