Instructions for Completing the Performance Agreement Application and Reporting Form
Provide the following information in the PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT/REPORT:
1. Identify the KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR (i.e. data) that will be used to determine progress toward goals. Be as specific and as
succinct as possible. The key performance indicator (data) may be quantitative or qualitative.
2. Show the THREE YEAR PERFORMANCE HISTORY, i.e., value of the key performance indicator (data) for December 31, 2006, 2005, and
2004, if available.
3. Show TARGETS for the next 3 years. Targets must be expressed in terms of the key performance indicator (data) identified in the first column.
4, PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES must be expressed in terms of the key performance indicator (data) listed in the first column.
5. EVALUATION of performance, i.e., target met, target not met, directional improvement, etc.
6. At least one institutional goal must support Regents’ System Goal B. Institutional goals must support two additional Regents’ System Goals
selected from Regents’ System Goals A, C, and D.
7. The narrative should not repeat information in the table. Instead, the narrative should provide explanation of anything in the table that may not be
obvious to the reader. If applicable, the narrative should also describe any circumstances that prevented the institution from making directional
improvement and future plans for improving performance.
Instructions for Narrative to Accompany the Performance Agreement Application
1. Institutional Goal 1: List goal as succinctly as possible.
Key Performance Indicator 1 (Data point 1): Identify the data to be collected as succinctly as possible. Use the same description that appears in
the first column of the form.
a. Data Collection: Describe EXACTLY how the data for the key performance indicator will be collected. For example, if the data is “retention,”
describe exactly how retention will be calculated.
b. Targets: Describe the rationale for selecting the targets in order for the Board to determine the degree of difficulty in achieving the target. This
information is required. (Note: Targets must be expressed in terms of the key performance indicator/data. For example, if the key performance
indicator is “retention,” the targets should be expressed in terms of the actual retention figures expected in the next 3 years.)
Continue in the same fashion for all indicators for this goal.
Comments:
Include only comments that are ESSENTIAL to understanding the goal. Comments are optional.
And so on up to six goals.
Performance Agreement/Report
Institution: Cowley County
Community College
Contact Person:
Contact phone & e-mail:
Charles McKown, Vice 620-441-5264
President of Research & mckown@cowley.edu
Technology
Date: 07/11/2007
Regents System Goal (Click on Arrow to view selections) A: Efficiency/Effectiveness/Seamlessness
Institutional Goal 1: To expand partnerships with other educational institutions, governmental agencies, and business and industry
Key Performance Indicator (Data)
3-Year Performance
History
Targets
1. Number of new partnerships with
other outside entities.
2006 - 5 new
partnerships
Target yr 1: At least
5 new partnerships
2005 - 7 new
partnerships
Target yr 2: At least
5 new partnerships
2004 - 5 new
partnerships
Target yr 3: At least
5 new partnerships
2006 - 41 new
sections (this is an
average of 2004,
2005, and 2006)
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
45 course sections)
2. Number of course sections offered in
conjunction with any Cowley partner.
2005 - 30 new
sections (this is an
average of 2003,
2004, and 2005)
2004 - 17 new
sections (this is an
average of 2002,
2003, and 2004)
3. Number of students enrolled in
course sections offered in conjunction
with any Cowley partner.
2006 - 301 students
(this is an aveage of
2004, 2005, and
2006)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
47 course sections)
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
49 course sections)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
331 students)
Performance Outcome
Evaluation
2005 - 229 students
(this is an average of
2003, 2004, and
2005)
2004 - 166 students
(this is an average of
2002, 2003, and
2004)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
346 students)
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
361 students)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
NARRATIVE — INSTITUTIONAL GOAL 1(Title Only): To expand partnerships with other educational institutions, governmental
agencies, and business and industry.
Key Performance Indicator 1(Title Only): Number of new partnerships.
Data Collection: New partnerships will be established either through collaboration with a new entity or through new project opportunities with
existing partners. The partnerships will be with other educational institutions, governmental agencies, and/or business and industry. Expanded
partnerships will directly support the regents’ system goal by improving the efficiency, effectiveness, and seamlessness of higher education through
collaborative efforts. As funding for education in general -- and higher education in particular -- continues to receive increased scrutiny, Cowley
recognizes the importance of working with other entities whenever possible to minimize duplication of effort and resources. This is often more
complicated than simply "doing it by ourselves"; but, is a tremendous benefit to the students and the taxpayers in the long run.
Targets: The anticipated partners for 2008 include a new aviation technology center in partnership with Wichita Area Technical College; a
Mechatronics program in conjuction with the Winfield Economic Development Commission; an MICT program in El Dorado and Andover with
Butler County Community College; a Leadership program with Southwestern College; a partnership with the homeschooling organization "Teaching
Parents Association" of Wichita; shared facilities with Friends University; and training programs with Rubbermaid and the Winfield Correctional
Facility. Of course, Cowley is always cognizant of the need to be flexible and to be responsive to other emergent opportunities as they arise.
Key Performance Indicator 2(Title Only): Number of course sections offered in conjunction with any Cowley partner.
Data Collection: As new partnerships are added, the total number of course sections offered with all Cowley partners will increase. This will
demonstrate an on-going commitment to look continually for new opportunities to collaborate and to maintain existing partnerships whenever
possible.
Targets: Targets are based on an average of the previous three years at that time. In 2006, the average (based on data from 2004, 2005, and 2006)
was 41 sections. The target calls for a 10% increase in 2008, 15% in 2009, and 20% in 2010. This will allow us to continue an ambitious but
manageable growth. Since the number of course sections are controlled by available classroom space and instructional teaching loads, these
increases are reasonable expectations for our resources.
Key Performance Indicator 3(Title Only): Number of students enrolled in course sections offered in conjunction with any Cowley partner.
Data Collection: As new partnerships are added, the total number of students enrolled in the partnership programs will increase. This will further
demonstrate an on-going commitment to look continually for new opportunities to collaborate and to maintain existing partnerships whenever
possible.
Targets: Targets are based on an average of the previous three years at that time. In 2006, the average (based on data from 2004, 2005, and 2006)
was 301 students. The target calls for a 10% increase in 2008, 15% in 2009, and 20% in 2010. This will allow us to continue an ambitious but
manageable growth. Since the amount of growth is controlled by available classroom space and instructional teaching loads, these increases are
reasonable expectations for our resources.
Key Performance Indicator 4(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 5(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Comments:
Regents System Goal (Click on Arrow to view selections) B: Improve Learner Outcomes
Institutional Goal 2: To improve the success of students in the core skills of reading, writing, and mathematics and those taking classes via online access.
Key Performance Indicator (Data)
3-Year Performance
History
Targets
1. Number of students exceeding the
national average in reading on the
CAAP test.
2006 - 237 students
(based on an average
of 2005 and 2006)
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
261 students)
2005 - 203 students
(this was the first
year of the test)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
273 students)
2004 - N/A
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
Performance Outcome
Evaluation
284 students)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
2. Number of students exceeding the
national average in writing on the
CAAP test.
2006 - 223 students
(based on an average
of 2005 and 2006)
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
245 students)
2005 - 183 students
(this was the first
year of the test)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
256 students)
2004 - N/A
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
268 students)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
3. Number of students exceeding the
national average in mathematics on the
CAAP test.
2006 - 297 students
(based on an average
of 2005 and 2006)
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
327 students)
2005 - 229 students
(this was the first
year of the test)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
342 students)
2004 - N/A
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
356 students)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
4. Success rate gap between
mathematics courses and all other
courses.
2006 - 11.70% gap
2005 - 10.44% gap
2004 - 8.92% gap
Target yr 1: 1.00%
decrease (i.e., reduce
gap to 10.70%)
Target yr 2: 1.50%
decrease (i.e., reduce
the gap to 10.20%)
Target yr 3: 2.00%
decrease (i.e., reduce
the gap to 9.70%)
5. Success rate gap between online
courses and all other courses.
2006 - 8.86%
2005 - 5.70%
2004 - 3.16%
Target yr 1: 1.00%
decrease (i.e., reduce
gap to 7.86%)
Target yr 2: 1.50%
decrease (i.e., reduce
the gap to 7.36%)
Target yr 3: 2.00%
decrease (i.e., reduce
the gap to 6.86%)
NARRATIVE — INSTITUTIONAL GOAL 2(Title Only): To improve the success of students in the core skills of reading, writing, and
mathematics and those taking classes via online access.
Key Performance Indicator 1(Title Only): Number of students exceeding the national average in reading on the CAAP test.
Data Collection: Cowley implemented a new policy in 2005 that all graduate candidates take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency
(CAAP) offered by ACT.
Targets: The CAAP test is a nationally recognized measurement of outcomes in core subject areas. The target measurement is to increase the
number of students that exceed the national average in reading. Targets are based on an average of the three previous years at that time.
Key Performance Indicator 2(Title Only): Number of students exceeding the national average in writing on the CAAP test.
Data Collection: Cowley implemented a new policy in 2005 that all graduate candidates take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency
(CAAP) offered by ACT.
Targets: The CAAP test is a nationally recognized measurement of outcomes in core subject areas. The target measurement is to increase the
number of students that exceed the national average in writing. Targets are based on an average of the three previous years at that time.
Key Performance Indicator 3(Title Only): Number of students exceeding the national average in mathematics on the CAAP test.
Data Collection: Cowley implemented a new policy in 2005 that all graduate candidates take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency
(CAAP) offered by ACT.
Targets: The CAAP test is a nationally recognized measurement of outcomes in core subject areas. The target measurement is to increase the
number of students that exceed the national average in mathematics. Taregets are based on an average of the three previous years at that time.
Key Performance Indicator 4(Title Only): Success rate gap between mathematics courses and all other courses.
Data Collection: Students in mathematics courses have traditionally had less success (defined by successfully completing the course with a grade of
A, B, or C) than students in other courses. This indicator will measure the success gap between mathematics courses and all other courses at
Cowley.
Targets: The gap (the difference in success rate between the mathematics courses and all other courses) was established based on 2006 data. The
percentage of students successfully completing any course was 80.46%. The percentage of students successfully completing their mathematics
course was 68.76%. The gap (80.46% - 68.76%) was 11.70%. The target is to reduce this gap by 1.00% in 2008, 1.50% in 2009, and 2.00% in 2010.
Key Performance Indicator 5(Title Only): Success rate gap between online courses and all other courses.
Data Collection: Students in online courses have had less success (defined by successfully completing the course with a grade of A, B, or C) than
students in other traditionally taught courses. This indicator will measure the success gap between online courses and all other courses at Cowley.
Targets: The gap (the difference in success rate between online courses and all other courses) was established based on 2006 data. The percentage
of students successfully completing any course was 80.46%. The percentage of students successfully completing their online courses was 71.60%.
The gap (80.46% - 71.60%) was 8.86%. The target is to reduce this gap by 1.00% in 2008, 1.50% in 2009, and 2.00% in 2010.
Comments:
Regents System Goal (Click on Arrow to view selections) C: Improve Workforce Development
Institutional Goal 3: To expand Cowley’s industrial technology training in aviation airframe and power plant maintenance, automotive technology,
machine tool technology, mechatronics, and welding.
Key Performance Indicator (Data)
3-Year Performance
History
Targets
1. Number of course sections offered in
industrial technology courses.
2006 - 372 sections
(this is an average of
2004, 2005, and
2006)
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
409 sections)
2005 - 288 sections
(this is an average of
2003, 2004, and
2005)
2004 - 200 sections
(this is an average of
2002, 2003, and
2004)
2. Number of students enrolled in
industrial technology courses.
2006 - 465 students
(this is an aveage of
2004, 2005, and
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
428 sections)
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
446 sections)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
511 students)
Performance Outcome
Evaluation
2006)
2005 - 368 students
(this is an average of
2003, 2004, and
2005)
2004 - 308 students
(this is an average of
2002, 2003, and
2004)
3. Number of students who successfully
complete an FAA airframe or power
plant certification).
2006 - 66 students
(this is an aveage of
2004, 2005, and
2006)
2005 - 52 students
(this is an average of
2004 and 2005 - data
prior to 2004 is
unavailable)
2004 - 16 students
(data prior to 2004 is
unavailable and
therefore cannot be
averaged)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
535 students)
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
558 students)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
Target yr 1: 10%
increase (i.e., at least
73 students)
Target yr 2: 15%
increase (i.e., at least
76 students)
Target yr 3: 20%
increase (i.e., at least
79 students)
Targets are based on
an average of 3 years
NARRATIVE — INSTITUTIONAL GOAL 3(Title Only): : To expand Cowley’s industrial technology training in aviation airframe and
power plant maintenance, automotive technology, machine tool technology, mechatronics, and welding.
Key Performance Indicator 1(Title Only): Number of course sections offered in industrial technology courses.
Data Collection: Vocational training is important to the state’s workforce. Cowley is committed to expanding our course offerings. Our workforce
advisory groups have identified these programs as areas of particular need.
Targets: Targets are based on an average of the three previous years at that time. In 2006, the average (based on data from 2004, 2005, and 2006)
was 372 sections. The target calls for a 10% increase in 2008, 15% in 2009, and 20% in 2010. Given the higher costs associated with vocational
training, we believe that this increase is an ambitious but manageable goal.
Key Performance Indicator 2(Title Only): Number of students enrolled in industrial technology courses.
Data Collection: In addition to offering more sections, the total number of students enrolled needs to increase as well in order to expand the number
of qualified workers available.
Targets: Targets are based on an average of the three previous years at that time. In 2006, the average (based on data from 2004, 2005, and 2006)
was 465 students. The target calls for a 10% increase in 2008, 15% in 2009, and 20% in 2010. Given the higher costs associated with vocational
training, we believe that this increase is an ambitious but manageable goal.
Key Performance Indicator 3(Title Only): Number of students who successfully complete an FAA airframe or power plant certification.
Data Collection: Certain industries require national certifications. Our students in aviation airframe or power plant maintenance must be certified
by the Federal Aviation Administration.
Targets: Targets are based on an average of the three previous years at that time. In 2006, the average (based on data from 2004, 2005, and 2006)
was 66 students. The target calls for a 10% increase in 2008, 15% in 2009, and 20% in 2010. Due to space limitations, the percentage of growth is
limited until completion of a new aviation facilty. These targets are ambitious but manageable until completion of the new center is finished.
Key Performance Indicator 4(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 5(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Comments:
Regents System Goal (Click on Arrow to view selections) A: Efficiency/Effectiveness/Seamlessness
Institutional Goal 4:
Key Performance Indicator (Data)
3-Year Performance
History
Targets
Performance Outcome
Evaluation
NARRATIVE — INSTITUTIONAL GOAL 4(Title Only):
Key Performance Indicator 1(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 2(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 3(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 4(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 5(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Comments:
Regents System Goal (Click on Arrow to view selections) A: Efficiency/Effectiveness/Seamlessness
Institutional Goal 5:
Key Performance Indicator (Data)
3-Year Performance
History
Targets
Performance Outcome
Evaluation
NARRATIVE — INSTITUTIONAL GOAL 5(Title Only):
Key Performance Indicator 1(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 2(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 3(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 4(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 5(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Comments:
Regents System Goal (Click on Arrow to view selections) A: Efficiency/Effectiveness/Seamlessness
Institutional Goal 6:
Key Performance Indicator (Data)
3-Year Performance
History
Targets
Performance Outcome
Evaluation
NARRATIVE — INSTITUTIONAL GOAL 6(Title Only):
Key Performance Indicator 1(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 2(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 3(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 4(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Key Performance Indicator 5(Title Only):
Data Collection:
Targets:
Comments:
KBOR use only: Institution Name:
Summary of changes from the previous approved performance agreement
Response to any Board comments on the previous approved performance agreement
Recommendation and Comments
561.09