Program Prioritization

Update 2014

Overview

• University of Colorado

Campus Priorities

– Build Student Success

– Enhance Reputation

– Optimize Revenue Sources and

Uses

• Prioritization Objectives

– Identify Campus Successes

– Identify Areas for

Improvement/Change

Academic

Prioritization

Overview

Academic Prioritization Process • Two existing faculty groups were

engaged to develop metrics:

– Academic Affairs Budget Advisory

Committee (AABAC)

– Academic Review of Programs

Advisory Committee (ARPAC)

• Their charge was to: • Simplify

• Understandable (strengths &

limitations)

• Reconcile existing AABAC and

ARPAC analyses

Methodology

• Resource Efficiency

– Use of Funds and Space

• Degree Production

– Total and Graduate

• Scholarly Accomplishment

– Academic Analytics Based

Comparative Measure; Other

nationally accepted metrics

• Undergraduate Teaching

Effectiveness

– Non-major Credit Delivery and

Senior Survey

Steven Pollock,

2013 U.S. Professor the Year

Prioritized Evaluations

• Highly Effective at Delivering Campus Mission

• Very Effective at Delivering Campus Mission

• Effective at Delivering Campus Mission

• Moderately Effective Delivering Mission

• Less Than Effective

Ratings Dashboard

BA

CH

EL

OR

MA

ST

ER

S

DO

CT

OR

AT

E

FY

13 G

F e

xp

/ S

CH

In

co

me

an

d E

xp

en

ses (

PB

A

So

urc

es a

nd

Uses)

AV

GS

pace E

ffic

ien

cy S

co

re

SC

OR

E

% o

f to

tal

deg

rees (

6 y

r. a

vg

)%

of

tota

l g

rad

uate

deg

rees (

6 y

r.

avg

)

SC

OR

E

Perc

en

tile

Ran

k in

Aca

dem

ic

An

aly

tics

SC

OR

E

% o

f u

nd

erg

rad

SC

H t

aken

by

majo

rs in

oth

er

deg

ree p

rog

ram

s

FY

13

Mean

of

resp

on

ses t

o S

pri

ng

2012

Sen

iors

' S

urv

ey M

ajo

r S

ati

sfa

cti

on

M

ean

of

resp

on

ses t

o S

pri

ng

2012

Sen

iors

' S

urv

ey J

ob

Pre

pS

CO

RE

Undergraduate Teaching

Effectiveness

Degree Uniqueness

CU=unique to CU-Boulder

* = offered at CU-Boulder

blank= degree not offered at

CU-Boulder

Resource Efficiency Degree Production Scholarly Accomplishments

Score

Psychology * * * 5.00 4.00 5.00 4.00 4.50

Integrative Physiology CU CU CU 4.67 4.00 5.00 3.67 4.33

Sociology * * * 5.00 3.00 5.00 4.33 4.33

Education CU CU 3.33 4.50 5.00 4.28

Economics * * * 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00

Geography * CU CU 3.67 3.00 5.00 4.33 4.00

English * * CU 3.33 4.00 4.00 4.33 3.92

Communication * * CU 4.67 3.50 4.00 3.33 3.88

Aerospace * * * 3.33 3.50 5.00 3.67 3.88

Business * * CU 4.00 5.00 3.00 3.33 3.83

Chemistry & Biochemistry * * * 3.00 3.00 5.00 4.33 3.83

Civil Engineering * * * 2.67 4.00 5.00 3.67 3.83

Political Science * * * 4.00 4.00 3.00 4.33 3.83

Geological Sciences * * * 3.00 2.50 5.00 4.67 3.79

Computer Science * * * 3.67 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.79

Undergraduate Teaching

Effectiveness

Degree Uniqueness

CU=unique to CU-Boulder

* = offered at CU-Boulder

blank= degree not offered at

CU-Boulder

Resource Efficiency Degree Production Scholarly Accomplishments

Prioritized Programs

HIGHLY EFFECTIVE

Psychology

Integrative Physiology

Sociology

Education

Economics

Geography

VERY EFFECTIVE

English

Communications

Aerospace Engineering

Business

Chemistry/Biochemistry

Civil Engineering

Geological Sciences

Computer Science

International Affairs

Ecology & Evolutionary

Biology

Astrophysics Planetary

Science

Journalism

Molecular Cell Develop

Biology

Mechanical Engineering

Physics

Anthropology

History

Philosophy

Linguistics

Environmental Studies

Chemical Engineering

Applied Math

Classics

Speech Language Hearing

Sciences

EFFECTIVE

Other Engineering

German Slavic Languages

Music

Spanish Portuguese

Film Studies

Art & Art History

PARTIALLY EFFECTIVE

Religious Studies

Atmospheric Oceanic

Science

French & Italian

LESS THAN EFFECTIVE

ATLAS

Comparative Literature

Administrative

Prioritization

Overview

Administrative Prioritization Process

Administrative Program Lessons Learned

1. Future analysis to distinguish between core

and strategic services.

2. Services that are both centralized and in the

unit level were not evaluated for effectiveness

or potential redundancies

(e.g., Human Resources).

3. Eliminate the distinction between internal

versus external demand.

4. Develop performance metrics for

administrative programs. The Office for

Performance Improvement will be working

across the University to develop such metrics.

5. Create a consistent set of evaluators for the

entire program.

Prioritization Results

Category 1: Candidate for Enrichment Office for Performance Improvement Admissions Veteran Services Disability Services Student Financial Aid Programs Office of Research Integrity (ORI) Office of the Registrar

Category 2: Consider for Enhancement University Memorial Center Information Security Media Relations and News Services Accounting and Business Support (ABS) Environmental Center Academic and Campus Technology, Communication and Support Office of Discrimination and Harassment Real Estate Services Recreation Center Environmental Health and Safety Office of Contracts and Grants Parent Relations Housing Construction and Maintenance Student Conduct Pre-Collegiate Development and Upward Bound CU Book Store Wardenburg Health Center and Counseling and Psychological Services

Category 3: Maintain Marketing and Creative Services Human Resources Operations OIT Operations Enterprise Services Utility Services Police Services Division

Career Services Student Fee Services (Student Legal Services, Off-Campus Housing, SOFO) Planning, Design and Construction Office of Diversity, Equity and Community Engagement (ODECE) Research Computing Facilities Operations Emergency Management Residence Life Ombuds Office Research Operations Dining Services and CU Conference Services Parking Services Office of Victim Assistance (OVA)

Category 4: Transform External and Government Relations Student Orientation Distribution Center Athletics Multicultural Affairs Office of Labor Relations (OLR) Testing and Assessment Center Imaging Services Industry Collaboration Transportation Services Organizational and Employee Development Bursar's Office Transportation Options Employment Services

Category 5: Further Review Faculty and Staff Assistance Program (FSAP) Fee Funded Programs* Planning, Budget and Analysis Alumni Association

*the grouping of services made it difficult for raters to evaluate as they were not clear on the programs to be evaluated.

Administrative Prioritization

*the grouping of services made it difficult for raters to evaluate as they were not clear on the programs to be

evaluated.

Next Steps

• Programs demonstrating high

performance will be further

evaluated:

– Are there best practices

employed that can be applied to

other programs?

– Would further investment in these

programs result in a high return

to achieve the University’s

objectives?

– Are there redundancies that

should be further evaluated?

Next Steps

• Programs identified that need significant

attention will be further evaluated:

– What are the key areas of concern highlighted

by prioritization?

– What immediate action needs to be taken to

improve performance in these areas?

– Identify whether resources are needed to

improve performance.

– Identify whether technology could help improve

performance.

– Evaluate whether there are redundancies or

other delivery models for the unit.

– Could the Office of Performance Improvement

be utilized to improve the outcomes of these

units?

Next Steps

• Each program has strengths and

weaknesses. Each program will be asked

to review these issues in the coming

months to target areas for improvement.

• Begin the prioritization and evaluation

process earlier in the fiscal year in order

to better address this analysis.

Moving Forward

• Campus Town Hall on May 2nd

• Academic Prioritization will

reconvene in Fall 2014 to

assess additional metrics for

evaluation and to begin next

analysis

• Administrative Prioritization

will initiate a survey for

feedback from participants

• Process for administrative

prioritization will begin early in

fiscal year 2015.

Academic Committee Members Academic Affairs Budget Advisory Committee

Members

Kate Allison (Student): United Government of Graduate Students, Education

Victor Bright (Professor): Mechanical Engineering

John Cooper (Professor Emeritus): Physics, JILA

Andrew Cowell (Professor): Linguistics, French & Italian, Philosophy

Robert (Rob) Ferry (Associate Professor): BFA, History

Monika Fleshner: BFA ,Integrative Physiology

Harsha Gangadharbatla (Associate Professor): Journalism & Mass Communication

Layne Hubbard (Student): CU Student Government

Yoshiyuki Ishikawa (Professor): Music

Janet Jacobs (Professor): Sociology

Patrick Kociolek (Professor): Museum, Ecology & Evolutionary Biology

Joe Polman (Associate Dean): Education

Leslie Reynolds (Associate Professor): University Libraries

Jerry Rudy (Professor) BFA, Psychology and Neuroscience

Andrew Schwartz (Associate Professor): Law

Richard Wobbekind (Associate Dean): LEEDS School of Business

Academic Committee Members Academic Review of Programs Advisory Committee

Margaret H Berg, Associate Professor, College of Music

Kenneth Bickers, Professor, Political Science

Adam Bradley, Associate Professor, English

Deborah Hollis, Associate Professor, University Libraries

Kenneth Ross Howe, Professor, School of Education

Polly E McLean, Associate Professor, Journalism and Mass Communication

Christopher B Mueller, Professor, School of Law

Agnes Szendrei, Professor, Mathematics

Carol A Wessman, Professor, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology

Ex Officio

William Kaempfer, Chair (Senior Vice Provost, Professor); Academic Affairs, Economics

Elaine Waters (Director of Budget & Finance and Chief of Staff): Office of the Provost

Erika Smith (Director of Budget Services): Planning, Budget and Analysis

Erin Foster (Finance Manager): Office of the Provost

Administrative Task Force

Members • Carla Ho-a, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Administration Auxiliaries

(Project Lead)

• Steve Thweatt, Interim Vice Chancellor for Administration

• Jeffrey Luftig, Associate Vice Chancellor for Process Innovation

• Maren Additon, Director of Budget and Operations for Student

Affairs

• Steve McNally, Senior Associate Vice Chancellor for Budget,

Finance and Enrollment Services

• Patricia Rankin, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research and Interim

Director of OCG

Administrative Review Team College of Arts & Sciences

Waleed Abdalati

Ann Carlos

Darna Dufour

Peter Freitag

Mary Kraus

Amy Lavens

Bernadette Stewart

Leeds School of Business

Rick Johnson

Al Smith

School of Education

Lorrie Shepard

College of Engineering and

Applied Science

Kurt Maute

JoAnn Zelasko

School of Law

Peggy Delaney

Marci Fulton

SuSaNi Harris

Kristine Jackson

Dennis Russell

Jon Sibray

Keri Ungemah

Administrative Evaluators

Waleed Abdalati

Ann Carlos

Darna Dufour

Peter Freitag

Mary Kraus

Amy Lavens

Bernadette Stewart

Rick Johnson

Al Smith

Lorrie Shepard

Kurt Maute

JoAnn Zelasko

Peggy Delaney

Marci Fulton

SuSaNi Harris

Kristine Jackson

Dennis Russell

Jon Sibray

Keri Ungemah

Rudy Betancourt

John Davis

Caroline Himes

Cynthia Husek

Patricia Rankin

Joe Rosse

Maren Additon

Barney Ballinger

Carlos Garcia

Christina Gonzales

Kambiz Khalili

Don Misch

Lisa Severy

Ryan Chreist

Bronson Hilliard

Jon Leslie

Ben Webster

David Aragon

Candice Bowen

Brian Groves

Carla Ho-a

David Lieb

Ron Ried

Steve Thweatt

Derrick Watson

Terri Willis

Melissa Zak

Jeff Luftig

Steve McNally

Gwen Pomper

Laura Ragin

Erika Smith

Robert Stubbs

Larry Levine

Ceal Barry

Matt Biggers

Emily Canova

Tom McGann

Kate Allison

Jeffrey Anderberg

Quen Ameyaw

Kelsey Cody

Lauren Cross

Marco Dorado

Mitch Fenton

Sam Golon

Anna Henderson

Joey Hubbard

Juedon Kebede

John Lurquin

Laura Michaelson

Ben Nguyen

Divya Reddy

Matt Ribarich

Ellie Roberts

Lora Roberts

Chris Schaefbauer

Colin Wichman