Core Requirement 2.5 Institutional Effectiveness
The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning
and evaluation processes that (1) incorporate a systematic review of institutional mission,
goals, and outcomes; (2) result in continuing improvement in institutional quality; and (3)
demonstrate the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission.
Compliance Status: In compliance
ECU uses a systematic and institution-wide, research-based planning and evaluation process
(termed the ECU Model of Institutional Effectiveness) to guide decision-making towards fulfilling
our mission. This model incorporates a systematic review of institutional mission, goals,
outcomes, and results in continuous improvement in institutional quality to assist in
demonstrating how ECU is effectively accomplishing its mission.
This narrative will:
I.
Describe the institution’s framework for institutional effectiveness and the
processes that contribute to the accomplishment of ECU’s mission,
II.
Identify the University of North Carolina requirements that impact ECU’s
planning and assessment processes,
III.
Describe the relationship of the university’s budget process and master
planning process to institutional effectiveness and provide evidence that the
institution is committing significant resources to ensure institutional quality,
IV.
Describe the ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning
and evaluation process, and
V.
Provide selected examples of the research-based systematic review and use of
data and information to ensure continuous improvement.
I.
Institutional Effectiveness at ECU
ECU’s Model of Institutional Effectiveness presents the core and enabling processes that
accomplish the ongoing planning, assessment, and quality enhancement work of the university.
Since strategies and priorities change over time, the model is dynamic and responds to the
needs and expectations of internal and external customers and stakeholders while remaining
true to the mission of the university. Critical components of the ECU Model of Institutional
Effectiveness are the development and ongoing review of plans outlined in the University
Dashboard.
Responsibilities for establishing mission-based outcomes and for continually assessing progress
toward these outcomes are institution-wide, distributed throughout the university’s many units,
activities, and programs and managed by the Executive Committee of the Strategic Planning
Committee and the Office of Institutional Planning, Assessment and Research (IPAR). This
integrated approach effectively positions the institution to assess progress toward the
accomplishment of the institution’s mission; ensures a broad representation of stakeholders on
planning committees; and drives the institution-wide use of assessment data to support a
culture of evidence (use of results) and ongoing improvement and quality enhancement.
Evidence of a research-driven approach that focuses on continuous improvement is evident in
1
the East Carolina University Annual Report 2010-2011, Points East, and the report entitled, ECU:
Examples of Key Accomplishments Toward the ECU Mission .
With a focus on the ECU Mission, institutional goals to support and advance the model of
institutional effectiveness are established through the ECU Strategic Planning Process that is
ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide, as detailed in Organization of the Process. A series of
Planning Principles and a Communication Plan support this work. The components of the
strategic planning and assessment process are discussed in more detail later in this narrative.
These institution-wide processes are coordinated and supported by IPAR and the Office of
Academic Program Planning and Development (formerly Academic Program Development).
IPAR also provides institutional and unit-level data and analysis in support of these aspects of
institutional effectiveness, and encourages evidence-based decisions in support of the mission,
as discussed later in this narrative.
Review of the Mission
At ECU, the mission’s importance is emphasized in its placement as the central focus of all
institutional planning. As presented in detail in the reports for Core Requirement 2.4 and
Comprehensive Standard 3.1.1, strategic planning at ECU begins with the review of the mission.
As part of the institution’s commitment to institutional effectiveness, the ECU Strategic Planning
Committee reviews the mission statement annually, as outlined in the Strategic Planning
Committee Meeting Minutes, September 15, 2011. The regular review of the institutional
mission is also a requirement of the UNC, as outlined in the next section of the narrative.
Program Reviews (Academic and Non-Academic)
A university-wide organizational framework for program review has been developed and has
been consistently implemented by the Office of the Provost. The Procedures for Unit Academic
Program Review and the Program Review Guidelines for Administrative and Support Units
outline the steps in this process which include attention to the coherence of the program and its
ongoing relevance to the mission of the institution. Unit program reviews consist of a self-study
conducted by each program, followed by a review by a committee comprised of representatives
from both within and outside the university. The outcomes for program reviews include the
identification of program strengths and weaknesses with a determination of overall program
quality and specific recommendations for improvement. Reviews are also used as a basis for a
more effective allocation of resources by using the program quality metrics as indicated by the
review. Twenty-five programs have been reviewed since spring 2009. Program Review reports
are tracked on the Academic Program Review SharePoint Site.
As discussed, all academic programs participate in the review process; although, it is recognized
that some programs and/or academic units at ECU hold accreditation reviews that include a
review of both undergraduate and graduate programs. In these instances, the accreditation selfstudy substitutes for the required self-study of the Unit Academic Program Review. This process
is described in detail in Core Requirement 2.7.2.
2
Specialized Accreditation
As documented in the East Carolina University Program Accreditation Cycle, a majority of the
university's professional academic programs are accredited by national and international
specialized professional associations who review those programs for coherence. The periodic
self-study for accreditation requires that faculty members compare their existing programs with
standards established for the discipline. Those reports require that the programs demonstrate
appropriate sequencing and integration of content. Examples of completed accreditation
processes are: Social Work, Business, Engineering, Nursing, Construction Management
[undergraduate], Physical Therapy, and Physician Assistant.
State licensure requirements for some professions (nursing, education, social work, engineering,
business, marriage and family therapy, restorative therapies, etc.) have established curriculum
mandates, which provide content guidelines in the respective degree areas. ECU students from
these discipline areas have a successful pass rate annually on licensure examinations.
These numerous accreditations, as discussed in detail in Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1.1,
further demonstrate the University's commitment to institutional effectiveness.
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
As part of the UNC system, ECU adheres to UNC Policy 400.2.2 Accountability/Goals and
Assessment Measures. Section 116.30.5 of the Act provides that:
The Board of Governors shall require each special responsibility constituent institution
to include in its institutional effectiveness plan those assessment measures that are
determined by the Board to be measures that will assure some standard measure of
student learning and development in general undergraduate education at the special
responsibility constituent institutions. The intent of this requirement is to measure the
impact of G.S. 116-30.1 through G.S. 116-30.5, establishing and administering special
responsibility constituent institutions, and their implementation on undergraduate
student learning and development.
ECU has a process to identify desired student learning outcomes for each of its degree
programs, assure that assessment measures are routinely put into place to determine
attainment of outcomes, and continually assess ways to improve programs and their assessment
measures. Oversight of this process is the role of the ECU Institutional Effectiveness (IE) Council
that is comprised of several small working groups. The IE Council’s charge includes the following
components:
 establish guidelines and processes for comprehensive assessment of educational
programs, academic and student support services, administrative, research and public
service units;
 provide a forum for the exchange of program review and assessment information and
strategies of quality enhancement among graduate and undergraduate programs as well
as support units;
 encourage innovative approaches or best practices in assessment of student learning
and provides guidance for student outcomes assessment throughout the institution;
3


review assessment plans and reports including those required by the Southern
Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) with an emphasis on using data to inform
and guide decision-making toward the improvement of student learning;
collaborate with all units on campus to ensure that integrated planning and assessment
efforts sustain the work of institutional effectiveness at ECU.
ECU faculty assess all educational programs in a total of 302 assessment units in our institutional
tracking system. At the college level, associate deans for assessment and academic deans work
directly with faculty and are heavily involved in the assessment of student learning. The Provost
and Chancellor have provided institutional support and vision for continual improvement of
educational programs. Starting in 2007, the then new Provost spoke at faculty meetings of each
college and met with each academic dean separately to emphasize the use of assessment results
to improve academic programs. Overviews of Assessment Reporting for 2008-09, 2009-10,
2010-11and 2011-12 are located on the Institutional Assessment website.
This process is another key component of ECU's integrated planning, evaluation, and quality
enhancement process. That process is described in detailed in connection with the discussion of
Comprehensive Standard 3.5.1 Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1.1.
The critical components of ECU’s framework for institutional effectiveness are supported by a
significant commitment of resources as outlined in section III of the narrative.
II. University of North Carolina requirements and critical components of institutional
effectiveness
The University of North Carolina system (hereafter, UNC or the UNC system) is governed by a
32-member Board of Governors (BOG) which, in accordance with North Carolina General Statute
116-11, is responsible for the general determination, control, supervision, management, and
governance of all affairs of the university’s constituent institution, one of which is ECU. UNC
requires progress reports towards accomplishing strategic goals in support of ECU Tomorrow
and UNC Tomorrow on a regular basis. Examples of these reports include the Phase I Report,
May 1, 2008, Phase II Report, December 8, 2008, and the Executive Summary of the Report on
Globalization in response to UNC-Tomorrow Prepared: October 12, 2010. In 2008, UNC required
that all of the 16 constituent institutions review their mission statements to ensure alignment
with UNC Tomorrow, UNC’s strategic plan. In response, as part of the Phase II sub-committee
work, ECU formed a mission statement committee to guide the development of the current
mission statement that was approved by the ECU Board of Trustees and the UNC-BOG as
outlined in the November 13, 2009 Board of Governor’s meeting minutes.
UNC has also established external data reporting requirements (see Reporting Schedule for
6/1/11 through 6/30/12) and regularly requests ad hoc data reports. This information is
published on the UNC Institutional Research and Analysis webpage in a variety of reports
including The University of North Carolina A Profile Based on Trend and Accountability Data Dec
2011, and is used to inform and guide strategic planning and assessment efforts across the
system.
4
As required by the University of North Carolina, ECU integrates strategic and financial planning
and follows the guidelines of the University of North Carolina Budget Process.
III. Budget planning, master planning, commitment of resources in support of institutional
effectiveness
Budget Planning
Planning and budgeting are complementary processes at ECU. In accordance with the ECU
budget planning process, a series of meetings are held at the divisional level to prepare a list of
budget priorities aligned to the university’s strategic action plan as outlined in the Academic
Directions and Funding Priorities. Examples of resources aligned to the established priorities for
2010-2011 are outline in the Examples of Resource Allocation Based on Planning Processes,
2010-11. This proposed budget also includes institutional mandates set forth by the UNC.
The draft budget request is then presented to the Chancellor’s Executive Council that is tasked
with providing a university-wide perspective on planning and budgeting. The budget is then
submitted to the University of North Carolina General Administration (UNC-GA) and, through a
collaborative process that includes the UNC President, Chancellors, and key staff members, a
system-level budget is prepared and presented to the BOG for approval. Once approved, the
budget is submitted to the Governor and the General Assembly.
More detailed information about the budget planning and allocation process can be found in
Core Requirement 2.11.1.
Master Planning
ECU’s development of capital and major facility projects is guided by a dynamic campus master
plan that builds upon previous master plans, thereby contributing to institutional effectiveness.
The master plan goals are aligned to the ECU Mission. Strong evidence of an inclusive and
research-based approach is found in the overview of the master planning process.
The current master plan, approved in spring 2012, serves as an effective framework for the
physical development of the campus. Recent and future examples of master planning are
outlined below:



In 2012, construction of the ECU School of Dental Medicine will be completed on the
Health Sciences Campus. This 188,337 GSF building will house the educational, clinical,
and research functions of the School. The project cost associated with this building and
satellite locations is $60 million.
In 2011, ECU completed building a new Family Medicine and Monk Geriatric Center on
the Health Sciences Campus to house faculty and staff offices, exam rooms, clinic
support space, teaching rooms, patient services, and building support space. The
117,185 GSF building was built at a cost of $45 million.
In 2010, ECU completed a renovation and addition to Scott Residence Hall. With a total
construction cost of $28.5 million, an additional 55,520 GSF of residence space was
obtained.
5

In 2010, the 5,842 GSF Croatan, located in the heart of the academic area of Main
Campus, was demolished and, with an $8.2 million budget, an 18,659 GSF dining facility
was constructed at the same location. An application for LEED certification at the Silver
Level has been submitted.
As resources are secured, the master plan outlines a series of future building opportunities
including a new student union with a supporting satellite building on the Health Sciences
Campus, a conference center, a parking desk, and additional offices.
The master planning process is described in detail in Core Requirement 2.11.2. Other examples
of ECU’s commitment to an ongoing, integrated master planning process are outlined in
Comprehensive Standard 3.11.3.
Commitment of Resources
ECU considers the SACSCOC process to be a continuous approach to quality improvement, not a
process of evaluation implemented at five or ten-year intervals. Accordingly, the practice of
continuous evaluation of compliance with the SACSCOC Principles of Accreditation has received
significant institutional support. To this end, ECU is committed to developing an aligned learning
organization characterized by collaboration and communication to meet the needs of students
and stakeholders as evidenced in the ECU Model for Institutional Effectiveness. To accomplish
this objective, the institution has committed significant resources and has adopted strategies
that continue to enhance ECU’s ability to provide a transparent and sound basis for budget
decisions, resource allocations, and plans for continuous improvement. Examples of institutional
commitment of resources include:






Establishment of the ECU Honors College to afford a diverse intellectual community for
academically talented students
Creation of a new position entitled, Executive Director for Retention Services and
Undergraduate Studies to more strategically align retention and graduation efforts
across the university.
Investment in a renovation of Joyner Library to accommodate a 3,800 GSF Math Lab that
will provide customized instruction.
Investment in a renovation of space in the Old Cafeteria Building to accommodate the
ECU Pirate Tutoring Center.
Four full-time professional positions in IPAR dedicated to assessment.
The purchase and university-wide utilization of TracDat and iWebfolio to support an
integrated model of planning and assessment.
Other examples of resource commitments include the institutionalization of the SACSCOC
process and the adoption of the Baldrige Education Criteria for Excellence. Clearly, the Baldrige
Educational Criteria meet ECU Tomorrow and the SACS and have, and will continue to enhance
our commitment to institutional effectiveness.
In 2010, ECU adopted the Baldrige Model for Performance Excellence. This continuous quality
improvement program offers a vision of the ideal organization and identifies criteria of quality
to guide self-assessment and goal-setting.
6
During the summer and fall of 2010 and the spring of 2011, ECU conducted a meta-assessment
of the institution, incorporated the work of more than 150 administrators, faculty, staff,
students, and stakeholders, and included the following steps:





Careful consideration of the institution’s mission and core competencies
Review of student learning outcomes and measures of student and stakeholder
satisfaction
Analysis of the quality of institutional plans, goals, leadership practices,
programs, and services
Review of processes to deliver information and knowledge
Review of budget, financial, and market results
A number of unanticipated outcomes of the Baldrige meta-assessment included broadened
faculty, staff, and student participation in organizational review and strategic planning, and a
proactive and constructive response to demands for increased assessment. In May 2011, ECU
submitted the Application for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and received the
Baldrige Feedback Report in November, 2011. In response to this report, a 2012 Project Charter
has been developed to address the “opportunities for improvement” outlined in the report.
IV. Ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation
processes
ECU has participated in a long history of ongoing strategic planning as outlined in the Brief
History of Strategic Planning at ECU, 2002-Present. In 2009, due in part to the global economic
decline, ECU’s Chancellor Steve Ballard appointed a University-Wide Strategic Planning
Committee, comprised of administrators, faculty, staff, students, and stakeholders, to “develop
a three-year plan to advance the mission and strategic directions of the institution, building
upon the previous work and accomplishments.” Of particular note are several key outcomes as
a result of this work. For example:



Response to receipt of new rules from UNC-GA on retention and graduation rates and
their use for enrollment increase enrollment funding. Data analysis identified highperforming freshmen as part of a group that came to and then relatively rapidly left
ECU. ECU’s response was thoughtful and data-driven, and resulted in the creation of
Foundations of Excellence (FoE) and a new and expanded ECU Honors College.
Proposal of a Bachelor of Science in University Studies that will be presented to UNC-GA
in fall, 2012.
Rapid implementation of an educational enhancement plan in the mathematics
department. The Department of Mathematics redesigned the delivery of Math
1065, College Algebra, based on data that was reviewed to address the need for
support for math courses with high student enrollment . This work has resulted
in the Fall 2012 opening of a new math lab.The Overview of Non-Academic
Assessment Planning and Reporting for 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2011-2012 provided
planning and evaluation guidelines for recent reporting years. Assessment reports
demonstrate institution-wide, integrated, and ongoing use of results in academic
programs, support services, and units supporting the institution’s research and service
7
mission as described in narratives for Comprehensive Standards 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.2, 3.3.1.3,
3.3.1.4, and 3.3.1.5.
Strategic Planning Process
The ECU Mission serves as the foundation for ECU’s ongoing, integrated strategic planning and
assessment process. The current processes, on a broad scale and working in teams, requires
that ECU conduct a situational analysis that includes data, information and feedback from
administrators, faculty, staff, students, and stakeholders regarding progress made towards the
current stated goals and to identify future opportunities for accomplishing the ECU Mission. The
feedback gathered is used to develop a series of broad goal statements and measurable
objectives. The current plan was approved by ECU’s Chancellor Steve Ballard in April, 2010 and is
entitled the ECU Strategic Action Plan, 2010-13.
ECU’s Strategic Action Plan, 2010-13 and the associated unit plans are posted and managed
online using TracDat, the institution’s assessment tracking system. TracDat’s functionality
allows the institution to define and align goals among all levels of the university to the five
strategic directions and ECU Mission. The process, managed by IPAR and overseen by the
Strategic Planning Committee, includes a semi-annual review of results and annual quality
enhancement plans as outlined in the Memo from the Provost, Strategic Planning Guidelines for
2011 and Mid-Year Meetings, June 1, 2011. Examples of strategic plans include those of the
Division of Academic Affairs, Division of University Advancement, the College of Nursing, the
College of Business, and Academic Library Services - Joyner Library.
Four primary groups provide support to the ECU ongoing strategic planning process.
1. The Chancellor’s Executive Council is the key leadership group, aligning planning
with resource allocation and deploying agreed-on action plans.
2. The Strategic Planning Committee, which consists of administrators, faculty,
staff, student, and stakeholder representatives, is responsible for maintaining
viable mission, vision, and values statements and long-term goals. The group
also develops strategic objectives under each goal area, aligns performance
measures to objectives, and monitors the implementation of action plans.
3. IPAR provides administrative support for strategic planning and assessment and
provides the institutional data and information to inform and drive the ongoing,
research-based strategic planning processes.
4. Financial Services, located in the Division of Finance and Administration,
includes the functions of fiscal analysis, annual operating budget, and capital
budget development. Working collaboratively, this combination of functions has
strengthened the use of data in planning and decision making, aligned resources
with strategic objectives and their accompanying action plans, and supported
the process to measure university performance against key performance
indicators.
On an ongoing basis, the university's website has featured regular updates on activities across
campus that supported each goal of the plan. Also, in his annual State of the University address,
ECU Chancellor Steve Ballard highlights each year's strategic achievements, and refocuses
attention and reprioritized resources, as needed, as the university prepares for the coming year.
8
With the development of the ECU Strategic Action Plan, 2010-2013, IPAR introduced the East
Carolina University Annual Report 2010-2011 which outlines key accomplishments and quality
enhancement efforts underway in response to the assessment of results. The report is delivered
to senior administration for use in decision-making and resource allocation and is made
available online.
V. Selected Examples of Research-Based Systematic Review and Use of Data and Information
Converting strategic objectives into action plans, establishing goals relative to benchmarks, and
measuring the success of strategic plans through the ongoing monitoring of data and
information are important aspects of ECU’s process of institutional effectiveness. ECU’s process
of institutional effectiveness is demonstrated by the University Dashboard (a primary
mechanism used by ECU to summarize and distribute information). This work is supported and
enhanced through multiple research efforts including (but not limited to) the development of
both recurring and ad hoc data reports; selected examples of the use of data in areas of student
retention and graduation, the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), and ECU’s
Program Prioritization process.
Selected examples of the research-based systematic review and use of data and information to
ensure continuous improvement are outlined below and described the next section of the
document:
 The University Dashboard
 Student Retention and Graduation
 National Survey of Student Engagement
 Program Prioritization
 Faculty Salary Practices
 University of North Carolina EPA Salary Resolution
 The Delaware Study
 Student Satisfaction with Online Learning
 Title III Grant – Strengthening Institutions Program
The University Dashboard
In 2010, at the request of the Strategic Planning Committee, IPAR and Information and
Technology Computer Services (ITCS) began work to develop an interactive web interface to
enhance the institution’s ability to monitor progress towards accomplishing the five strategic
directions and the ECU Mission. The resultant work is the University Dashboard that includes a
series of institutional level performance measures outlined in Table 1, ECU: Example Measures
from the University Dashboard, below. These measures were developed by stakeholders
following the development of the 2010-13 Strategic Action Plan.
Table 1. ECU: Example Measures from the University Dashboard
9
ECU Mission and Strategic
Directions
Example Measures
Education for a New Century




Graduation Rates
Retention Rates
Nationally Standardized Tests
Transfer-Completion Rates (for community
college students)
The Leadership University


Faculty Productivity
The Chancellor’s Leadership Academy (Faculty
and Non-Faculty EPA)
The Chancellor’s Leadership Academy (Staff)
Grants and Contracts Awarded
Awards per Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Faculty
Profile of Undergraduate Student Population
(Health)
Profile of Faculty (Health)
Licensure Exam Pass Rates
ECU Graduates in the State and National
Workforce
Degrees Granted in Programs that Target HighNeed Areas
Tickets sold (per event)
External Funding for Public Service (Arts)
Total External Research Grants and Contracts
Awarded and Expenditures
F & A Production
Sponsored Program Awards Received per FullTime Equivalent (FTE) Faculty
Students Performing Service to the Community
Faculty Service to the Community
Undergraduate Enrollment
Graduate Enrollment
Four-year Graduation Rates
Six-year Graduation Rates
First-time, Full-time Freshmen Retention Rates
Full-time Faculty
Health, Health Care, and Medical
Innovation
Economic Prosperity in the East








Art, Culture, and Quality of Life
Research





Public Service
Diversity








The University Dashboard and key data are available on the IPAR website. The measures
selected provide a robust and accurate way to monitor patterns of change and access to realtime data to make decisions in a timely manner regarding strategic planning and resource
allocation.
10
Student Retention and Graduation
IPAR tracks and publishes reports on student retention and graduation rate data that is
disaggregated and used across the institution for planning and assessment purposes. Data has
been used to track Retention and Four-Year and Six-Year Graduation Rates by Ethnicity. Findings
indicate that, while African-American males return to campus for their sophomore year, the
four-year and six-year completion rates for this population are too low. In response, ECU is
conducting an action research project, outlined in the African-American Male Retention Project
Charter and Executive Summary that includes a comprehensive review and analysis of ECU’s
academic and support services programs. The goal of this ongoing analysis is to catalogue the
academic and social support services and benchmark them against similar programs designed to
support student success. The recommendations are being used to attain and exceed the
benchmarks for retention and graduation detailed in the UNC Accountability Plan and
Performance Measures, Phase 1: Proposed Performance Measures .
The use of this data is critical to improving student retention and graduation rates and has been
disaggregated and continues to be used to drive several planning processes. Examples of how
university stakeholders have used retention and completion and rate data and information to
improve student achievement are provided below:
 The Provost appointed a Retention Committee in spring 2012 with an initial charge of
reviewing student support programs and policies.
 More than 150 administrators, faculty, staff, students, and stakeholders are engaged in
the African-American Male Success Project, mentioned earlier, to establish core
measures for monitoring the key processes that students must participate in during the
continuum of the first-year experience.
 The Pirate Tutoring Center has been established to provide additional student support.
The center currently serves 5,000 students per year with over 300 volunteer peer tutors.
Research indicates that those active tutees who take three or more tutoring sessions
receive higher grades in tutored courses.
 The investment in an academic early warning and connect system embraced by faculty
and staff resulted in almost 60,000 flag notifications sent to students during the
inaugural 2011-2012 implementation. As outlined in the Starfish Retention Solutions
Implementation and Assessment January 2012 Report, 95% of students who received a
“kudos” notification indicated that it was motivational to receive recognition from the
professor, and 85% of students who received an academic warning notification “took
action” (changed study habits, talked to a professor or advisor, and sought tutoring).
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
When used in combination with other assessment tools, NSSE provides information regarding
undergraduate cohorts and is used to facilitate conversations between faculty, students, and
administrators about activities and environments conducive to student learning. As indicated in
the NSSE Results by Domain and Year Relating to Institutional Effectiveness (SACS Principle 2.5)
table, the means of ECU first-year and senior students’ ratings are higher than mean ratings for
both our Southeast public and Carnegie Classification peers in response to three questions
related to institutional effectiveness:
11
1. Overall, how would you evaluate the quality of academic advising you
have received at your institution?
2. How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this
institution?
3. If you could start over, would you go to the same institution you are now
attending?
In comparison to 2005, ECU’s 2012 NSSE results show a positive trend for the questions related
to institutional effectiveness. This is true for both the first year and senior students.
In addition, as shown on NSSE Results by Domain and Year Related to Academic/Student Support
Services table, ECU first-year and senior students’ mean ratings exceed the mean ratings for both
our Southeast public and Carnegie Classification peers in response to “provides the support you
need to help you succeed academically.” [Note: ECU now administers NSSE every three years].
Specific uses of NSSE results are included in compliance narratives for 2.8, 3.4.9, 3.3.1.1, 3.3.1.3,
and 3.3.1.5.
Program Prioritization
In mid-February, 2011 and due in part to the budget crisis, Chancellor Ballard charged the
Educational Policies and Planning Committee(EPPC) to develop two preliminary reports, with
separate, but interrelated objectives: 1) define criteria for potential prioritization of programs,
departments, units, schools, and colleges; and. 2) develop a list of potential consolidation
options of colleges, schools, and/or departments that may reduce administrative costs with
minimal or no losses of faculty and staff positions. Chancellor Ballard also emphasized to the
EPPC that his intent was to avoid implementing consolidation procedures unless absolutely
necessary.
Subsequently, the Program Prioritization Committee (PPC) was appointed by the Chancellor in
April, 2011 with very broad structural representation, including six faculty members. The PPC’s
first objective was to refine the EPPC’s prioritization framework by considering important
feedback from the campus community and to develop an inclusive and transparent prioritization
process as we moved forward in prioritizing our academic programming. Departments, schools,
and colleges were directly involved in prioritizing their own programs as we considered
alternative futures. The PPC developed several investment/reorganization scenarios and
encouraged campus-wide conversation as we assessed the academic effectiveness and financial
efficiencies associated with varied reorganization options. Because academic programs are the
heart of the university and provide its building blocks, program prioritization was the first order
of PPC business. Only after priorities were established could the building blocks be assembled
into appropriate structures for campus consideration. As a result, the PPC provided final
recommendations on program priorities on January 16, 2012 and a recommendation on
potential academic reorganization on April 30, 2012.
As part of this PPC process, a meta-analysis of data has been conducted of all ECU programs.
The process examined the current status of educational offerings, assessed the future potential
12
of those programs, and identified opportunities for program alignment and reinvestment to
strengthen the university.
The Phase I and Phase II Recommendations Report, April 30, 2012 revealed potential tangible
and quantifiable methods for prioritizing academic areas, and presented potential consolidation
scenarios that result in administrative cost savings while protecting faculty/staff positions as
well as the academic core of the university. Program prioritization will enable ECU to take
control of its resources and direction, ensure quality, and chart its future. Vice Chancellors in the
academic divisions (Academic Affairs, Health Sciences, Research and Graduate Studies) are
currently (AY 2012-13) implementing many of these recommendations. For example, some
departments are being down-sized, merger of several is underway, centers and institutes are
being moved into appropriate academic homes, two library systems are being more carefully
integrated, and colleges are developing plans to reduce administrative costs by at least one
million dollars through reorganization and centralization of some services.
Faculty Salary Practices
Annually, IPAR provides the Faculty Senate with a salary study in compliance with Faculty Senate
Resolution Number 05-35. The ECU Faculty Salary Reports benchmark ECU faculty salary data
against College and University Professional Association for Human Resource (CUPA-HR) and
American Association of University Professors (AAUP) salary data.
A Chancellor-appointed committee meets to compare ECU’s salary structure with its peers and
public PhD granting universities to determine which, if any, departments have significant salary
imbalances as demonstrated by highly compressed, inverted, or depressed salaries. In response
to findings, the committee then meets with appropriate deans to address the origins of salary
imbalances. The committee reports annually to the Faculty Senate on progress in mitigating
salary imbalances.
University of North Carolina EPA Salary Resolution
In July 2003, the University of North Carolina (UNC) Exempt from State Personnel Act (EPA)
Salary Resolution designated the that salary ranges for selected administrative positions be
calculated using CUPA-HR salary data from the University’s peer institutions, as identified by the
BOG. Annually IPAR provides the Chancellor and senior administrators a salary study of the
Chancellor’s direct reports, EPA staff, academic deans, and other positions for which the
university must report salary information to UNC-GA as part of its management flexibility
provision. Average and median salaries for the UNC institutions, all public research and doctoral
institutions, and Carnegie Classification doctoral/research university institutions are included.
The Delaware Study
Used by the constituent institutions that comprise The University of North Carolina, this report
provides a comparative analysis of faculty teaching loads, direct instructional cost, and
separately budgeted scholarly activity and is used for management and policy decision-making.
The Faculty Teaching Workload Report is required by the UNC BOG to monitor teaching
workloads as required by statute House Bill 229, Section 15.9 entitled, Rewarding Faculty
Teaching. UNC-GA uses Delaware data for numerous reports and monitoring mechanisms. The
13
Faculty Workload Advisory Group Report to the Board of Governors, April 13, 2012, is a recent
example of the use of data to review existing faculty workload policies, data collection systems,
and campus- based processes for monitoring workload expectations.
Student Satisfaction with Online Learning
In 2005, ECU participated in the Noel-Levitz Priorities Survey for Online Learners to assess the
satisfaction and priorities of students in distance learning and online programs. This research
helped ECU examine student transactions with all major aspects of their experience, including
academic registration and customer service. Satisfaction with an institution included a
combination of academic factors as well as areas related to other campus services. These
include student interaction with faculty as well as the service students receive from staff and
administrators; the resources provided to students; policies that are in place; and students’
overall feelings about the value of the total educational experience. Satisfaction assessment was
refined by capturing students’ levels of importance (or expectations). Importance ratings
provide institutions with valuable data on the areas that matter most to students.
As shown in the Institutional Summary Priorities Report, in each of the five categories surveyed,
ECU exceeded the national norms. However, one of the benchmarks in which ECU scored lower
than the national norms was: “Registration for online courses is convenient.” In fall 2007, ECU
completed the Banner Student implementation allowing all ECU students to register
conveniently online.
Extensive analysis of student satisfaction with online learning is included in 3.13.4a Policy
Compliance: Distance Education.
Title III Grant – Strengthening Institutions Program
Recent evidence that ECU has developed, enhanced, and is using a systematic and institutionwide, research-based planning and evaluation process to guide decision-making towards
fulfilling its mission came in spring 2012 from the US Department of Education. In 2010, ECU
secured a five-year, $2million Title III Strengthening Institutions Grant “to expand ECU’s capacity
to serve our students by improving and strengthening academic quality, institutional
management, and fiscal stability (institutional effectiveness).” This grant supports projects and
initiatives in four main areas: 1) student learning outcomes assessment; 2) the use of data and
information to inform and guide key planning decisions; 3) assessment of and support for
student retention and graduation; and, 4) campus space planning. The US Department of
Education is heralding ECU’s work nationally as a “best practice” in institutional effectiveness.
Highlights of the work underway are outlined in the April 16, 2012, Title III Strengthening
Institutions Grant, Welcome Conference PowerPoint.
Conclusion
Building off our enterprise model, each of the six university divisions, all of the 13 colleges, and
other major ECU administrative units have developed strategic plans that align with the goals
set forth in the 2010-2013 Strategic Action Plan. Academic Programs have defined plans for
authentic assessment of student learning driven by the ECU mission statement, linked to our
14
University Strategic Plan and Strategic Action Plan. These plans, outcomes and use of results are
also stored in our university data warehouse. The warehouse allows us to report and
demonstrate results towards accomplishment of the institutional mission. These results are
documented and progress monitored on a semi-annual basis. The specific purposes of the
process are to:
1. Optimize the student experience
2. Encourage and facilitate development of operational plans that will drive each program
to improve and advance so that programs will be at the forefront of their disciplines in
five years;
3. Tie program priorities to the budgeting process at ECU; and
4. Maintain an integrated planning and evaluation process by drawing explicit links
between the two areas and resource allocation.
In summary, through integrated strategic, academic, financial, master, and space planning, East
Carolina University engages in ongoing and institution-wide research-based planning and
evaluation processes. As documented in this narrative, these processes (1) incorporate a
systematic review of ECU’s mission, goals, and outcomes; (2) result in continuing improvement
in institutional quality; and (3) demonstrate that East Carolina University is effectively
accomplishing its mission.
Documentation
Reference Title
2008-09 Overview of
Assessment Reporting
Location
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/3.3.1.1/
3.3.1.1%20Overview-of-Assessment-Reporting-for-2008.pdf
2009-10 Overview of
Assessment Reporting
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ove
rview%20of%20Assessment%20Reporting%20for%202009-10.pdf
2010-11 Overview of
Assessment Reporting
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ove
rview%20of%20Academic%20Assessment%20Reporting%20for%2020
10-11.pdf
2011-12 Overview of
Assessment Reporting
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ove
rview%20of%20Academic%20Assessment%20Reporting%20for%2020
11-12.pdf
2012 Project Charter
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/201
2%20Charter%20for%20Performance%20Excellence.pdf
Academic Directions and
Funding Priorities
Academic Library Services Joyner Library
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Aca
demicDirectionsandFundingPriorities.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Joyn
er.pdf
15
Academic Program Review
SharePoint Site
African-American Male
Retention Project Charter
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/Shared%
20Resources/Academic%20Program%20Review%20Sharepoint%20Sit
e/Academic%20Program%20Review%20Sharepoint%20Site.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/AA%
20Male%20Retention%20Project%20Charter%20v6.pdf
Application for the Malcolm
Baldrige National Quality
Award
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Bald
rige2011%20Application.pdf
Approved by the ECU Board of
Trustees
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/BOT
MissionStatement11-21-08.pdf#page=7
Awards per FTE
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/3.1.
2.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Univ
ersity%20Studies%20Degree.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Bald
rigeAdoption.pdf
Bachelor of Science in
University Studies
Baldrige Education Criteria for
Excellence
Baldrige Educational Criteria
meet ECU Tomorrow and the
SACS
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Bald
rigeMap.pdf
Board of Governors
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/BOG
MissionApproval.pdf#page=5
Brief History of Strategic
Planning at ECU, 2002-Present
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
%20History%20of%20Planning%202002%20to%20Present.pdf
Business
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/COB
accredletter.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
%20NSSE%202012%20Carnegie%20Class.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/2.1.
5.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/2.1.
6.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Com
municationPlan.pdf
Carnegie Classification
Chancellor’s Leadership
Academy - Faculty
Chancellor’s Leadership
Academy - Staff
Communication Plan
Comprehensive Standard 3.1.1
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.1.1.docx
Comprehensive Standard
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
16
3.11.3
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.11.3.docx
Comprehensive Standard
3.3.1.1
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/Comprehensive%20Standard%203.3.1.1.docx
Comprehensive Standard
3.3.1.2
Comprehensive Standard
3.3.1.3
Comprehensive Standard
3.3.1.4
Comprehensive Standard
3.3.1.5
Comprehensive Standard 3.4.9
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.3.1.2.docx
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.3.1.3.doc
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.3.1.4.docx
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.3.1.5.docx
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.4.9.docx
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/ComprehensiveStandard3.5.1.docx
Comprehensive Standard 3.5.1
Construction Management
Core Requirement 2.11.1
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Con
strutionmanagemtaccredletter.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/CoreRequirement2.11.1.docx
Core Requirement 2.11.2
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/CoreRequirement2.11.2.docx
Core Requirement 2.4
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/CoreRequirement2.4.docx
Core Requirement 2.7.2
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/CoreRequirement2.7.2.docx
Core Requirement 2.8
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/Compliance%20Readiness%20Coun
cil%20Reports/CoreRequirement2.8.docx
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
%20News%20Feature%20-%20Building%20Experience.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/4.1.
6.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Aca
demicAffairs.pdf
Croatan
Degrees Granted in Programs
that Target High Need Areas
Division of Academic Affairs
Division of University
Advancement
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Univ
ersityAdvancement.pdf
East Carolina University Annual
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
AnnualReportforStrategicPlanning2010-2011.pdf
17
Report 2010-2011
East Carolina University
Program Accreditation Cycle
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Accr
editation%20Cycle%207-24-12.pdf
ECU Budget Planning Process
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.11.1/E
CU%20Budget%20Planning%20Process.docx
ECU Faculty Salary Reports
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/IPAR
%20-%20Research%20-%20Faculty%20Salary%20Reports.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/IPAR
%20-%20Research%20-%20Faculty%20Salary%20Reports.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/4.1.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Hon
ors%20College.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
%20Mission%20Statement.pdf
ECU Faculty Salary Reports
ECU Graduates in the State and
National Workforce
ECU Honors College
ECU Mission
ECU Model of Institutional
Effectiveness
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Fra
mework%20for%20Institutional%20Effectiveness.pdf
ECU Strategic Action Plan,
2010-13
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Stra
tegic%20Action%20Plan%202010-2013.pdf
ECU Strategic Planning Process
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
StrategicPlanningProcess2009.pdf#page=2
ECU: Examples of Key
Accomplishments Toward the
ECU Mission
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exa
mplesofAccomplishmentstowardstheECUMission.pdf
ECU’s Framework for
Institutional Effectiveness
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Fra
mework%20for%20Institutional%20Effectiveness.pdf
ECU’s Program Prioritization
Process
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Prog
ramPrioritization.PDF
Engineering
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Engi
neeringaccredletter.pdf
Examples of Resource
Allocation Based on Planning
Processes, 2010-11
Executive Committee of the
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exa
mples%20of%20Resource%20Allocation%20Based%20on%20Planning
%20Processes%202010-11.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exec
18
Strategic Planning Committee
utiive%20Committee%20of%20the%20Strategic%20Planning%20Com
mittee.pdf
Executive Committee of the
Strategic Planning Committee
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exec
utiive%20Committee%20of%20the%20Strategic%20Planning%20Com
mittee.pdf
Executive Summary
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exec
utive%20Summary%20-%20v7.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exec
utive%20Summary%20of%20the%20Report%20on%20Globalization%
20-%20Oct122012.pdf
Executive Summary of the
Report on Globalization in
response to UNC-Tomorrow
Prepared: October 12, 2010
External Funding for Public
Service
F & A Production
Faculty Senate Resolution
Number 05-35
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/5.1.
9.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/6.1.
3.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/2.1.
2.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/FS%
20Resolution%2005-35.pdf
Faculty Service to the
Community
Faculty Teaching Workload
Report
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/7.1.
5.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Facu
lty%20Teaching%20Workload%20Report.pdf
Faculty Workload Advisory
Group Report to the Board of
Governors, April 13, 2012
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Facu
ltyWorkloadAdvisoryGroupReport.pdf
Family Medicine and Monk
Geriatric Center
First Time, Full Time Freshman
Retention Rates
Foundations of Excellence (FoE)
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.11.2/F
amilyMedicine.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/8.3.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/FoE.
pdf#page=2
Four-year Graduation Rates
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/8.2.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/8.5.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Mas
ter%20Plan.pdf#page=98
Faculty Productivity
Full-Time Faculty
future building opportunities
Graduate Enrollment
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/8.1.
19
Graduation Rates
Grants and Contracts Awarded
House Bill 229, Section 15.9
Institutional Assessment
website
2.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/1.3.
2.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/3.1.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/HB2
29.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/IPAR
Assessmentwebpage.PDF
Institutional Summary Priorities
Report
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Noel
%20Levitz%20Institutional%20Summary%20Priorities08012012112751.pdf
Licensure Examinations
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/4.1/1.7.
1.pdf
Licensure Exam Pass Rate
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/3.1.
11.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Mas
ter%20Plan.pdf
Master Plan
Math 1065, Course Algebra
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/MAT
H1065.pdf
Math Lab
National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE)
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Mat
hLab.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/1.1.
5.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/NSS
E.PDF
North Carolina General Statute
116-11
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/NCG
eneralStatute116-11.PDF#page=5
November 13, 2009 Board of
Governor’s meeting minutes
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
%20BOG.PDF
NSSE Results by Domain and
Year Related to
Academic/Student Support
Services
NSSE Results by Domain and
Year Related to Institutional
Effectiveness (SACS Principle
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/NSS
EbySACSprinc-3-3-1-3-(2012).pdf
Nationally Standardized Tests
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/NSS
EbySACSprinc-2-5-(2012).pdf
20
2.5)
Nursing
Office of Academic Program
Planning and Development
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Nurs
ingaccredletter.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Offic
eofAcademicProgramPlanningandDevelopment.PDF
Office of Institutional Planning,
Assessment and Research
(IPAR)
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/IPAR
website.PDF
Ongoing and integrated
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ong
oingandIntegrated.pdf
Organization of the Process
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
StrategicPlanningProcess2009.pdf#page=11
Overview of Non-Academic
Assessment Planning and
Reporting for 2009-2010
Overview of Non-Academic
Assessment Planning and
Reporting for 2010-2011
Overview of Non-Academic
Assessment Planning and
Reporting for 2011-2012
overview of the master
planning process
Phase I and Phase II
Recommendations Report,
April 30, 2012
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ove
rview%20of%20NonAcademic%20Assessment%20Reporting%20for%202009-10.doc
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ove
rview%20of%20NonAcademic%20Assessment%20Reporting%20for%202010-11.doc
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ove
rview%20of%20NonAcademic%20Assessment%20Reporting%20for%202011-12.doc
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Mas
ter%20Plan.pdf#page=16
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/PPC
_PhaseIandII_04272012.pdf
Phase I Report, May 1, 2008
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
%20Tomorrow%20Response%20Phase%201.pdf
Phase II Report, December 8,
2008
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
TomorrowResponsePhase2.pdf
Phase II sub-committee
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/200
8MissionReviewCommittee.pdf
Physical Therapy
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Ptac
credletter.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/PAa
ccredletter.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/PTC.
Physician Assistant
Pirate Tutoring Center
21
Planning Principles
Points East
Previous Master Plans
Procedures for Unit Academic
Program Review
Profile of Faculty (Health)
Profile of Undergraduate
Student Population
Program Review Guidelines for
Administrative and Support
Units
Report on Globalization,
October 12, 2010
pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Guid
ingPrinciples.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Poin
tsEastFinal.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Univ
ersityMaster%20PlanWebsite-PreviousPlans.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.7.2/U
NIT-ACADEMIC-PROGRAM-REVIEW-6-10-2.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/3.1.
7.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/3.1.
6.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Non
-Academic%20Program%20Review%20Procedures.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exec
utive%20Summary%20of%20the%20Report%20on%20Globalization%
20-%20Oct122012.pdf
Reporting Schedule for 6/1/11
through 6/30/12
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Exte
rnalReportingRequirements.pdf
Retention and Four-Year and
Six-Year Graduation Rates by
Ethnicity
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Rete
ntion%20Graphs.pdf
Retention Rates
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/1.4.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Miss
ionStatementReview.pdf#page=14
Review Their Mission
Statements
Salary Study
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Sala
ry%20Study.pdf
School of Dental Medicine
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.11.2/S
chDentalMed.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/cons
truction.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
StrategicPlanningProcess2009.pdf#page=2
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/8.2.
Scott Residence Hall
Situational analysis
Six-year Graduation Rates
22
Social Work
Southeast Public
Sponsored Programs Awarded
per FTE
Starfish Retention Solutions
Implementation and
Assessment January 2012
Report
2.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Soci
alWorkAccredletter.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/ECU
%20NSSE%202012%20Southeast%20Public.pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/6.1.
2.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Starf
ish.pdf
State of the University address
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Cha
ncellors%20SOUApr42012.pdf
Strategic Action Plan
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.11.1/E
CU%20SAP.pdf
Strategic Action Plan 2010-13
College of Business
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/COB
.pdf
Strategic Action Plan 2010-13
College of Nursing
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/CON
SAP.pdf
Strategic Planning Committee
Meeting Minutes, September
15, 2011
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/SAP
%20Committee%20Mission%20Review%209-15-11.pdf#page=3
Strategic Planning Guidelines
for 2011 and Mid-Year
Meetings, June 1, 2011
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Stra
tegic%20Planning%20Guidelines%20for%202011_06_01_11%20(5).pd
f
Students Performing Service to
the Community
The need for support for math
courses with high student
enrollment
The University of North
Carolina A Profile Based on
Trend and Accountability Data
Dec 2011
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/7.1.
3.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Sup
port%20for%20students%20in%20high%20enrollment%20courses.do
c
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
%20Profile%20Key%20Trend%20and%20Accountability%20Report%2
02011.pdf
Tickets Sold
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/5.1.
7.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Title
Title III Strengthening
23
Institutions Grant
IIIAbstract.pdf
Title III Strengthening
Institutions Grant, Welcome
Conference
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Title
%20III%20Welcome%20Conference%20April%2016%202012.pdf
Total External Research Grants
and Contracts Awarded and
Expenditures
Transfer Completion Rates
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/6.1.
1.PDF
UNC Accountability Plan and
Performance Measures, Phase
1: Proposed Performance
Measures
UNC Institutional Research and
Analysis webpage
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/1.3.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/4.1/Prop
osed%20Core%20and%20Campus%20Specific%20Performance%20M
easures%20(Goals).pdf
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
InstitutionalResearchandAnalysis.PDF
UNC Policy 400.2.2
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
Policy400.2.2.pdf
UNC Tomorrow
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/UNC
%20Tomorrow.pdf
Undergraduate Enrollment
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/8.1.
1.PDF
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/4.1/Univ
ersity%20Dashboard.png
University Dashboard
University of North Carolina
(UNC) Exempt from State
Personnel Act (EPA) Salary
Resolution
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Emp
loyees%20Exempt%20From%20the%20State%20Personnel%20Act.pd
f
University of North Carolina
Budget Process
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.11.1/U
NC%20BUDGET%20PROCESS.pdf
University – Wide Strategic
Planning Committee
https://collab.ecu.edu/cmte/sacs/CorrespondingDocuments/2.5/Univ
ersity%20Strategic%20Planning%20Committee.pdf
24