Enhancing University Effectiveness with Title III Support

1. Enhancing University Effectiveness with Title III Support Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University “Service is Sovereignty” Caula BeylDirector, Institutional Planning, Research, & Evaluation caula.beyl@email.aamu.edu

2. Title III Project Enhancing University Effectiveness • In 2002-3, Alabama A&M University received Title III support to develop a better infrastructure for enhancing university effectiveness and assessment • At that time, Alabama A&M University was due to go through SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation in 2004. • The functional state of the Office of Institutional Planning, Research, and Evaluation was not good and it was apparent that something needed to be done quickly.

3. History of Institutional Effectiveness at AAMU • In 1989, the Office of Institutional Planning and Research was established separate from its former home, the Budgeting Office • In 1992, just two years before the previous round of SACS reaffirmation, it was expanded to include evaluation and became the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation • The Director of OIPRE left the university abruptly in 2001 after a gradual erosion of space, personnel, equipment, and budget for the office

4. OIPRE Early in 2002 • When I joined OIPRE in January of 2002 as Director, • the office leadership had been vacant for 6 months, • we had one old and one ancient computer, one administrative assistant, one phone, and • nine locked file cabinets whose keys had been lost • OIPRE was located in one back room in the Graduate Office • As an entity on campus, OIPRE was virtually invisible

5. Revitalization of OIPRE • Revitalization of OIPRE required commitment of • Budgetary support • Additional personnel • Office space • Equipment • Recognition as an entity • OIPRE was reorganized into two major divisions – Institutional Data and Assessment • Without Title III support, none of this would have been possible Dr. Subodh SharmaInstitutional Data Coordinator Dr. Sherrell PriceAssessment Coordinator

6. Enhancing University Effectiveness Involved Integration of Three Major Functions Planning Institutional Research Evaluation and Assessment From 2002 to the present, all of our Title III objectives have involved enhancement of these three functions as well as the expertise of OIPRE personnel to conduct these functions

7. $ Achievements Enabled by Title III Support

8. OIPRE’s First Web Page

9. OIPRE’s Current Web Page

10. Development of a Data Warehouse • In the past, AAMU has lacked credibility with respect to the validity of its data • This was the result of many problems • Antiquated mainframe system • No direct access to data on the mainframe • Inability to obtain data electronically • No controls on quality of data input • In response to statutory requests, administration obtained data from all over campus • What data were reported depended upon what day it was, who provided it, and a plethora of other conditions, but there was little consistency.

11. Development and Adoption of University Wide Policies Regarding Data Nine policies received unanimous approval by the Planning and Budgeting Committee in 2003

12. Institutional philosophy developed that data should be used… • To develop strategic documents • To support of Reaffirmation of SACS Accreditation • To make planning decisions • To forecast trends in enrollment and retention • To aid in program accreditation • To support grant writing efforts

13. Updating the university’s strategic planning documents

14. Under the new criteria, AAMU had to develop a QEP Focus 2015 Strategic Plan Blueprints for ExcellenceQuality Enhancement Plan Frameworks for Continuous Quality Improvement

15. Blueprints to Excellence Enhancing Academic Support Services and the Campus Culture Quality Enhancement Plan Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University “Service is Sovereignty”

17. Development of Three On-Line Systems of Documentation Old way… New way… 1 2 3

18. Three major on-line reporting systems for documenting university effectiveness • Planning and Budgeting System • First implemented in the 2004-5 budget year • Used successfully in 2005-6 and most recently in 2006-7 • Version 2.0 is being tested now and will replace 1.0 in about one month • Learning Outcome Reporting System • Will be fully implemented incrementally as each program goes through the cyclic program review process • Allows open access to view outcomes and assessment • Quality Enhancement Plan Reporting System • Allows every level of the university community to participate in reporting QEP initiatives • Documents activities and outcomes for SACS

19. Why did we believe an on-line planning and budgeting system was necessary? SACS criteria require... • An institution must prepare an appropriately detailed annual budget. • Its preparation and execution must be preceded by sound educational planning. • Procedures for budget planning must be evaluated regularly.

20. Principles of Accreditation state… • C.R. #5 requires an “ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide planning and evaluation process which informs budgeting decisions” • C.R. #11 Financial Stability “There is a need to provide clear evidence that the budgeting process is preceded by sound planning”

21. AAMU took a hard look at the existing process Old System: • Annual and strategic plans were submitted as Word tables and then posted on the web page • Budget requests and five year projections were submitted on a diskette to the Budget Officer • However, it was clear that there was little systematic link between the processes of planning and budgeting

22. Could we create a stronger link? University Budgeting Office and OIPRE met to: • Develop an on-line mechanism for linking planning documents to budgets • Integrate planning and budgeting into one system of data collection to: • Examine productivity of units in accomplishing their goals and meeting expected outcomes • Use real data to reallocate from ineffective units to more effective units • Make first steps toward ensuring that increases in personnel are tied to planning

23. New process Based on budgetary units, not organizational units. The new planning and budgeting screen captures Strategic 5-year plans Annual planning outcomes and effectiveness Current year’s budget requests are now linked to specific strategic focus areas and QEP goals 5-year projected budgets Beginnings of a position control system New Planning and Budgeting Process If you spend money at AAMU, you better have a plan!

24. Software Development Development Phases • OIPRE and the Budgeting Office developed a conceptual framework and rough screen layouts • Actual software development was outsourced to: MindGate Technologies www.mindgate.com 1-800-MGT-6840 ext. 800 • The same basic on-line architecture and concepts were used to develop systems for documenting learning outcomes and quality enhancement plan progress

25. On-Line Planning and Budgeting System • Adoption of the Planning and Budgeting System was approved by the Planning and Budgeting Council on March 23, 2004 • A beta version of the new system was demonstrated to the SACS visiting team during their on site visit • University-wide use began in September for the 2004-5 fiscal year

26. Getting to the Planning and Budgeting System www.aamu.edu and then “Institutional Planning and Research”

28. Planning and Budgeting Initial Log-In Screen

29. Select a unit by name or input budget number, then select the correct fiscal year

30. This is the planning screen as it first appears in its collapsed mode. The buttons in the left margin perform view, save, hide/show, new, delete, and reorder functions.

31. The show button toggles with the hide button. Clicking on “show” expands each goal’s area.

32. Every unit goal is related to a Focus Area or a QEP Goal and has its own objectives, assessment method, etc.

33. In version 1.0, each focus area was assigned a budget percentage to estimate spending on each Unit Goal and Focus Area

34. Clicking directly on text brings up an edit window

35. Clicking on the icon to the left selects a text box. The arrow tools move the item up in order or down.

36. Each goal has associated Objectives, Assessment Methods, Anticipated Results, Actual Results…..

37. …and Use of Results, Achievements, and Needs sections.

38. Clicking on the “Budget” will take you to the budget projection page

39. Only the budget manager, your dean or director, your Vice President, and the University Budget Officer will have access to budget information.

40. The first budget screen allows you to choose the object codes in your budget

41. The second budget screen allows you to begin entering actual budget numbers

42. Line items can be expanded to include details such as personnel names or titles, percentage, amount, and the total will then appear in the line item summary

43. Fringe benefits are calculated automatically and then Shown as a total under line item “299”

44. Budget totals appear at the bottom of the screen for the current and the projected years

45. Report formats will allow summarization by any of the budget categories across the projected years For example, a report summarizing by “function”

46. The Administrator’s Tool • The administrator’s tool allows authorized persons to: • Set the current year • Identify the phase of the year(planning vs. reporting) • Create a budget manager’s list and oversight list • Reset passwords • Change values for fringe benefits

47. Version 2.0

48. Version 1.0 was slow because every save required an upload to the Internet

49. The new software is faster than earlier versions of the other systems because it takes advantage of a new architecture

50. Advantages of an On-Line Planning and Budgeting System • Direct linkage of planning to budgeting • Better tracking of unit performance in relationship to goals and focus areas • Spending on focus areas can be tracked • Can enable later personnel position control • Timely compliance is tied to budget access • SACS Documentation of annual planning, assessment, and budgeting