2012 Report Presented April 5, 2013 Division of Administration and Finance

1. University Assessment Committee 2012 ReportPresented April 5, 2013Division of Administration and Finance Tee Rogers

2. Section 1 of 4:Division Overview

4. DRC Red font indicates changes over the past year

5. Outmoded Cattitudes. Assessment not taste good This assessment process not working for me. Too stressed (#faints) No. Look. Already great. No assessment needed.

6. Cattitudes 2.0 Go ahead. Pull out the rubric. I’m Exemplary. (#raspberry) I think I can. I think I can. I KNOW I can… Shhh… processing reflective statement. No. Looking ahead to future implemented changes.

7. Gold highlightsare departments that improved from last year or who maintained Exemplary level.  Red highlights show decreases in scores from last year.

8. Section 2 of 4:Results Reports

9. Results Report This slide randomly pink to make Nancy Stanlick laugh. Don’t worry, Dr. S – this is the only one.

10. Results– Rubric Comparison

11. 2010-11 Results Example Beginning Unit: Environmental Health & Safety Page content removed. Results Reports are not made public. Plans are posted on university’s assessment site, www.assessment.ucf.edu.

12. 2010-11 Results Example Exemplary Unit : Landscape & Natural Resources Page content removed. Results Reports are not made public. Plans are posted on university’s assessment site, www.assessment.ucf.edu.

13. Exemplary Unit : Landscape & Natural Resources Page content removed. Results Reports are not made public. Plans are posted on university’s assessment site, www.assessment.ucf.edu.

14. Section 3 of 4:Plans

15. Plan

16. Plan – Rubric Comparison

17. 2012-13 Plan Example Emerging Unit: Parking and Transportation Services Assessment process: Parking and Transportation Services will continue to strive to meet its mission. Comments given to coordinator, with opportunity to revise: Indicator 2: Expectation not met. There is no assessment process given here. This should be a detailed description of how assessment is conducted in the department, what the assessment strategy is, how outcomes and measures relate to business practices, who is involved and what their role is, what the process for collecting, reviewing, and reporting data is, and what is the process for implementing changes based on the findings. Comments after revision: Expectation still not met. No changes made to the assessment process.

18. 2011-2012 Plan Accomplished Unit : Environmental Health & Safety • 2011-12 Plan: Meets Expectations • 2011-12 Results: Beginning • 2012-13 Plan: Accomplished • Outcome 3: The EHS Department limits the risk and liability to the university through facility worker training and through facility inspections. • Measure 3.1: Assure that worker trainings are working as planned by achieving a 10% reduction in employee accidents • Measure 3.2: Assure that facility inspections are working as intended by achieving a 10% reduction in general liability claims.

19. 2011-2012 Plan Accomplished Unit : Environmental Health & Safety Previous Outcome 2: Conduct training sessions to educate the university and mitigate hazardous environments & behavior (paraphrase) Measure 2.1: offer training in (areas listed) and keep records of training & participants. New Outcome 2: The UCF EHS Department Maximizes Research Safety and Environmental Compliance through training programs designed to inform laboratory workers, facility workers, and project managers in the hazards to which they are exposed and the required protocols that are to be followed. Measure 2.1: Annually inspect each laboratory on campus in order to determine if the training programs are effective. Measures of success are as follows: 75% of lab staff attend training; 100% of laboratories are inspected; 10% reduction in laboratory inspection violations.

20. Section 4 of 4:Review of A&F

21. This was our second year of working toward a mentorship model in our division. We are proud of our team’s accomplishments. Every member of our team ROCKS!

22. Advisors to the DRC to oversee the division’s assessment process as well as demonstrate our leadership’s commitment to assessment. • William Merck • Curt Sawyer • Lee Kernek • Tracy Clark • Mark Roberts

23. DRC Mentors • Alaina Bernard • Finance & Accounting • Business Services • HinaBehal • Parking & Transportation • Human Resources • Debbie Frankenbach • Resource Management • Scott Eberle • Environmental Health & Safety • Facilities Planning • Brian Butkus • Financial Services • Sustainability & Energy Management • Nancy Gayton • Facilities Operations • University Police • Emergency Management • Brian Wormwood • Landscape & Natural Resources • Purchasing

24. Communication - 2012 • Workshops: Individual workshops in the spring semester with OEAS, the DRC Mentor, DRC Chair, and the Assessment Coordinator • Several departments followed up with additional workshops and included department directors. • Several departments held in-department team meetings to discuss assessment strategies • Mentoring: Five DRC Mentors were assigned 2-3 departments each.

25. Assessment Changes for 2013 Continued: workshops, mentoring Added: • DRC Meeting (April 19th) • Advisors to the DRC Meeting (tentative) • Division assessment meeting (tentative) • Rotating DRC Chair (tentative) Tools Updates: Continued: A&F Assessment Webs site Added: Workbooks updated to separate DRC & Coordinator info.

26. Team Tools

27. From our DRC… • I enjoyed learning about others’ goals on campus and helping them articulate them in the assessment process. • Being able to learn about others’ processes and compare my own work against theirs • I learned more about us as a division • I liked getting to learn what another department does and how they work within A&F

28. From our DRC… • I hope my leadership helped the teams I worked with • Being part of the process felt very rewarding • I liked the rubric • The workbook was helpful • Time constraints for coordinators created a challenge • Participating in the training as both a mentor and a coordinator was great, it gave me a different point of view. • The website was not very user-friendly • Additional guidance would be helpful, since we only do it once a year

29. From our DRC… Suggestions • It was sometimes hard to communicate about deadlines and system access. • Have a number of mandatory meetings that are logged to make sure progress can be tracked. • It was a challenge asking the coordinators how assessment was going and trying to set times to meet. • More buy-in from the department directors would be helpful. • There should be a presentation about the rubric.

30. From our DRC

31. From our Assessment Coordinators • Annual survey of AC’s: 7 of 14 responded.

32. Assessment Coordinator Input Continued

33. Assessment Coordinator Input • It would be helpful for the DRC to schedule additional workshops. • It would be helpful to meet with the mentor more. • The workbook was confusing – separate DRC & coordinator resources. • We need to be able to copy into the system from Word without it making changes between the two. • We need a spell checker in the system. • We weren’t sure who should initiate – me or the mentor. So we were waiting on each other, and that didn’t work well. Please clarify our assessment roles.

34. Thank you.