Performance Accountability Review (PAR)

1. Performance Accountability Review (PAR) Technical College System of Georgia

2. Purpose of the PAR The purpose of the PAR is to evaluate each college’s compliance with state standards as well as federal regulations regarding Perkins monies.

3. PAR as part ofPAS The PAR validates the self–evaluations that institutions conduct annually in PAS.

4. Types of PARs Standard PAR (occurs once every six years) Risk-based PAR (schedule determined by a risk-based scoring regimen) Perkins budget documentation Perkins procedures/internal control mechanisms Perkins inventory • College-wide standards • Perkins program implementation • Perkins budget and inventory • Instructional program measures

5. How Do I Begin? Familiarize yourself with the Standards and Policies associated with the PAR… The Streamlined PAR Checksheet & the Risk-based PAR Checksheet will be your quick references when preparing PAR material.

6. Policy sources References: • TCSG State Board Policies (Found on the TCSG website, under the State Board Policy link. Look for IV D (Institutional and Program Specific Standards) • EDGAR (Education Department General Administrative Regs) • Carl D. Perkins Grant Regulations (Can be found at Ed.gov…look at sections 134 and 135)

7. Examples of State Policies • The faculty of each program that includes live work as part of its curriculum develops and implements a written live work plan. • Program advisory committee meetings have a planned program of work.

8. Examples of Carl D. Perkins Regulations “… the eligible recipient will: • (9) provide activities to prepare special populations, including single parents and displaced homemakers, who are enrolled in career and technical education programs, for high skill, high wage, or high demand occupations that will lead to self-sufficiency. • (3) provide students with strong experience in and understanding of all aspects of an industry, which may include work-based learning experiences;”

9. PAR Agenda/Schedule (This schedule is fluid and is dictated by the pace of the review.)

10. Standard PAR Review Components • College-Wide Processes (i.e. Admissions, Work Ethics, Warranty) • Perkins Program Data/Documentation • Instructional Program Data…a representative sample covering the years since the college’s last PAR (i.e. Advisory Committee documentation) • Two Perkins (fiscal) Budget years…including one that has been completely liquidated

11. Definitions

12. Definitions, Standard PAR A recommendationpoints out: • a violation of a federal policy or state standard which the college must correct • an expenditure of Federal Perkins moneys for a purpose that is not in compliance with the current Perkins law.

13. Definitions, Standard PAR (continued) A suggestion points out: • an improvement that might be made in some part of the Perkins management process at the college • a questionable activity of the institution which is not a clear violation of a policy or state standard or federal guideline, but which is a concern to the team.

14. Definitions, Standard PAR (continued) A commendationpoints out: • an outstanding achievement or practice.

15. Examples ofRecommendations, Suggestions and Commendations Standard PAR

16. recommendation The PAR team recommends that the college develop and implement Laboratory Management Plans and Training Plans for all appropriate programs.

17. Suggestion The PAR team suggests that the college re-visit and revise the documentation for its Advisory Committee for the Hotel-Restaurant-Travel Management program. The Advisory Committee plan of work, minutes, and other documents are maintained as required. However, these documents refer heavily (or sometimes solely) to Culinary Arts, and do not adequately provide information regarding Hospitality.

18. Commendation The PAR team commends the college for making considerable progress toward improving budgetary control processes and maintaining appropriate documentation.

19. RISK-BASED PARs

20. Why “Risk?" • A “Risk-based” PAR ranking DOES NOT indicate that the college is “risky.” • EVERY college in the system will receive a risk score annually to determine its rank and position on the risk-based PAR schedule. (Four colleges will have a risk-based PAR each year.) • Except under special circumstances, a college will not have a risk-based PAR two years in a row. • It is possible to have a Standard PAR and Risk-based PAR in the same year… normally on two consecutive days.

21. Risk-based PAR Scoring • How Large Is Your Perkins Budget, Comparatively? • How Did Your College Perform On Perkins Measures, Comparatively? • How Many Perkins Points (i.e. recommendations/action items) Did Your College Have At Its Last PAR? • How Did Your College Fare During Its Most Recent State Audit?

22. Risk-based pars…what to expect • Evaluation of three budget years (i.e. FY 2013, 2012, and 2011) • Evaluation of Internal Control Mechanisms • Evaluation of Asset Management and Equipment Inventory ($1000 or higher…EVERY ITEM MUST BE IDENTIFIED or “TOUCHED” BY THE PAR TEAM.) • Interviews with Perkins-paid personnel (Full-time and Part-time)

23. What are internal controls? • Internal Controls are methods and policies designed to prevent fraud, minimize errors, promote operating efficiency, and achieve compliance with established policies. • Internal Controls, and subsequent documentation, may vary from college to college.

24. Definitions

25. Action Item An action itempoints out: • a violation of a federal policy which the college must correct • an expenditure of Federal Perkins moneys for a purpose that is not in compliance with the current Perkins law.

26. Suggestion A suggestion points out: • an improvement that might be made in some part of the Perkins management process at the College • a questionable activity of the institution which is not a clear violation of a policy or federal guideline, but which is a concern to the team.

27. Commendation A commendationpoints out: • an outstanding achievement in Perkins-related operations.

28. Examples of Action items, suggestions and commendations Risk-Based PAR

29. Action Item The Special Populations Coordinator and the Retention Specialist need job descriptions that include all activities. These job descriptions must be submitted to the System Office for approval.

30. Suggestion The PAR team suggests that the college review its asset management system to ensure that all equipment is tagged and placed in the appropriate area in a timely manner.

31. Commendation The PAR team commends the college for maintaining a thorough and detailed inventory and asset management system. Each piece of equipment was readily identifiable, accounted for, and located in designated areas, as approved by TCSG.

32. QUESTIONS