Institutional Effectiveness Plan Evaluation Rubrics

Similar documents
Planning Unit Managers Training

Administrative Offices Assessment Reporting Rubric. Unit Name: Reporting Year:

PROGRAM MISSION STATEMENT

Raymore-Peculiar School District. Strategic Plan Executive Summary

Patrice Lancey, Ph.D Divya Bhati,Ph.D University of Central Florida

Performance Management

GPS GROWTH, PLANNING, & SUPPORT

The School District of Lee County Division of Operations

SMART Goals: A How to Guide

Evaluating Excellence A Guide for IABC Award Evaluators

OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT MANUAL

Back to Basics: Assessment 101 for Administrative and Educational Support Units. Presented by Office of University Assessment

HOW-TO GUIDE FOR IABC AWARDS

Tips and Tools for Writing a District LCAP

Functional Area Assessment FAQ

+ Purpose of assessment and use in candidate monitoring or decisions are consequential

Student Learning Outcomes Annual Report Process

Actionable enterprise architecture management

CAREER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM APPRAISAL GUIDE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION

Career Management System (CMS) Overview

New Zealand Aid Programme Results-Based Management Toolkit

Student Success Quantum Leap Proposal Evaluation Rubric

A conversation about the framework for performance excellence PERFORM LIKE A ROCK STAR!

Key Performance Indicators

THE MIDAS TOUCH INTRODUCTION... 3 QUESTION- BY- QUESTION GUIDE... 5 HOW TO PREPARE A WORK SAMPLE... 13

Skating to Where the Puck Will Be: The Questions You Must Answer to Get It Right (And How I ve Gotten It Wrong)

Guide to Writing SMART Objectives

SMART Goals Model. Specific. Measureable. Achievable. Relevant. Time-bound. Talent Management Learning Series 2

A Rubric for Assessing Public Impact LEGITIMACY ACTION POLICY. Applying the Public Impact Fundamentals to the real world

KRA Setting Guidelines

Management Plan Rubric for Priority Improvement and Turnaround Schools & Districts

Manage personal and professional development

Chapter 8: THE MARKETING PLAN. Chapter 11: Strategic Leadership

1/11/2017 GOAL SETTING WITH YOUR TEAM TEAM MEMBERS IN TODAY S WORLD WHY? PERSONAL AND GROUP

White Paper. Strategic Alignment

Written Marketing Plan Rubric

Education Liaison: The Performance Evaluation Process (PEP)

Appendix C Classified Employee Evaluation Form

Capturing The Value:

June Hospice Fundamentals All Rights Reserved 1. Avoiding the Top Ten Auditing & Monitoring Blunders. Plan for This Session

A Guide for Writing S.M.A.R.T. Goals

Performance-Based Planning & Programming: Self-Assessment

Building State Capacity and Productivity (BSCP) Center. November 2013

Syllabus Level 5 NVQ Diploma in Management

Making the Performance Evaluation Process Meaningful. Jen Rick Ryan Armsworthy James Kohan

The below rating scale is used to determine UW-Stevens Point competency proficiency.

proving value through data

The Synergistic Nature of PI Objectives

A Performance Scorecard for Parks and Recreation

Performance and Professional Growth Systems

Appendix C Classified Employee Evaluation Form Unit A CSEA Chapter 262

A Rubric for Achieving the Gold Standard

ESTABLISHING PERFORMANCE MEASURES. LA DOTD Quality and Continuous Improvement Program February 28, 2018

Indicators, Targets and Data Sources

Chapter 8. The Plan Objectives, Strategies & Tactics. A goal is not always meant to be reached, it often serves simply as something to aim at.

EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW GUIDELINES

EXPOSURE DRAFT SURVEY QUESTIONS

2011 Leadership, Collaboration, and Trust Research Report

Lean Healthcare Metrics Guide

DRAFT Criteria, Metrics, and Questions for the Academic Program Prioritization Process at PSU

Evidence-Based Management: Techniques and Strategies for Using Assessment for Achieving Overall Institutional Effectiveness

Ontario Municipal Human Resources Association Human Resources Strategic Planning Template Strategic Plan Example. Strategy 1

ISO High Level Standards (HSL)

How to write a logframe

Constructing the Outcome Statement. Dave Vance President, Manage Learning LLC. tdrp. Talent Development Reporting principles

2016 Technical Assistance Conference

Strategic Planning. Visioning. Strategic planning serves a variety of purposes in organisations, including to:

December Business and Finance Division Service Assessment Survey. Summary Report To Finance Division December 1, 2006

Combining L-SIP with Baldrige for PHL System Improvements

15 Tips for Improving Your Content Marketing Editorial Calendar

Predictive Customer-Focused Experience

CGEIT QAE ITEM DEVELOPMENT GUIDE

Key Performance Indicators. Where on earth do we start

Self-evaluation form Form 1: Research and innovation actions Innovation actions Form 2: Coordination & support actions

Employee Performance Management Process. Management Training Participant Workbook

FOCAL POINT AGREEMENTS : KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Bay District Schools

Bay District Schools

School Leadership Team Review Process Guide

CSU State Classified Performance Management. Presented by: Erik Hokanson Jeff Milton

SIG 1003(g) Successful Applications By Design. April 5, 2013

Effective Date: Rule 6A-5.066, F.A.C. Form EPI IAS Page

Gap Analysis: AQIP Systems Portfolio Review Team Areas to be addressed for the CQR Quality Highlights Report

Challenges and Options for RIS3 Monitoring Systems

Strategic Plan Implementation Workshop

Through these, as well as through our other products and services, EFQM aim to "Share What Works".

Program/Unit Assessment Basics. Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness

2017 Institutional Effectiveness Report OVERVIEW

Annual Self Performance Review

Preparing for. Your Performance Review. (A Staff Perspective)

BUILDING TRUST SAMPLE

TOD GUIDANCE DOCUMENT. Stakeholder Workshop

PARTNERING FOR RESULTS FY REVIEW PANEL APPLICATION EVALUATION TOOL. Reviewer: Date Review Completed

1 Introduction. 2 Program Evaluation Standard Statements. Int'l Conf. Frontiers in Education: CS and CE FECS'16 173

Embracing VOC to Improve the Customer Experience

Chapter 2: Setting Goals with Accountability

Show value by learning to align initiatives, collecting data, and demonstrating the impact on business results. HUMAN CAPITAL. 30 T+D September 2013

Program Management Office Effectiveness. The Key to Leading Reform Success. Meeting the Requirements of OMB Memorandum M-17-22

Transcription:

Institutional Effectiveness Plan Evaluation Rubrics January 2018

Institutional Effectiveness Plan (IEP) Evaluation Guidelines and Rubrics General Each component of the IEP is scored using a standard rubric. For a proposed IEP to be acceptable, the following must be true: A Mission Statement must be included for the planning unit. A minimum of three goals must be specified. For each goal: a) Desired outcomes must be clearly specified. b) Each outcome must align to a specific MCC Institutional Priority. c) Each outcome must align with at least one MCC Strategic Plan item. d) An appropriate measure is specified, along with a target value. Qualitative outcomes are acceptable if they are both measurable and align with the of the College. e) Findings are reported that document achievement of each outcome with primary data. Each finding must include steps that close the loop in an Action Plan: a) The actual outcome measure is included and documented. b) Specific and relevant findings are cited from the outcomes information. c) Sufficient analysis of the findings is completed to inform future actions and decision making. Criteria When evaluated using the standardized rubrics, each IEP component must yield a score 2 or better. Rubrics for each component follow. Our office will work with planning unit managers as needed to evaluate progress and provide feedback that encourages success. Application Rubrics are applied to IEPs during specific portions of the planning cycle, as follows: Planning Execution Phase of Cycle Rubrics Applied Mission Statement, Goals, Outcomes Specific Findings, Action Plans 1

Mission Statement Rubric The statement is a concise outline of the ultimate principles that guide the work of the unit, who the unit serves, in what ways the unit serves, and what results are achieved. 1. Clear and concise 2. Specific to the unit (differentiates the special function of the unit) 3. Addresses the larger impact of the unit 4. Identifies stakeholders 5. Aligns with district initiatives and (and HLC standards where appropriate) 1. Gives unit s purpose and who it serves 2. Aligns with district initiatives and 3. Identifies stakeholders 1. Gives unit s functions, but not greater purpose 2. Does not identify stakeholders 3. Fails to demonstrate clear alignment with district 4. Language fails to encapsulate the entire Goals Rubric Goals represent the intended results, expressed in general terms, which must be accomplished to fulfill the of the College. Each IEP must have at least three goals. 1. The intended results are clearly described, along with consideration of any collateral effects, positive or negative 2. The desired results are realistic given the resources of the operating unit 3. The goal aligns with the of the planning unit and College 4. Implications for the institution beyond the goal (where it could lead to) are explored or implied 1. Intended results are clearly evident 2. The desired results are realistic given the resources of the operating unit 3. The goal aligns with the of the planning unit and College 1. Describes something that s not a goal (such a measurement or outcome) 2. The goal is not realistic given the unit s available resources or resources haven t been considered. 3. The goal doesn t align with the of the College or planning unit 2

Outcomes Rubric Outcomes reflect the desired or target conditions that will result from executing a tactical activity. 1. Observable, measurable, feasible, time bound (SMART) 2. Reasonable number of outcomes identified, but not so many that measurement is impeded 3. Aligns with at least one Institutional Initiative and one Strategic Initiative or HLC criterion 4. Aligns with of planning unit 5. Target values readily discernable and related to institutional, unit and priorities 1. Observable, measurable, feasible, time bound (SMART) 2. Aligns with of planning unit 3. Aligns with district 4. Target values readily discernable 5. Aligns with at least one Institutional Initiative and one Strategic Plan item. 6. May need minor revisions to language 1. Describes something that s not an outcome (such a process, resource) in isolation. 2. SMART outcomes are not evident - - immeasurable, not feasible, etc. 3. Outcomes don t align with of unit or district (no alignment with District Initiatives or unit statement) 4. Incomplete target values not evident, measurements not stated, etc. Specific Findings Rubric Specific findings are a concise summary of results obtained by execution of a specific tactic. They must be evidence or data-based and well organized and give clear indication that targets were met, partially met, or not met. 1. Concise and well-organized 2. Provides solid evidence that targets were met, partially met, or not met 3. Compares new findings to past trends as appropriate 4. Supporting documentation (surveys, more complete reports, etc.) is included in the document repository. 5. Provides meaningful interpretation of results along with next steps for 1. Addresses achievement targets 2. Complete and organized 3. Appropriate instruments used for measurements 4. Aligns with language and methodology of the corresponding achievement target 1. Not clearly related to achievement targets 2. Appears to offer excuses for results rather than meaningful interpretation or next steps for 3. No findings, or too many (scattered/fragmented) findings to manage 4. Too general; lacks details (time, people, resources, outcomes, etc.) 3

Action Plans Rubric Action plans are steps to be taken to improve the unit or assessment process based on analysis of achieved outcomes. 1. Reflects an understanding of the implications of the IEP findings 2. Identifies a specific area that needs to be improved, monitored, remediated, or enhanced and defines logical next steps 3. Contains completion dates 4. Identifies resources and people needed, along with responsibilities 5. Number of action plans are manageable 1. Reflects on what was learned during the IEP cycle 2. At least one action plan in place per Goal 1. Not clearly related to findings 2. Plan appears to offer excuses for results rather than meaningful interpretation or next steps for unit 3. No action plans, or too many action plans to manage 4. Too general; lacks details (time, resources, people, etc.) 4