Policy 5002
Program Review Plan and Compliance

Date of Current Revision: September 2018
Primary Responsible Officer: Special Assistant to the President for Strategic Planning & Engagement

1. PURPOSE

This policy establishes common program review components and requirements for non-Academic Affairs departments and/or offices. A separate Academic Affairs policy governs program reviews for areas within the Division of Academic Affairs.

2. AUTHORITY

The Board of Visitors has been authorized by the Commonwealth of Virginia to govern James Madison University. See Code of Virginia § 23.1-1600; § 23.1-1301. The board has delegated the authority to manage the university to the president.

3. DEFINITIONS

Core Quality
One of 11 key aspirational descriptors that make-up the primary structure for achieving the university’s mission and vision. A core quality is a broad description, with each supported by three to seven university goals. Descriptions of the university’s core qualities, as well as other important strategic plan-related content can be found at: http://www.jmu.edu/jmuplans/corequalities/index.shtml.

Departmental Objective
A significant and measurable action in support of the university’s mission or vision, the respective department’s mission and/or one or more university goals. Some objectives evolve from previous evaluation/assessment efforts. The JMU-STAR Tool contains instructions for writing good objectives.

Designated Unit
A department or office that has been determined by its respective vice president to be required to undergo a program review in accordance with this policy. The majority of departments and/or offices are designated units. In this policy, terms such as “department,” “office,” “unit,” or “designated unit” are used interchangeably.

JMU-STAR Tool
The web-based application used for entering, tracking and reporting on objectives at JMU. It is available at the following link to those designated to enter and track objectives: https://jmu.xitracs.net/survey/portallogon.jsp.

Mission
The enduring purpose of the university: We are a community committed to preparing students to be educated and enlightened citizens who lead productive and meaningful lives. For the purposes of this policy, it may also refer to the particular department’s mission.

Program Review Committee
The group that assists in conducting the unit’s program review. The committee provides a third-party analysis of the designated unit’s self-study.

University Goal
One of 43 specific targets that were developed by the Madison Future Commission and approved by the president and senior leadership team in 2014 in support of the 11 core qualities.

Vision
The broadest, highest priority aspiration of the university: To be the national model of the engaged university; engaged with ideas and the world. For the purposes of this policy, it may also refer to the particular department’s vision. Information concerning the university’s vision can be found here: http://www.jmu.edu/jmuplans/engagement.shtml.

4. APPLICABILITY

This policy applies to all non-Academic Affairs designated units.

5. POLICY

All designated units will undergo a formal program review at least once every five years.

6. PROCEDURES

6.1 Program reviews measure the designated unit’s performance in helping to fulfill the mission, vision, core qualities and/or goals of the university. A review also measures the unit’s success at achieving its own mission.

6.2 Much of the program review process is a self-study, where the designated unit conducts a broad and detailed review of its policies, processes and performance.

6.3 While the organizational purposes and specific roles vary considerably for JMU’s many units, effective program reviews should include the following factors:

  • A review of the unit’s mission statement.
  • An intense review of the unit’s current overall performance, often represented in a detailed strengths/weaknesses/opportunities/threats (SWOT) analysis.
  • Updating of key current and future objectives and verification that they are entered and tracked accurately in the JMU-STAR Tool.
  • Updated budget processes and needs.
  • Updated job descriptions and performance management documents.
  • A study of key unit constituencies to reflect needs and the service quality provided by the unit.
  • The comparison of unit performance to a specific industry standard.
  • Updated documented departmental policies and procedures.
  • The implementation of the learning and improvement process, often reflected when  results and methods are established, evaluated and tracked for each departmental objective. Then, those results are used to improve future performance on related objectives. This cycle is particularly important in accreditation review.
  • Acknowledgement of significant successes and accomplishments.

6.4 The program review committee should include staff members from areas other than the unit reviewed and, when appropriate, students from the unit and other areas. The use of external reviewers is encouraged for unit reviews. The respective vice president will determine how committee chairs and program review committees are selected in their respective divisions.

6.5 A review must focus on the unit’s most important functions and needs. When preparing for the review, the unit should describe its major functions and expected outcomes.

6.6 An internal consultant may be selected to review and comment on the program review.

6.7 Recommendations that result from the program review and that are approved by the division vice president or designee as part of the unit’s Action Plan must be entered into the unit’s JMU-STAR Tool and tracked accordingly.

6.8 Once approved by the appropriate vice president or designee, a copy of the final program review report will be sent to the Office of Institutional Research (ask-oir@jmu.edu or MSC 3803) for access by the university’s SACSCOC Reaccreditation Work Group.

7. RESPONSIBILITIES

Vice presidents are responsible for ensuring that this policy is followed in their respective divisions. Vice presidents or their designees must provide both a program review schedule as well as each program review report to the Office of Institutional Research for use in reaffirmation of accreditation.

All departments, offices and employees that generate, receive or maintain public records under the terms of this policy are also responsible for compliance with Policy 1109 (Records Management).

8. SANCTIONS

Employees who violate this policy are subject to discipline commensurate with the severity and/or frequency of the offense and may include termination of employment.

9. EXCLUSIONS

This policy does not apply to areas within the Division of Academic Affairs, which are governed by Academic Affairs Policy #8.

10. INTERPRETATION

The authority to interpret this policy is given to the president, and is generally delegated to the Special Assistant to the President for Strategic Planning and Engagement.

Previous version: January 2016
Approved by the President: April 2002

Back to Top