Prioritization of
Academic and Administrative
Programs
Academic and Administrative Author Training
September 30 – October 1, 2014
Prioritization Overview
• Steering Committee Co-Chairs
– Anny Morrobel-Sosa, Provost & Senior Vice
President for Academic Affairs
– Vincent Clark, Vice President of Administration &
Finance
• Website – main communication medium
–
–
–
–
http://www.lehman.edu/program-prioritization/
Working Groups, membership
Resources, FAQs, Working Timeline (2014-2015)
Open Forum – Nov. 3, 2014
Work to Date - 1
• Data Support Team
– Co-Chairs: Bethania Ortega, Yvette Rosario
– Consensus review data sources, validity,
accuracy, reliability
– Multiple meetings + meetings with Task Forces
& Steering Committee
• Communications Team – on-going
– Joseph Tirella, Dawn Ewing-Morgan, David
Stevens
Work to Date- 2
• Academic Programs and Services Task Force
– Co-Chairs: Dene Hurley, Richard Finger
– Multiple meetings and review of documents (since April 2014)
– Identification and Selection of analysis criteria & questions to
programs - over 15 iterations of the program analysis form
• Administrative Programs and Services Task Force
– Co-Chairs: Raymond Galinski, Liesl Jones
– Multiple meetings and review of documents (since April 2014)
– Identification and Selection of criteria & questions to programs
- over 10 iterations of the program analysis form
Review of Prioritization Process
Why Program Prioritization??
• Maintain financial stability through uncertain times
Why Program Prioritization? (continued)
?
• Identification of opportunities to:
• Strengthen programs
• Reduce expenses
• Increase revenues
What is Program Prioritization??
• Structured assessment of all programs that
consume or generate resources
• Using pre-selected criteria
• Focused on centrality to mission & effective
use of resources
• Data-driven
Success Requires?
• Respect for existing governance process
• Not replacement for….
• But assist in decision-making
• All activities (academic, administrative) are
included
• Use of objective, consistent criteria
• Same process/methodology uses to
assess all programs
• Transparency in communications, reporting
Program Analysis Forms?
• All programs will receive pertinent
information for analysis
• Analysis should be conducted by
Chairs/Directors
• input from all stakeholders is encouraged
• Electronic submission and reporting
Review, Rate, Report
Program
Analysis Form
•
Prepared by
Chairs/Directo
rs, faculty,
Deans
Task Force
•
•
Review and
application
of rating
rubric
Provide
reports and
ratings to
Steering
Committee
Steering
Committee
•
•
Review report and
ratings
Provide final
recommendations
to the President
President
Final conclusions in
time for 2015/2016
Planning
11
Lehman College
Author Training
Dene Hurley, Co-chair, Academic Task Force
Richard Finger, Co-chair, Academic Task Force
Johann Lindig, Managing Partner, Academic Strategy Partners
Julie Naster, Partner, Academic Strategy Partners
Agenda
 Opening
 Session Ground Rules
 Training Session
 Close
 Individual Questions
Opening
 Prioritization Timeline
o Overview of working timeline
 Process orientation
o Where we are in process?
• Data is being uploaded into Prioritization Plus
software (software discussed later)
• Rating rubric completed by Nov. 12
• Electronic program analysis Forms available
Nov. 12
• Forms must be submitted by 12:00 a.m.
1/12/15
Session Ground Rules
 Our purpose is to help you understand the
evaluation criteria to assist you in
completing the evaluation form
 Walk through form by section (criteria,
then instructions) – address questions in
each section
Academic Criteria
Criteria
1. History and Development
Description
2. External Demand for the
Program
Original intent of the program/service and evolution of
program/service
Level of interest and participation in the current
program/service
3. Internal Demand for the
Program
The magnitude to which this program/service is needed
by other University programs/services.
Weight
5%
15%
15%
4. Program Support and Staffing The quality of resources necessary to support the
program/service
10%
5. Quality of Outcomes
The extent of program/service performance.
20%
6. Program Size, Scope and
Productivity
Breadth and depth and the efficiency measures of
outputs and inputs
15%
7. Revenues and Expenditures
Revenue and other resources generated. All costs and
other expenses.
Aspirational goals.
10%
8. Opportunity Analysis and
Impact
10%
Academic Program Analysis Form
How to complete the Forms
 Complete as a group
o Share information
o Complete Forms together
 Review forms before submitting
 Submit to Deans for review prior to final
submission of program analysis form
Characteristics of a Good Form
 Concise and Succinct – (Word limits for each
section)
 Respond to relevant data and tables
 Minimize “prose”, opinion, and anecdotal
evidence
 Straight-forward, honest picture of program
Close
 Electronic Forms will be available on 11/12/14
 Questions can be emailed to
program.prioritization@lehman.cuny.edu
 Additional trainings will be scheduled after
10/15/14
 Completed Program Analysis forms will be
available on Lehman Prioritization website
after 1/12/2015
Questions?
Using Prioritization Plustm
 The Prioritization Plustm system:
o Provide an orderly way to keep track of
responses.
o Manages who has access to what and when.
o Insures that you are all looking at the same
thing.
o Allows you to work anywhere with a
browser.
Access the System
 Use the URL www.prioritizationplus.com
 Your full Lehman email address will be your
username
 Your password will be provided by your
support team.
 Change your password and don’t share it!
Access Control
 Only Authors and Reviewers have access to your
drafts until they are approved.
 Deans are “Reviewers”
 Note: Lehman Support Team has access to
your drafts in order to provide assistance as
needed.
 Support team information will be provided
when the software is made available
Levels of Program Analysis Form
 Three Levels on one form
• Program
• Criterion
• Criterion Question
 You will have access to all the programs for
which you are an Author.
 All of the work is done at the Question level.
Navigate the Outline - Example
Prioritization Plus Resources
 Training videos – available in Prioritization
Plus
 Author Training guides – available in the
Prioritization Plus
Writing Team
 Multiple Authors can be assigned to a single
program.
 One Reviewer is assigned for each program.
 All have the same writing privileges.
 Work together!
Approval
 When complete the Reviewer marks the
program as Approved.
 Only then is the write-up available for
publishing and to the Task Force.
Questions?