Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
through Purposeful Design of
Continuous Improvement Processes
Dr. Brian Lofman, Dean, Planning & Effectiveness
Dr. Willard Lewallen, Superintendent/President
Hartnell College
November 20, 2014
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
CONTEXT FOR THIS PRESENTATION
Early 2013:
Leading into the Team Visit for Hartnell’s
Comprehensive Evaluation, the College could
not determine the extent of progress made in
key areas, such as SLO assessment and
program review.
June 2013:
ACCJC Placed the College on Probation
June 2014:
ACCJC Removed the College from Probation
and Issued Warning
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
SELECTED ACCJC RECOMMENDATIONS
ON EVALUATION AND EFFECTIVENESS
The team recommends that the college:
• Develop a process for regular and systematic
evaluation of its mission statement.
• Develop a regular systematic process for
assessing its long term and annual plans, as well
as its planning process, to facilitate continuous
sustainable institutional improvement.
• Fully engage in a broad-based dialogue that leads
to … regular assessment of student progress
toward achievement of [learning] outcomes.
• Ensure that evaluation processes and criteria
necessary to support the college's mission are in
place and are regularly and consistently
conducted for all employee groups.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
SELECTED ACCJC RECOMMENDATIONS
ON EVALUATION AND EFFECTIVENESS
• Ensure that program review processes are
ongoing, systematic, and used to assess and
improve student learning, and that the college
evaluate the effectiveness of its program review
processes in supporting and improving student
achievement and student learning outcomes.
• Develop a process for regular and systematic
evaluation of all Human Resources and Business
and Fiscal Affairs policies.
• The board self-evaluation continues to be done
with full participation of each board member.
• Systematically review effectiveness of its
evaluation mechanisms.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH
INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
Institutional effectiveness is a very broad, generic
construct. It encompasses many different aspects of
a college as it functions as a system. Effectiveness
cannot be measured directly or easily.
Effectiveness can be measured at specific times. But
the ACCJC expects that institutions will continuously
work toward enhancing their effectiveness, hence
the phrase, sustainable continuous quality
improvement.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
Key Question:
How can you maximize
the extent to which
your institution is,
and will continue to be,
effective?
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
Especially Relevant ACCJC Standard on Institutional
Effectiveness (I.B.7):
The institution regularly evaluates its
policies and practices across all areas of the
institution, including instructional programs,
student and learning support services,
resource management, and governance
processes to assure their effectiveness in
supporting academic quality and
accomplishment of mission.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
1 OF 6 STEPS
Unpack institutional effectiveness
into all core areas that
contribute to effectiveness.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
REVIEW OF EVALUATION MECHANISMS
FALL 2013
Systematic Review of Effectiveness of Evaluation
Mechanisms:
 What processes are in place? Which are being
implemented?
 Does a complete master list of elements exist?
Who maintains it?
 What proportion and which elements in the
inventory have recently been evaluated? When?
 Does a regular cycle of evaluation exist? How
frequently are elements scheduled to be
evaluated currently and in the future per the
existing evaluation cycle?
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
REVIEW OF EVALUATION MECHANISMS
FALL 2013
Key Results of This Review:
 17 formalized evaluation mechanisms existed
 Irregularity of evaluation cycles
 Incomplete or non-comprehensive master lists
 Inconsistent or irregular evaluation of specific
elements
 Certain key processes did not exist or had not
been fully documented
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
CORE AREAS
The overarching framework adopted for
grouping CI processes encompassed the
following 5 categories or core areas:
A.
B.
C.
D.
Organizational effectiveness
Effectiveness of strategic planning
Effectiveness of strategic operations
Processes for employee hiring and job
classification
E. Performance evaluation procedures
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
2 OF 6 STEPS
Analyze the core areas, and
develop several explicit
CI processes for each area
that contribute to
institutional effectiveness.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
ADDITION OF CI PROCESSES
Potential processes to be developed were
added to the already existing mechanisms.
Decisions were based partly on the
accreditation recommendations requiring
deficiency resolution, and more generally on
core areas that were considered to
contribute substantially to institutional
effectiveness.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
INVENTORY OF CI PROCESSES
A. Organizational Effectiveness – 5 Processes:
A1. Board Policies & Administrative Procedures
A2. Organizational Structure
A3. Governance System
A4. Internal & External Communications
A5. Organizational Climate
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
INVENTORY OF CI PROCESSES
B. Effectiveness of Strategic Planning – 7 Processes:
B1. Mission/Vision/Values Development, Review & Revision
B2. Community Research & Environmental Scanning
B3. Long Term Institutional Planning:
• B3a. Strategic Plan Development, Review & Revision
• B3b. Long Term Institutional Plans—Development,
Review & Revision
B4. Long Term Program Planning:
• B4a. Academic Program Establishment, Revitalization &
Discontinuance
• B4b. Non-Instructional Program Establishment,
Revitalization & Discontinuance
• B4c. Comprehensive Program Review
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
INVENTORY OF CI PROCESSES
C. Effectiveness of Strategic Operations –
6 Processes:
C1. Curricular Development, Review & Revision
C2. Annual Planning & Assessment:
• C2a. Annual Program Planning & Assessment
• C2b. Annual SLO Assessment
C3. Budget Development & Resource Allocation
C4. Enrollment Management
C5. Partnership Establishment & Management
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
INVENTORY OF CI PROCESSES
D. Processes for Employee Hiring & Job
Classification – 5 Processes:
D1. Hiring Processes:
• D1a. Full-Time Hiring
• D1b. Part-Time Hiring
D2. Review of Job Classifications:
• D2a. Cyclical Job Classification Review—Classified
Staff
• D2b. Individual Job Classification Review—
Classified Staff
• D2c. Job Classification Review—Other Employees
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
INVENTORY OF CI PROCESSES
E. Performance Evaluation Procedures – 7 Processes:
E1. BOT Evaluation
E2. CEO Evaluation
E3. Manager Evaluation
E4. Classified Staff Evaluation
E5. Faculty Evaluation Processes:
• E5a. Probationary Faculty Evaluation
• E5b. Tenured Faculty Evaluation
• E5c. Adjunct Faculty Evaluation
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
INVENTORY OF CI PROCESSES
Resulting from this analysis was a total of 30
processes that needed to be fully developed and
formalized, including the 17 processes that were
being implemented to some extent.
A standardized template was developed to ensure
that all important components would be considered
and included in fleshing out each CI process.
To date, 27 CI processes have been developed and
included in a Handbook of Continuous Improvement
Processes.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
KEY ITEMS IN CI TEMPLATE
FOR THE EVALUATION OF EACH CI PROCESS:
 1 or More Leads are Assigned (Accountability)
 An Appropriate Evaluation Cycle is Followed –
Every Year, Every 5 Years, etc.
 Various Persons, Tools and Data are Involved in
the Assessment Process
 One or More Levels of Oversight Occur
 Improvement Needed is Specified
 Improvement of the Process Itself may also be
Recommended
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
COMPLETED CI PROCESS TEMPLATE
Example:
Hartnell’s CI Process for
Evaluating Governance
System Effectiveness
(Handout)
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
3 OF 6 STEPS
Implement CI processes on
regular cycles to ensure that
evaluation occurs,
improvements are encouraged
and made, and
CI becomes embedded in
organizational culture.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
EXAMPLE OF PROCESS IMPLEMENTATION:
GOVERNANCE SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS
Survey Tool for each Council:
Council Tasks
• For example, “Outcomes of each council meeting were
clear and understood.”
Information adequacy
• For example, “Council members had appropriate
information to make informed decisions.”
Participation
• For example, “Council members attended regularly.”
Respectful Dialogue
• For example, “Different opinions and values were
represented.”
Council Purpose and Responsibilities
• For example, “The Council worked effectively towards
fulfilling its purpose and responsibilities.”
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
EXAMPLE OF PROCESS IMPLEMENTATION:
GOVERNANCE SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
EXAMPLE OF PROCESS IMPLEMENTATION:
GOVERNANCE SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS
Results: Overall Governance Effectiveness
Strengths of the governance system identified through the evaluation
• Over 80percent of respondents indicated satisfaction with the governance
system.
Themes of effectiveness from respondents:
• Open and transparent
• Greater participation of all constituent groups than in the past
• Opportunities for participation and engagement
• Good structure
• Posting of all agendas, minutes, and materials creates accessibility for all
Improvements for the governance system to be considered for 2014-15
• Reporting back to constituent groups
• Attendance at meetings
• Examination of quorum rules due to lack of attendance
• Flow of information to and from CPC
• Amount of time needed to move items through the governance system
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
EXAMPLE OF PROCESS IMPLEMENTATION:
GOVERNANCE SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS
Improvements Recommended/Made:
To improve communication about
governance actions and discussion, a
“summary/highlights” document was
created and is posted to the college web site
following each CPC meeting. An email is
sent to all employees following each meeting
informing them that the document is
available for review.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
4 OF 6 STEPS
Link CI processes directly to
the integrated planning process,
the strategic plan, APs, CBAs, and
other governing documents
to increase the probability of
successful implementation.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
EMBED CI INTO ANNUAL
PLANNING PROCESS
Example:
Hartnell’s Model For
Integrated Planning &
Sustainable Continuous
Quality Improvement
(Handout)
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
ALIGN CI PROCESSES WITH
THE STRATEGIC PLAN
Example:
We have developed a CI process on Partnership Establishment
and Management. It aligns perfectly with Priority 6 of our
Strategic Plan:
Partnerships with Industry, Business,
Agencies & Education
And with Goal 6A of the plan:
Hartnell College is committed to strengthening and
furthering its current partnerships and to establishing
new partnerships, in order to secure lasting, mutually
beneficial relationships between the college and the
community that the college serves.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
FORMALIZE CI PROCESSES
IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES (APs)
Example:
• We re-conceptualized our then existing academic
program discontinuance process, and decided to
broaden it to encompass program establishment,
revitalization, or discontinuance.
• A task force of faculty from the Academic Senate
and the Dean of Institutional Planning and
Effectiveness convened over a period of several
months last year to develop this AP. The AP
recently moved through the governance system.
• We have also developed a parallel CI process for
non-instructional programs.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
ENSURE CORRESPONDENCE WITH
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS
Example:
Hartnell’s CI processes encompass probationary,
tenured and adjunct faculty evaluation.
Procedures for faculty evaluation must match
provisions included in the current agreement
between the District and faculty association.
In cases such as this, CI processes can highlight and
reinforce key provisions, and help ensure that the
provisions are followed in practice.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
5 OF 6 STEPS
Allow for improvements
to be made in
the processes themselves.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
MAINTAIN FLEXIBILITY
CI processes may need to be modified or added as
new circumstances arise. Such changes are integral
to continuous improvement.
Example:
The ACCJC is increasingly focusing on student
achievement outcomes, such as by expecting
colleges to develop institution-set standards for
student achievement. Hartnell has developed CI
processes for comprehensive program review,
annual program review, and SLO assessment, but
does not yet have a specific process in place as it
relates to student achievement outcomes.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
6 OF 6 STEPS
Document steps 1 through 5.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
DOCUMENT & SHARE
Examples:
• For each CI process, maintain an updated
inventory of all items to be evaluated at the
upcoming cycle, and all items that were evaluated
in the most recent cycle. Ensure that there’s a
specific office or position responsible for this task.
• Within the CI process itself, refer to applicable
governing documents, such as specific
administrative procedures and collective
bargaining agreements that apply to that
particular process.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
DOCUMENT & SHARE
• Publish the CI processes, and educate the
community about these processes. Hartnell has
developed and is implementing a CI Plan. All CI
processes are included in an accompanying
handbook.
• Collect, discuss and publish non-confidential
evaluations and assessments. A culture of
assessment and data driven decision making is
cultivated as you continue to share evaluations as
appropriate in governance councils and other
venues.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
Return to Key Question:
How can you maximize
the extent to which
your institution is,
and will continue to be,
effective?
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
Follow 6 Steps:
1. Unpack institutional effectiveness into all
core areas that contribute to effectiveness.
2. Develop several explicit continuous
improvement (CI) processes for each core
area.
3. Implement CI processes on regular cycles to
ensure that evaluation occurs, improvements
are encouraged and made, and CI becomes
embedded in organizational culture.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
4. Link CI processes directly to the
integrated planning process, the strategic
plan, APs, CBAs, and other governing
documents to increase the probability of
successful implementation.
5. Allow for improvements to be made in the
processes themselves.
6. Document all of the above.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
In short, your institution can
ensure its effectiveness through
purposeful design of
continuous improvement processes.
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
QUESTIONS
&
COMMENTS
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. www.hartnell.edu
Ensuring Institutional Effectiveness
through Purposeful Design of
Continuous Improvement Processes
Dr. Brian Lofman
Dean, Institutional Planning and Effectiveness
Dr. Willard Lewallen
Superintendent/President
Hartnell College
411 Central Avenue
Salinas, CA 93901
November 20, 2014
Community College League of California
2014 Annual Convention
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
REVIEW OF EVALUATION MECHANISMS - FALL 2013
Evaluation Mechanism
Cycle of Element
Evaluation
Complete Master
List of Elements?
Elements Evaluated?
(Most Recent)
Continuous
As Needed
Irregular
Incomplete (CCLC)
Yes
Incomplete
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
Irregular
As Needed
Yes
N/A
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (Seldom)
Irregular
Incomplete
Some (2010-12)
C. Effectiveness of Strategic Operations
Curricular Development, Review & Revision
Annual SLO Assessment
Every 6 Years
Annual
Yes
Yes
Yes (2012-13)
Some (2012-13)
D. Processes for Employee Hiring & Job Classification
Cyclical Job Classification Review - Classified Staff
Individual Job Classification Review - Classified Staff
Every 4 Years
As Needed
Yes
Yes
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
E. Performance Evaluation Procedures
Board Evaluation
CEO Evaluation
Manager Evaluation
Classified Staff Evaluation
Probationary Faculty Evaluation
Tenured Faculty Evaluation
Adjunct Faculty Evaluation
Annual
Annual
Annual
Every 2 Years
Annual
Every 3 Years
Every 3 Years
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Incomplete
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
Some (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
Yes (2012-13)
Few (2012-13)
A. Organizational Effectiveness
Board Policies and Administrative Procedures
Organizational Structure
Governance System
B. Effectiveness of Strategic Planning
Mission/Vision Development, Review & Revision
Academic Program Establishment, Revitalization &
Discontinuance
Comprehensive Program Review
INVENTORY OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES - 11/4/14
Process Lead(s)
A. Organizational Effectiveness
A1. Board Policies & Administrative Procedures
A2. Organizational Structure
A3. Governance System
A4. Internal & External Communications
A5. Organizational Climate
S/P
S/P
S/P & Dean IPE
S/P & Director Communications
S/P & Dean IPE
B. Effectiveness of Strategic Planning
B1. Mission/Vision/Values Development, Review & Revision
B2. Community Research & Environmental Scanning
B3. Long Term Institutional Planning:
B3a. Strategic Plan Development, Review & Revision
B3b. Long Term Institutional Plans - Development, Review & Revision
B4. Long Term Program Planning:
B4a. Academic Program Establishment, Revitalization & Discontinuance
B4b. Non-Instructional Program Establishment, Revitalization & Discontinuance
B4c. Comprehensive Program Review
C. Effectiveness of Strategic Operations
C1. Curricular Development, Review & Revision
C2. Annual Planning & Assessment:
C2a. Annual Program Planning & Assessment
C2b. Annual SLO Assessment
C3. Budget Development & Resource Allocation
C4. Enrollment Management
C5. Partnership Establishment & Management
S/P
Dean IPE
S/P & Dean IPE
Respective VPs/Other Administrators
VPAA & President Academic Senate
S/P & VPs
Dean IPE
VPAA & Chair Curriculum Committee
Dean IPE
Dean AA/LSR
VPAS & Controller
VPAA, VPSA & VPAS
S/P & ED Advancement
Page 1 of 2
INVENTORY OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES (continued)
D. Processes for Employee Hiring & Job Classification
D1. Hiring Processes:
D1a. Full-Time Hiring*
D1b. Part-Time Hiring*
D2. Review of Job Classifications:
D2a. Cyclical Job Classification Review - Classified Staff
D2b. Individual Job Classification Review - Classified Staff
D2c. Job Classification Review - Other Employees*
Process Lead(s)
AVPHR
AVPHR
AVPHR
AVPHR
AVPHR
E. Performance Evaluation Procedures
E1. BOT Evaluation
E2. CEO Evaluation
E3. Manager Evaluation
E4. Classified Staff Evaluation
E5. Faculty Evaluation Processes:
E5a. Probationary Faculty Evaluation
E5b. Tenured Faculty Evaluation
E5c. Adjunct Faculty Evaluation
S/P & President BOT
President BOT
AVPHR
AVPHR
VPAA, VPSA & AVPHR
VPAA, VPSA & AVPHR
VPAA, VPSA & AVPHR
* To be developed in 2014-15.
Page 2 of 2
Hartnell College
Continuous Improvement Plan
2013 - 2018
Cultivating Institutional Effectiveness through
Implementation and Assessment of
Purposefully Designed Processes of
Continuous Improvement
7/1/2014
This plan ensures that the key activities in which the college engages,
and the institutional processes underlying these activities, are regularly
reviewed and evaluated toward making continuous improvement.
Continuous Improvement Plan 2013-2018
Contents
I.
Institutional Effectiveness & Continuous Improvement
1
II.
Categorization of Key Continuous Improvement Processes
1
III.
Overview of Key Continuous Improvement Processes
2
IV.
Components of Continuous Improvement
3
V.
Categorization of Continuous Improvement Processes into Evaluation Cycles
5
VI.
Alignment of Continuous Improvement Processes with Strategic Plan Goals
8
VII.
Evaluation of Continuous Improvement Plan
i
11
Continuous Improvement Plan 2013-2018
I.
INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS & CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
To ensure institutional effectiveness, it is critically important that the key activities in which the
college engages, and the institutional processes underlying these activities, are reviewed,
evaluated and/or assessed toward making continuous improvement (CI). This Continuous
Improvement Plan was developed for the overall purpose of cultivating institutional
effectiveness through the development, implementation, and assessment of purposefully
designed processes of continuous improvement.
II.
CATEGORIZATION OF KEY CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES
Hartnell’s 30 key CI processes are organized into 5 categories:
A. Organizational Effectiveness (5 processes)
A1. Board Policies & Administrative Procedures
A2. Organizational Structure
A3. Governance System
A4. Internal & External Communications
A5. Organizational Climate
B. Effectiveness of Strategic Planning (7 processes)
B1. Mission/Vision/Values Development, Review & Revision
B2. Community Research & Environmental Scanning
B3. Long Term Institutional Planning
B3a. Strategic Plan Development, Review & Revision
B3b. Long Term Institutional Plans – Development, Review & Revision
B4. Long Term Program Planning
B4a. Academic Program Establishment, Revitalization & Discontinuance
B4b. Non-Instructional Program Establishment, Revitalization & Discontinuance
B4c. Comprehensive Program Review
C. Effectiveness of Strategic Operations (6 processes)
C1. Curricular Development, Review & Revision
C2. Annual Planning & Assessment
C2a. Annual Program Planning & Assessment
C2b. Annual SLO Assessment
C3. Budget Development & Resource Allocation
C4. Enrollment Management
C5. Partnership Establishment & Management
1
D. Processes for Employee Hiring & Job Classification (5 processes)
D1. Hiring Processes
D1a. Full-Time Hiring
D1b. Part-Time Hiring
D2. Review of Job Classifications
D2a. Cyclical Job Classification Review – Classified Staff
D2b. Individual Job Classification Review – Classified Staff
D2c. Job Classification Review – Other Employees
E. Performance Evaluation Procedures (7 processes)
E1. BOT Evaluation
E2. CEO Evaluation
E3. Manager Evaluation
E4. Classified Staff Evaluation
E5. Faculty Evaluation Processes
E5a. Probationary Faculty Evaluation
E5b. Tenured Faculty Evaluation
E5c. Adjunct Faculty Evaluation
III.
OVERVIEW OF KEY CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES
A. Organizational Effectiveness concerns how the organization works as a system, focusing on
the extent to which the organization:
A1. Operates effectively through the provision, implementation and interpretation of Board
Policies and Administrative Procedures.
A2. Develops and maintains an Organizational reporting Structure that meets organizational
operational needs.
A3. Employs internal governance bodies and supporting, integrative mechanisms to ensure
appropriately informed decision and policy making via the Governance System.
A4. Engages in Internal and External Communications to ensure that activities, events,
decisions, and outcomes are effectively communicated within the organization and to target
audiences and stakeholders in the greater community.
A5. Cultivates and maintains a welcoming Organizational Climate conducive to positive and
supportive workplace relations.
B. Effectiveness of Strategic Planning deals with how well the college sets goals and plans for a
multi-year period, centering on:
B1. Development, review and revision of its Mission, Vision and Values.
B2. Community Research and Environmental Scanning that inform goals and plans.
B3. Long Term Institutional Planning that consists of development, review and revision of the
college’s Strategic Plan and other long term institutional plans.
B4. Long Term Program Planning that involves the periodic comprehensive review and
establishment, revitalization, and discontinuance of academic and non-instructional programs,
services, and offices.
2
C. Effectiveness of Strategic Operations concerns how well the college undertakes key strategic
operations, focusing on:
C1. Curricular Development, Review and Revision to ensure well-conceived learning outcomes
and up-to-date curricula.
C2. Annual Planning and Assessment to ensure that annual review and action planning occurs,
and student learning or service area outcomes are assessed and analyzed, for programs,
services and offices.
C3. Budget Development and Resource Allocation that is linked to resource requests resulting
from annual planning and assessment, and that revolves around sound funding decisions based
on analysis of empirical data and linkages to the college’s Strategic Plan.
C4. Enrollment Management that serves student needs and meets fiscal goals.
C5. Partnership Establishment and Management that fosters engaging, complementary and
productive relationships with external organizations and works toward beneficial, synergistic
outcomes.
D. Processes for Employee Hiring & Job Classification deals with the extent to which the
institution effectively establishes job classifications and hires employees to meet organizational
needs, centering on:
D1. Hiring Processes for full- and part-time employees.
D2. Review of Job Classifications for employees generally, and on a cyclical and individual basis
for classified staff in particular.
E. Performance Evaluation Procedures concern how all levels and types of employees are
evaluated toward ensuring maximum performance, focusing on:
E1. BOT Evaluation
E2. CEO Evaluation
E3. Manager Evaluation
E4. Classified Staff Evaluation
E5. Faculty Evaluation, including procedures for evaluating probationary, tenured, and adjunct
faculty.
IV.
COMPONENTS OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
The components of each CI process are expounded in the accompanying CI Handbook through
answers to a series of standard items within four areas as follows:
CI Process, Cycle, and Process Lead
1. Name of process
2. CI cycle (semester/year & frequency)
3. The position(s) at the college responsible for leading the process according to the CI cycle
3
Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Evaluation/Review Process
4. The policies, procedures, systems, plans, programs, or positions that are evaluated
5. The position at the college who informs those responsible for conducting the evaluation;
when those responsible for conducting the evaluation are informed
6. The positions who conduct the evaluation; when (which years and specific months) and how
frequently the evaluation is conducted
7. The instruments, forms and/or data that are utilized in the evaluation
8. The positions and/or groups who review content for quality and completeness; when and
how frequently quality checks occur
9. The persons and/or groups who have oversight/broadly review content; when and how
frequently oversight occurs
10. The positions responsible for maintaining the list of all elements (persons, programs,
outcomes, etc.) to be evaluated, tracking completion of evaluations, and maintaining the
master list of evaluations completed and those yet to be completed
11. When and where the evaluations are housed, and which positions is responsible for placing
them there, has access to them, and maintains the entire set of evaluations completed
Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Effectiveness
12. The position who decides what improvements/outcomes are needed and the level of
targeted improvements/outcomes; how these planned outcomes are documented
13. The positions at the college responsible for making improvements; when (specific
months/years) improvements are implemented
14. When (specific months/years) and how frequently improvements/outcomes are measured;
the positions at the college responsible for measuring outcomes; how outcomes are
documented; the positions responsible for determining whether outcomes are adequate
leading into the next evaluation period
Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Process Effectiveness
15. The position responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of the overall CI process, and when
(which years and specific months); how frequently the process is evaluated
16. The position responsible for determining which improvements need to be made in the
process; how improvements are documented
17. The positions responsible for making improvements to the process; when (which years and
specific months) the improvements are implemented [prior to or at the start of the next CI
cycle]
4
V.
CATEGORIZATION OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES INTO EVALUATION
CYCLES
The cycle of evaluation differs according to the specific CI process, per the following table.
CI
Process
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
B1
B2
B3a
B3b
B4a
B4b
B4c
C1
C2a
C2b
C3
C4
C5
D1a
D1b
D2a
D2b
D2c
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5a
E5b
E5c
Annu- Every 2
ally* Years*
Every 3
Years*
Cycle of Evaluation
Every 4 Every 5 Every 6
Years* Years* Years*
X
X
Continuously**
As
Needed***
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
* Each element in the group is evaluated every year, every two years, or so on.
** Evaluation occurs continuously to ensure that each element in the group is eventually
assessed, and subsequently the cycle begins anew.
*** An element in the group is evaluated as needed.
5
Annual Evaluation
A3. Governance System
A4. Internal & External Communications
B3a. Strategic Plan Development, Review & Revision
B3b. Long Term Institutional Plans – Development, Review & Revision
C2a. Annual Program Planning & Assessment
C3. Budget Development & Resource Allocation
C4. Enrollment Management
C5. Partnership Establishment & Management
E1. BOT Evaluation
E2. CEO Evaluation
E3. Manager Evaluation – Annual Planning and Review of Goals/Comprehensive Evaluation in
First Two Years (see Three Year Evaluation)
E5a. Probationary Faculty Evaluation
Two Year Evaluation
B4c. Comprehensive Program Review – CTE Programs (see Five Year Evaluation)
C1. Curricular Development, Review & Revision – CTE Courses (see Six Year Evaluation)
E4. Classified Staff Evaluation
Three Year Evaluation
E3. Manager Evaluation – Comprehensive Evaluation (see Annual Evaluation)
E5b. Tenured Faculty Evaluation
E5c. Adjunct Faculty Evaluation
Four Year Evaluation
D2a. Cyclical Job Classification Review – Classified Staff
Five Year Evaluation
A1. Board Policies & Administrative Procedures
A2. Organizational Structure
B1. Mission/Vision/Values Development, Review & Revision
B2. Community Research & Environmental Scanning
B4c. Comprehensive Program Review – Non-CTE Programs (see Two Year Evaluation)
Six Year Evaluation
C1. Curricular Development, Review & Revision – Non-CTE Courses (see Two Year Evaluation)
Continuous Evaluation
C2b. Annual SLO Assessment
D2c. Job Classification Review – Other Employees
6
Evaluation as Needed
A5. Organizational Climate
B4a. Non-Instructional Program Establishment, Revitalization & Discontinuance
B4b. Academic Program Establishment, Revitalization & Discontinuance
D1a. Full-Time Hiring
D1b. Part-Time Hiring
D2b. Individual Job Classification Review – Classified Staff
7
VI.
ALIGNMENT OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESSES WITH STRATEGIC PLAN
GOALS
As displayed below, the CI processes delineated in this plan, and expounded in the
accompanying CI Handbook, are aligned with the 11 goals established in the college’s Strategic
Plan 2013-2018. The cells under each Strategic Plan goal (column) with “CI” indicate which CI
process(es) support each specific goal. Every goal is supported by at least one CI process (row);
several processes support more than one goal. Some (6) CI processes apply more generally at
the institutional level and therefore do not apply directly to any particular goal, as indicated by
empty cells across an entire row.
CI Process 1A 2A
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
B1
B2
B3a
B3b
B4a
B4b
B4c
C1
CI
C2a
C2b
CI
C3
C4
CI
C5
D1a
D1b
D2a
D2b
D2c
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5a
E5b
E5c
Strategic Plan Goal
2B 3A 3B 4A 4B 4C
4D 5A
6A
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
CI
8
The linkages between Strategic Plan goals and CI processes are described below.
 Goal 1A – Hartnell College will provide higher education, workforce development, and
lifelong learning opportunities—with seamless pathways—to all of the college’s present and
prospective constituent individuals and groups.
C4 – Enrollment Management processes are directed toward ensuring that present and
prospective individuals and groups are served various offerings in appropriate proportions.
 Goal 2A – Hartnell College will provide a supportive, innovative, and collaborative learning
environment to help students pursue and achieve educational success.
C1 – Student learning outcomes are established through Curricular Development, Review
and Revision.
C2b – Student learning outcomes are measured through Annual SLO Assessment , thereby
ensuring an ongoing focus on helping students pursue educational success.
 Goal 2B – Hartnell College will provide a supportive, innovative, and collaborative learning
environment that addresses and meets the diverse learning needs of students.
C4 – Enrollment Management is aimed toward ensuring that students experience
appropriate sequencing of coursework to meet their diverse educational goals and learning
needs.
 Goal 3A – Hartnell College is committed to 1) increasing diversity among its employees; 2)
providing an environment that is safe for and inviting to diverse persons, groups, and
communities; and 3) becoming a model institution of higher education whose respect for
diversity is easily seen and is fully integrated throughout its policies, practices, facilities,
signage, curricula, and other reflections of life at the college.
A5 – Periodic Organizational Climate surveys track sentiment about diversity issues in the
workplace and other perceptions about the work environment.
D1a – Full-Time Hiring procedures encourage establishment of diverse applicant pools.
D1b – Part-Time Hiring procedures encourage reaching out to diverse applicants.
 Goal 3B – To attract and retain highly qualified employees, Hartnell College is committed to
providing and supporting relevant, substantial professional development opportunities.
E1, E2, E3, E4, E5a & E5b – BOT, CEO, Manager, Classified Staff and Probationary and
Tenured Faculty Evaluation procedures provide input into needed, appropriate, and/or
desired professional development opportunities.
9
 Goal 4A – To support its mission, Hartnell College is committed to the effective utilization of
its human resources.
A2 – The Organizational Structure is generally designed to ensure placement of human
resources where they are most needed to accomplish organizational goals.
C3 – Budget Development and Resource Allocation processes require justification for
staffing requests.
D2a, D2b & D2c – Job Classification Reviews are conducted regularly and as needed to
most effectively align human resources with organizational needs.
E2, E3, E4, E5a, E5b & E5c – Performance Evaluations are undertaken to ensure effective
utilization of human resources and require improvement in performance as needed.
 Goal 4B – Hartnell College is committed to having its physical plant, furnishings, and
grounds maintained and replaced in a planned and scheduled way to support learning,
safety, security, and access.
B3b, B4c & C2a – The Development of Long Term Institutional Plans, Comprehensive
Program Review and Annual Program Planning and Assessment provide multiple
mechanisms for planning, requesting and scheduling upgrades and improvements in the
college’s physical assets.
 Goal 4C – Hartnell College will maintain a current, user-friendly technological infrastructure
that serves the needs of students and employees.
B3b, B4c & C2a – The Development of Long Term Institutional Plans, Comprehensive
Program Review and Annual Program Planning and Assessment provide multiple
mechanisms for planning, requesting and scheduling upgrades and improvements in the
college’s technological infrastructure.
 Goal 4D – Hartnell College is committed to maximizing the use and value of capital assets,
managing financial resources, minimizing costs, and engaging in fiscally sound planning for
future maintenance, space, and technology needs.
B3b – The Development, Review and Revision of Long Term Institutional Plans supports
fiscally sound planning for future maintenance, space, and technology needs.
C3 – Budget Development and Resource Allocation processes and their evaluation result in
the funding of, and as necessary re-allocation of resources toward, effective management
of financial resources.
10
C4 – Enrollment Management processes are directed toward ensuring effective space
utilization.
 Goal 5A – Hartnell College will provide programs and services that are relevant to the realworld needs of its diverse student population, while also developing and employing a culture
of innovation that will lead to improved institutional effectiveness and student learning.
B4a, B4b, B4c, C1 & C2a – The Establishment, Revitalization and Discontinuance of
Academic and Non-Instructional Programs; Comprehensive Program Review;
Development, Review and Revision of Curricular Offerings; and Annual Program Planning
and Assessment all help ensure that programs and services are directed toward the
relevant needs of the diverse student population.
 Goal 6A – Hartnell College is committed to strengthening and furthering its current
partnerships and to establishing new partnerships, in order to secure lasting, mutually
beneficial relationships between the college and the community that the college serves.
C5 – Activities focused on Partnership Establishment & Management serve to strengthen
and expand external partnerships.
VII.
EVALUATION OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLAN
As the great majority of CI processes will be implemented according to their respective CI cycles
in 2014-15, evaluation of this CI Plan will occur annually starting in summer 2015. Assessment
will entail reporting on each CI process relative to what was accomplished overall for that
process (the extent to which it was utilized as stated in the CI process itself), along with a brief
statement concerning any improvement made in that process for the next cycle. CI processes
not scheduled to be utilized in a particular year will not be reported in that year. The College
Planning Council will receive the evaluation report for its review.
11
HARTNELLCOLLEGE
HARTNELLCOLLEGE
Long Term Institutional Planning
Model for Integrated Planning &
Model for Integrated Planning &
Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement
Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement
Institutional
Purpose &
Direction
Strategic Plan
Three to
Five Year
Planning
Long Term Plans
& Comprehensive
Program Reviews
Program
Review
(Year One)
Annual Planning & Continuous Improvement Cycle
Vision
Mission
Program Planning
& Assessment
Participatory
Governance &
Budget
Development
Data Driven
Institutional
Decision Making
(Year Two)
Implementation
& Evaluation
(Year Three)
Outcome
Assessments
Resource
Allocation & Plan
Implementation
Components of Continuous Improvement (CI)
2013 - 2018
A. CI Process, Cycle, and Process Lead
1. CI Process:
2. CI Cycle (semester/year & frequency):
3. CI Process Lead:
B. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Evaluation/Review Process
4. Who or what is evaluated?

5. Who informs those responsible for conducting the evaluation, and when are they
informed?

6. Who conducts the evaluation? When (which years and specific months) and how
frequently is the evaluation conducted?

7. What instruments, forms and/or data are utilized in the evaluation?

8. Who reviews content for quality and completeness? When and how frequently do
quality checks occur?

9. Who has oversight/broadly reviews content? When and how frequently does oversight
occur?

10. Who maintains the list of all elements (persons, programs, outcomes, etc.) to be
evaluated? Who tracks completion of evaluations/maintains the master list of
evaluations completed and those yet to be completed?

11. When and where are the evaluations housed, who places them there, and who has
access? Who maintains the entire set of evaluations completed?

C. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Effectiveness
12. Who decides what improvements/outcomes are needed and the level of targeted
improvements/outcomes? How are these planned outcomes documented?

13. Who is responsible for making improvements, and when (which specific months/years)
are they implemented?

14. When (which specific months/years) and how frequently are improvements/outcomes
measured, who measures them, and how are they documented? Who decides whether
they were adequate leading into the next evaluation period?

D. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Process Effectiveness
15. Who evaluates the effectiveness of the overall CI process? When (which years and
specific months) and how frequently is the process evaluated?

16. Who decides what improvements need to be made in the process, and how are they
documented?

17. Who makes improvements to the process, and when (which years and specific months)
are they implemented? [prior to or at the start of the next CI cycle]

Components of Continuous Improvement (CI)
2013 - 2018
A. CI Process, Cycle, and Process Lead
1. CI Process: Governance System.
2. CI Cycle (semester/year & frequency): Each year—spring 2014, spring 2015, spring
2016, spring 2017, and spring 2018.
3. CI Process Lead: S/P & Dean IPE.
B. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Evaluation/Review Process
4. Who or what is evaluated?

Effectiveness of the governance system.
5. Who informs those responsible for conducting the evaluation, and when are they
informed?

Dean of IPE informs chairs/co-chairs of governance councils mid-spring semester.
6. Who conducts the evaluation? When (which years and specific months) and how
frequently is the evaluation conducted?


The chairs/co-chairs of each governance council coordinates the evaluation (with
assistance from Dean of IPE).
Evaluations are conducted annually before the end of the spring semester.
7. What instruments, forms and/or data are utilized in the evaluation?

Survey is the primary tool.
8. Who reviews content for quality and completeness? When and how frequently do
quality checks occur?


Dean of IPE and chairs/co-chairs of governance councils review content for quality
and completeness.
Quality checks occur at the time of each evaluation.
1
9. Who has oversight/broadly reviews content? When and how frequently does oversight
occur?


Each governance council has oversight for reviewing content.
Oversight occurs at the time of each evaluation.
10. Who maintains the list of all elements (persons, programs, outcomes, etc.) to be
evaluated? Who tracks completion of evaluations/maintains the master list of
evaluations completed and those yet to be completed?


Dean of IPE maintains the list of all governance councils and other governance
bodies to be evaluated.
Dean of IPE tracks completion of evaluations and maintains the master list of all of
evaluations.
11. When and where are the evaluations housed, who places them there, and who has
access? Who maintains the entire set of evaluations completed?



Evaluations are housed in the Office of Dean of IPE.
Chairs/co-chairs of governance councils provide completed evaluations to Dean of
IPE.
Office of Dean of IPE maintains the entire set of evaluations.
C. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Effectiveness
12. Who decides what improvements/outcomes are needed and the level of targeted
improvements/outcomes? How are these planned outcomes documented?


Councils determine improvements needed based on feedback received and
discussed. Proposed modifications in council handbooks are considered by the
specific council and the CPC.
Improvements and proposed modifications are documented in the evaluation report
and reported in meeting minutes.
13. Who is responsible for making improvements, and when (which specific months/years)
are they implemented?



Chairs/co-chairs are responsible for implementing recommended improvements.
Office of S/P makes approved modifications to council handbooks.
Timeline for implementing improvements is determined by the specific governance
council. Improvements are normally implemented starting in the next fiscal year.
2
14. When (which specific months/years) and how frequently are improvements/outcomes
measured, who measures them, and how are they documented? Who decides whether
they were adequate leading into the next evaluation period?




Improvements/outcomes are measured as part of the next evaluation.
Chairs/co-chairs are responsible for coordinating the measurement of
improvements/outcomes.
Improvements/outcomes are documented in the evaluation report and meeting
minutes.
Each governance council determines whether improvements were adequate.
D. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Process Effectiveness
15. Who evaluates the effectiveness of the overall CI process? When (which years and
specific months) and how frequently is the process evaluated?


CPC evaluates overall effectiveness of the CI process.
Evaluation of the CI process occurs annually as part of the evaluation of the
governance system.
16. Who decides what improvements need to be made in the process, and how are they
documented?


CPC determines what improvements are needed in the CI process.
Improvements are documented in the evaluation report and meeting minutes.
17. Who makes improvements to the process, and when (which years and specific months)
are they implemented? [prior to or at the start of the next CI cycle]


CPC implements improvements to the CI process.
Improvements are implemented in the next fiscal year.
3
Components of Continuous Improvement (CI)
2013 - 2018
A. CI Process, Cycle, and Process Lead
1. CI Process: Annual Program Planning & Assessment.
2. CI Cycle (semester/year & frequency): Each year – fall 2013, spring 2014, spring 2015,
spring 2016, spring 2017, and spring 2018.
3. CI Process Lead: Dean IPE.
B. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Evaluation/Review Process
4. Who or what is evaluated?

Programs, services, offices, campuses.
5. Who informs those responsible for conducting the evaluation, and when are they
informed?

Dean IPE informs administrators, faculty and staff in December of the preceding
semester.
6. Who conducts the evaluation? When (which years and specific months) and how
frequently is the evaluation conducted?

Relevant faculty, staff, administrators conduct the review annually in February and
March.
7. What instruments, forms and/or data are utilized in the evaluation?


Annual review of and action plan for academic programs. Student learning and
achievement outcomes data are analyzed.
Annual review of and action plan for services, offices and non-instructional
programs. Service area outcomes data are analyzed.
8. Who reviews content for quality and completeness? When and how frequently do
quality checks occur?

From February through April, the supervising administrator reviews content after
the annual review and action plan is completed, and each time a draft is required.
1
9. Who has oversight/broadly reviews content? When and how frequently does oversight
occur?



Divisional VPs provide oversight as needed from February through April to ensure
work is complete and at threshold level quality.
IPE staff check overall consistency, quality and completeness across annual reviews
and action plans as possible during the spring semester.
The corresponding governance council in early fall, and subsequently the CPC later
in the fall, review the annual reviews and action plans, or summaries thereof, and
make budgetary recommendations as needed.
10. Who maintains the list of all elements (persons, programs, outcomes, etc.) to be
evaluated? Who tracks completion of evaluations/maintains the master list of
evaluations completed and those yet to be completed?


Divisional VPs track completion for annual reviews and action plans within their
purview.
Dean IPE maintains the list of programs/services/offices to be reviewed annually and
the master list of reviews completed each year.
11. When and where are the evaluations housed, who places them there, and who has
access? Who maintains the entire set of evaluations completed?



Divisional VPs, and Area Deans in Academic Affairs, place completed annual reviews
and action plans in appropriate folders in the Google drive in May. eLumen is
expected to be utilized starting in spring 2015.
Dean IPE maintains the completed annual reviews and action plans in the Google
drive. eLumen is expected to be utilized starting in spring 2015.
Dean IPE provides a publicly accessible list of completed reviews annually on the IPE
website.
C. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Effectiveness
12. Who decides what improvements/outcomes are needed and the level of targeted
improvements/outcomes? How are these planned outcomes documented?




Relevant faculty and their dean for academic programs.
Relevant staff and their supervising administrator for services and non-instructional
programs.
Supervising administrators for offices.
Planned outcomes are documented in annual reviews and action plans.
2
13. Who is responsible for making improvements, and when (which specific months/years)
are they implemented?



Relevant faculty and their dean for academic programs.
Relevant staff and their supervising administrator for services, offices and noninstructional programs.
Improvements are typically implemented starting in the subsequent fall semester for
academic programs, and in the summer or fall semester for non-instructional
programs, services and offices. Some improvements may be made immediately,
whereas others that rely on resource allocation may not be implemented until
resources are available. For example, certain improvements in academic programs
may not be implemented until three semesters after the initial request is made.
14. When (which specific months/years) and how frequently are improvements/outcomes
measured, who measures them, and how are they documented? Who decides whether
they were adequate leading into the next evaluation period?


Improvements/outcomes are measured by relevant faculty for academic programs
at least once, but perhaps several times for certain SLOs, prior to the next evaluation
period. Faculty report SLO data on the next annual review and action plan, and
determine whether outcomes are adequate.
Improvements/outcomes are measured by supervising administrator and staff for
services, offices and non-instructional programs at least once, but perhaps several
times for certain SAOs, prior to the next evaluation period. Administrators report
SAO data on the next annual review and action plan, and determine whether
outcomes are adequate.
D. Participants, Tasks & Evidence in Making Improvements in Process Effectiveness
15. Who evaluates the effectiveness of the overall CI process? When (which years and
specific months) and how frequently is the process evaluated?

IPE staff evaluate the effectiveness of the annual program planning and assessment
process annually in the fall semester, with input from persons who participated in
the most recent process.
16. Who decides what improvements need to be made in the process, and how are they
documented?


Dean IPE decides which specific improvements to make in consultation with the CPC,
Academic Senate, and/or other appropriate governance bodies and administrators.
Appropriate modifications reflecting improvements are made in timelines, charts,
forms and/or other documents.
3

Dean IPE incorporates improvements in process revision as needed.
17. Who makes improvements to the process, and when (which years and specific months)
are they implemented? [prior to or at the start of the next CI cycle]

IPE staff make improvements, which are implemented in December prior to the next
(spring) semester’s annual program planning and assessment process.
4