Transcript Reporting Standards in Performance Auditing

Preparing for SACS
“Where Do We Go From Here?”
Presentation at
Southern University at New Orleans
September 28, 2006
Shanna Estay Little
Coordinator for Accreditation & Program Review
Southern University System
1
SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Self Regulation”
Philosophy
(1) Self-Regulation through Accreditation Embodies a Traditional U.S.
Philosophy That a Free People Can and Ought to Govern Themselves
Through a Representative, Flexible, and Responsive System.
(2) Emphasizing Processes and Resulting Outcomes, Accreditation
Relies on Integrity, Thoughtful and Principled Judgment, Rigorous
Application of Requirements, and a Context of Trust.
2
SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Self Regulation”
Philosophy
(3) Based on Reasoned Judgment, the Process Stimulates Evaluation and
Improvement, While Providing a Means of Continuing Accountability to
Constituents and the Public.
(4) The COC Expects Institutions to Dedicate Themselves to Enhancing the
Quality of the Programs & Services Within The Context of Their Mission,
Resources, and Capacities, and to Create an Environment in Which
Teaching, Public Service, Research and Learning Occur.
3
Principles of Accreditation
“Foundations for Quality Enhancement”
Criteria for Accreditation
Principles & Philosophy of Accreditation
Core Requirements (12)
Comprehensive Standards (53)
Federal Mandates (8)
4
Principles of Accreditation
“Foundations for Quality Enhancement”
Criteria for Accreditation
Core Requirements: Establishes “Entry” Level Requirements For an
Institution Seeking Continued Accreditation. Institutions Must Demonstrate
Compliance With all Twelve Requirements.
Core Requirement 12: The Institution Has Developed an Acceptable
Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) and Demonstrates The Plan Is Part of
An Ongoing Planning and Evaluation Process.
5
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
The Principles of Accreditation attests to the
commitment of the Commission on Colleges to:
•the enhancement of the quality of higher
education
•the proposition that student learning is at the
heart of the mission of all institutions of
higher learning
6
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”

The Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) is a
component of the accreditation process
that reflects and affirms both of these
commitments. Developing a QEP as part
of the reaffirmation process is an
opportunity and an impetus for an
institution to enhance overall institutional
quality and effectiveness by focusing on
an issue or issues the institution
considers important to improving student
learning.
7
Principles of Accreditation
“Foundations for Quality Enhancement”
The Quality Enhancement Plan
The Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) is a Carefully designed and
Focused Course of Action Designed to Improve Student Learning
Quality and Institutional Credibility. The Plan Must be Implemented
Over a Time Period and Demonstrating The Following:
- Planning
- Implementation
- Evaluation
- Recommendations
- Reporting
- Communication
- Inclusiveness
- Collaborations
8
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
•The QEP describes a carefully designed and focused
course of action that addresses a well-defined topic or
issue(s) directly related to enhancing student learning.
•Student learning is defined broadly in the context of the
QEP and may address a wide range of topics or issues but,
in all cases, the goals and evaluation strategies need to be
clearly and directly linked to improving the quality of
student learning.
•In order to ensure that the QEP is implemented, the
institution integrates it into its ongoing planning and
evaluation process.
9
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
At the time of the on-site review, the Commission
expects an institution to have in place all components
that are characteristic to any workable plan:
1.a focused topic (directly related to student learning)
2.clear goals
3.adequate resources in place to implement the plan
4.evaluation strategies for determining the achievement of
goals
5.evidence of community development and support of the
plan
10
Principles of Accreditation
“Foundations for Quality Enhancement”
SACS Deliverables
Compliance Certification – Documents SUNO’s Response to
- Core Requirements (11)
- Comprehensive Standards (53)
- Federal Mandates (8)
Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) – Documents SUNO’s Response
to Core Requirement 12
11
Principles of Accreditation
“Foundations for Quality Enhancement”

Paradigm For QEP Development
• Environmental Scan
• Assessment of Student Learning
• Definition of Product
• Core Values
• Value Added
• Action for Change (Quality Emphasis)
12
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Institutional Effectiveness”

Strategic Planning / Vision 2020: Vibrant Balanced Economy
With a Well-Educated Workforce & Improved Life Quality.

Institutional Operational Plans: Establish Annual
Performance Targets and Reporting Strategic Goal Attainment
Activities.

Institutional Effectiveness Plans: Establish Annual
Performance Targets For Organizational Units

SACS/QEP(s): Linking Institutional Units Into the Strategic
Planning/Reporting & Reaffirmation Process.

Performance Budgeting: Cost Maximization & Resource
Utilization. Emphasis: Cost Avoidance, Cost Liabilities & Cost
Effectiveness.
13
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Establishing Accountability”

Five Levels of Accountability
1. Policy Accountability
Selection of policies pursued/rejected.
2. Program Accountability
Goal achievement.
3. Performance Accountability
Efficient operations.
4. Process Accountability
Using adequate process, procedures,
or measures in performing actions
required.
5. Probity/Legal Accountability
Spending funds in accordance
with approved budget and
legal requirements.
14
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Data Driven Assessments”









Core Data Systems
Statewide Student Profile System (BOR)
IPEDS
Performance Based Budget Planning & Reporting
Enhanced University Assessment Capability
Perception Based Surveys
Knowledge, Skills & Abilities ( Pedagogy)
Development of Core Indicators
Outcome Assessment
Quality of Academic Experience
Post Baccalaureate Specialization
Employment Earnings Evaluations
15
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Performance Reporting”

QEP Reporting: Performance/Process Accountability
Criteria:
Measure of service accomplishments
(output and outcome indicators)
Measures relating service efforts to service accomplishments
(efficiency and cost-outcome indicators)



Explanatory Information (Data Quality Measurements)
Relevance
Understandability
Comparability *
Timeliness
Consistency
Reliability
16
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
Embrace the QEP as an Opportunity to:
improve the educational experience of your students
reinvigorate faculty & staff
demonstrate that Administration, Academic Affairs, &
Student Affairs share common goals
demolish campus silos
strengthen partnerships with the community
create competitive applications for new funding
opportunities

17
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
Student Learning Outcomes
Student Learning Outcomes Reflect Changes in
Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, and/or Values Attributed to
the Collegiate Experience.
18
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
Cognitive Outcomes



Demonstrable acquisition of specific
knowledge and skill.
What do the student know that they didn’t
know before.
What can they do that they couldn’t do
before.
19
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”
Affective Outcomes






How has their college experience
impacted student’s
Values
Goals
Attitudes
Self-concepts
World views
20
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“Quality Enhancement Framework”



All outcomes measures should be linked to
the student’s college experience.
The outcome also should be measurable
How do you measure the Student learning
outcome?

DOCUMENTATION


Testing (State and/or interdepartmental).
Surveys or some fact finding instrument
21
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QEP Topic Selection”

Quality Enhancement Focus
• SLO Originating From IE Process
• Inclusiveness
• Topic Selection-Data Driven
• Organizational Buy In (Faculty/Stakeholders)
• Within Institutional Resource Capability
• Measurable Impact On Student Learning
22
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QEP Topic Selection”

Performance/Process Variables Affecting SLO
• Increase Licensure Pass Rates
• Improve Student Writing
• Enhance Course Relevancy
• Improve Parking
• Increase Salaries
• Shorten Registration Process
23
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QEP Topic Selection”

Indirect Relationship to SLO
• Improve Technology Access
• Enhance Library Holdings
• Enhance Faculty Advisement
• Increase Student Retention
• Increase Graduation Rates
• Increase Completer Earnings
24
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QEP Topic Selection”

Demonstrate Evidence
• Development of Enhancement Process
• Inclusiveness
• Topic Selection & Related Issues
• Generated Results
• Measurable Process Improvements
25
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QE Collaborative Model”
Review Area: Student Registration
1. Strategic Goal: Student Access/Enrollment
2. Review Context: Reporting Integrity
3. Program Area: Enrollment Mgt./Ac. Affairs
4. Benchmarks: Statewide Student Profile Sys.
5. Govt. Oversight: BOR,OPB,OLA & Federal
6. SACS Standards: 2.5, 2.11.1/3.10.1-3.10.5
26
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QE Collaborative Model”
Organizational Units: Problem Resolution
Assessment of Process Variables
Pre-Enrollment Trends
- Inter-organization Coordination
- Class Enrollment Trends
Financial Aid Eligibility
- Class Withdrawal/Acquisition
Optimal Class Purging
- Payment Verification Status
Advisor Certification
Mandated Student Census Lockdown
-14/7 Post SSPS Adjustments
Enrollment Management Policies/Procedures
-
27
SUS/SACS Paradigm for Accreditation
“ QE Collaborative Model”
Develop Quality Initiatives
1. Proactive Pre-Registration Initiatives
2. Strengthening IE Planning Process
3. Involvement of Internal Auditor
4. Enhancing Policies/Procedures
5. Continued Process Improvement
28
How Can We Achieve Reaffirmation ?

Communication

Cooperation

Trust

Mutual Respect
“A Willingness to Change”
29