creating a comprehensive institutional measurement system

Creating a Comprehensive Institutional Measurement System

Richland College

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

1

Fonda Vera,Dean,Planning and Research For Institutional Effectiveness

Texas Association for Institutional ResearchMarch 1, 2007

Gloria Washington,Director,Institutional Effectiveness

Bao Huynh,Director,Institutional Research

Session Overview• Performance Excellence Model• Approaches• Deployment of Approaches• Results and Key Learnings• Integrating and Sharing Key Learnings

2

3

Performance Excellence Model

Deploy

Integrate

Approach

Learn

Richland CollegeCycles of Improvement

4

APPROACHES

5

Richland CollegeCycles of Improvement

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

AugustAugust- Update 5-year Strategic Plan and 1-year Operational Working Plan- Formalize QEP Focus for coming year

SeptemberSeptember- Board of Trustees formally adopts budget- Finalize KPIs, Measures, and Targets - Publish & implement updated Strategic & 1-year Operational Working Plans-Align Individual and Departmental Plans to updates-Deploy QEP Focus

October October –– NovemberNovember- EOY results received and analyzed- Operational plan modified based on EOY results

DecemberDecember- Publish official, updated 1-year

Operational Plan and EOY report

JanuaryJanuary- College/Departmental/Individuals update plans

based on official Operational Plan

February February -- MarchMarch- Mid-year Review

MayMay- Finalize and submit Operational

Plan/Budget Request for next cycle

June June -- JulyJuly- Board of Trustees budget work session- Staff Progress Discussions

April April - Begin Operational and Budget planning

for next cycle

Start Here

Green circles denote monthly KPI/QEP reviews

AugustAugust- Update 5-year Strategic Plan and 1-year Operational Working Plan- Formalize QEP Focus for coming year

SeptemberSeptember- Board of Trustees formally adopts budget- Finalize KPIs, Measures, and Targets - Publish & implement updated Strategic & 1-year Operational Working Plans-Align Individual and Departmental Plans to updates-Deploy QEP Focus

October October –– NovemberNovember- EOY results received and analyzed- Operational plan modified based on EOY results

DecemberDecember- Publish official, updated 1-year

Operational Plan and EOY report

JanuaryJanuary- College/Departmental/Individuals update plans

based on official Operational Plan

February February -- MarchMarch- Mid-year Review

MayMay- Finalize and submit Operational

Plan/Budget Request for next cycle

June June -- JulyJuly- Board of Trustees budget work session- Staff Progress Discussions

April April - Begin Operational and Budget planning

for next cycle

Start Here

Green circles denote monthly KPI/QEP reviews

Strategic Planning Process

6

7

Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

Alignment of Goals

8

Interpreting Data

9

1.1.1 Contact hours from dual credit and tech-prep2006-2007 Target

Range90% – 100%

207,000 – 230,000

2008-2009 Target Range

90% - 100%

360,000 – 400,000

2010-2011 Target Range

90% - 100%

450,000 – 500,000

10

Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

1.5.1 # of on-line contact hours2006-2007 Target

Range90% – 100%

1,071,000 – 1,190,000

2008-2009 Target Range

90% - 100%

1,178,100 – 1,309,000

2010-2011 Target Range

90% - 100%

1,295,100 – 1,439,000

11

Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

2.1.2 % retained through semester in credit classes2006-2007 Target

Range90% – 100%

75.60 – 84.00

2008-2009 Target Range

90% - 100%

76.05 – 84.50

2010-2011 Target Range

90% - 100%

76.95 – 85.50

12

Goals, KPIs, Measures, Targets

• Major Surveys

– Community College Survey of Student Engagement

– Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory

– Campus Quality Survey

– Assessment of ThunderValues

• Other Departmental Surveys

13

Information Management

• Administer one major survey every year

• Segment and Analyze

• Themes across Surveys

• Action Plans to Improve

• User-friendly Reports

• Distribute Widely

• Other Departmental Surveys

14

Major Surveys Approaches

DEPLOYMENT OF

APPROACHES

15

Richland CollegeCycles of Improvement

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the

senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope.

● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of

performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking

state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives

strategic college-wide initiatives

All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions

Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope.

● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of

performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking

state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives

strategic college-wide initiatives

All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions

Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope.

● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of

performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking

state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives

strategic college-wide initiatives

All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions

Organizational Actions are those actions developed by the senior leadership of the college and are broad in scope.

● ThunderTeam initiates Organizational Actions because of

performance gaps from the End of Year Report, national surveys, or benchmarking

state, district-wide, or DCCCD Board initiatives

strategic college-wide initiatives

All Organizational Actions have supporting Departmental Actions

Organizational Actions

16

Organizational Action Plans

17

18

Departmental Actions

• Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of:

– an Organizational Action or – a department-specific performance gap or initiative.

• Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions

that are relevant for their work area. • Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does

not exist.

19

• Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions

in support of:

– an Organizational Action or – a department-specific performance gap or initiative.

• Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions that

are relevant for their work area. • Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does

not exist.

• Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of:

– an Organizational Action or – a department-specific performance gap or initiative.

• Departmental Actions respond only to those

Organizational Actions that are relevant for their work area.

• Departmental Actions are not required if one of these conditions does

not exist.

• Departments or work units initiate Departmental Actions in support of:

– an Organizational Action or – a department-specific performance gap or initiative.

• Departmental Actions respond only to those Organizational Actions

that are relevant for their work area. • Departmental Actions are not required if one of these

conditions does not exist.

20

21

22

23

Process Improvement/Implementation Plan (PIIP)8-step process to:• document implementation of new

processes/programs • improve existing processes/programs

Process Improvement /Implementation Plan

24

Process Improvement

55

Pilot/Implement Approach

44

DevelopSolution

33

IdentifyRoot

Cause

22

AssignOwnership

11

IdentifyImprovement

Need

66

MeasureImpact

77

DisseminateResults

88

Evaluate theProcess

RLC Evaluation &Improvement

Approach

Integrate Approach

Deploy

Learn

25

26

Identify Improvement NeedAssign OwnershipIdentify Root CauseDevelop Solution

Benchmarking Process

The Benchmarking Process provides a standardized institutional process for investigating best/better practices.

Through this system, best/better practices are:• Proposed• Accepted for further research and review• Assigned to a process owner• Adopted, revised or rejected

27

28

Benchmarking Form

Thunion Report

29

Thunion Report - Layer 1

30

Thunion Report - Layer 2

31

Thunion Report - Layer 3

32

1.1.1 Contact hours from dual credit and tech-prep2006-2007 Target Range

90% – 100%

207,000 – 230,000

Performanceas of

December 2006

85,216

Score

9.26

Adjusted Score

9.26

33

Thunion Report - Raw Data

34

Thunion Report - Raw Data

1.5.1 # of on-line contact hours 2006-2007 Target Range

90% – 100%

1,071,000 – 1,190,000

Performanceas of

December 2006

303,280

Score

6.37

Adjusted Score

6.37

35

Thunion Report - Raw Data

2.1.2 % retained through semester in credit classes2006-2007 Target Range

90% – 100%

75.60 – 84.00

Performanceas of

December 2006

83.78

Score

9.97

Adjusted Score

9.97

RESULTS AND KEY

LEARNINGS

36

Richland CollegeCycles of Improvement

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

37

Student Success Results - End of Year

38

Dual Credit Contact Hours

Market Share of Service Area

39

Organization Nature of Benchmark Activity

Ritz-Carlton ThunderValue-of-the-Week

Texas Nameplate Dashboard

Bank One Customer service “Front Counter”

Walt Disney Company Interview/screening, Orientation

Starbucks & the “Experience Music Project”

Experience Engineering for T-duck Hall & Future Buildings

Southwest, Container Store Employee culture

Branch-Smith Printing Supplier/Partner Score Card

Presbyterian Hosp of Dallas Employee professional development

Saint Luke’s Hospital Performance Excellence Model

Outside Higher Education: Comparative Information

40

• Enrollment Projections

• Daily Registration Comparative Reports

• Facility Use for Class Scheduling Effectiveness

• Discipline and Program Review

• Market Share Analysis

• Trended Grade Distribution Reports

• Survey Results with Themes & Next Steps

• Monthly Employee Diversity Reports

Types of Analysis

41

Daily Enrollment Comparison District Colleges

42

43

On-line Contact Hours

# On-line Contact Hours

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006

INTEGRATING AND

SHARING KEY

LEARNINGS

44

Richland CollegeCycles of Improvement

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

Richland College Shared Learnings

Posting of:• PIIP documents• Benchmarking reports• QEP activities and reports • Executive summaries and next steps for

all major surveys• Monthly Thunion Report Card• Annual End of Year Report

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

45

The Richland CollegeMeasurement System Philosophy

• ADLI for Continuous Improvement• Data Informed - Not data-driven• Measure what is key• Segment for greater understanding• User-friendly Strategies and Reports• Benchmark Best Practices• Take action• Evaluate

46

Creating a Comprehensive Institutional Measurement System

Richland College

Teaching, Learning, Community Building

47

Fonda Vera,Dean,Planning and Research For Institutional Effectiveness

Texas Association for Institutional ResearchMarch 1, 2007

Gloria Washington,Director,Institutional Effectiveness

Bao Huynh,Director,Institutional Research