Student Affairs and University Planning
Program Review Guidelines

Guidelines

·         The primary purpose of all phases of the program review process is to provide an office/department with findings that can be utilized to bring about office/departmental improvements.

·         The vice president or his designee will establish a schedule outlining both the sequence of the offices/departments to be reviewed and the assigned director who will serve as Coordinator of the Program Review (CPR).

·         Program reviews will be conducted on an approximate five-year cycle and scheduled at least a year in advance and in such a way that the time and energy necessary to complete the review does not negatively impact the department.

·         A program review must be completed by the end of the semester for which it is scheduled.

·         The AVP for University Planning and Analysis and Institutional Research (IR) staff will provide assistance in areas critical to the program review process (e.g., SWOT, program evaluation and effective consultation).

·         In addition to department-wide program reviews, focused reviews on one or two topics/areas may be conducted.

Intended Outcomes

·         To provide the office/department being reviewed with the opportunity to evaluate its operation; to identify ways in which the office/department is functioning well; and to identify at least two areas in which functions may be improved.

·         To have staff, faculty, and students provide the office/department being reviewed with both an internal and external perspective on the office/department’s performance.

·         To receive from an outside consultant, when necessary, an objective appraisal of the office/department’s self-evaluation and plans for improvement.

·         To provide the vice president and the office/department’s AVP with evaluative feedback about the department and specific actions to improve the office.

Review Process

Phase I:  The Program Review Committee (the director of the department/office being reviewed; his or her AVP; the CPR – the Coordinator of the Program Review, who is another divisional director; the AVP for Planning and Analysis; and representatives from Institutional Research) meet to discuss the program review process and its intended outcomes.

Phase II:  With assistance from the CPR and IR staff, the office/department being reviewed completes a self analysis. This analysis should include a review of the unit’s objectives and accomplishments for the previous two years from the Planning Database. The analysis might also include strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT); perceptions of other faculty, staff and students; and where appropriate, outside constituents.

Phase III:  The Program Review Committee meets (1) to review the analysis and office/departmental responses; and (2) to identify areas for additional examination. Ideally, Phase III is completed by the beginning of the semester in which the Program Review is scheduled.

Phase IV:  The Program Review Committee agrees on two areas that require further review as part of the program review process.

Phase V:  The Program Review Committee will determine if additional data are needed to assist in the development of action plans to improve the areas identified. If needed. these data are collected.

Phase VI:  The CPR and the director will meet with staff in the office being reviewed and other University faculty and staff identified by the CPR as possibly being of some assistance. From these discussions should come a plan for each area of improvement identified that includes specific goals, objectives, and action items; a method by which the level of success will be evaluated and/or assessed; and a schedule for completion. The action plan is then reviewed and approved by the Program Review Committee.

Phase VII:  The Program Review Committee decides if an outside consultant is appropriate.

Phase VIII:  The AVP and the director of the office being reviewed presents the results of the program review process to the vice president.

Phase IX:  Initiatives for improvement with specific objectives, timelines, and expected outcomes are entered into the Planning Database and pursued by the office/department that has been reviewed.

Potential Office/Department Areas to be Reviewed

Ties to Existing Planning Efforts

·         University Defining Characteristics

·         Student Affairs Mission statement and Strategic Plan

·         Program/Department mission statement

·         Central functions

·         Learning outcomes and/or service objectives

·         Annual goals from the Planning Database

·         Annual objectives

·         CAS – Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education

Organization

·         Leadership

·         Organizational chart

·         Staff and responsibilities

·         Training

·         Decision-making processes, departmental teams

·         Campus relations

·         Collaboration

·         Community relations

·         Ethics

·         Legal issues

Programs and Services

·         Major programs and services

·         Diversity, equity and access

Evaluation and Assessment

·         Profile and tracking of students or clients

·         Assessment plan, data, and results

Resources

·         Budget

·         Facilities

·         Equipment and technology

·         Planning process

Scholarly Work

·         Publications

·         Workshop/Presentations

·         Professional development

Constituencies

·         Staff

·         Students

·         Parents

·         Students

·         Outside JMU

Revised May 2008