Accreditation - Hartnell College!!

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Institutional Self Evaluation – 12-05-12 K-16 Bridge Program (academic program linking area K-16 institutions) Transfer/Career Center TRIO Student Support Services Program Veterans Services K-12 Outreach SERVICE ASSESSMENT AND REDESIGN TO SUPPORT STUDENTS The college and the Division of Student Affairs utilize a variety of surveys, program reviews, assessments, and evaluations (both internal and external) to determine the mix and efficacy of its student support services and to, as needed, revise the array, timing, and delivery of services in support of student learning and achievement. For example, from 2004 to 2006, the Division undertook a comprehensive program review of each of its services and programs utilizing the Productivity Effectiveness Efficiency Responsiveness (PEER) assessment model. In 2007-08, Student Affairs personnel assisted in seeking information from the community. They designed a student survey that specifically asked questions to help better understand how the community rated the student services offered. This set of questions became part of the comprehensive Salinas Valley Vision 2020 study that surveyed and/or interviewed nearly 1,300 service area residents, family members, leaders, employers, business owners, and students. In late 2007-08, Division management and staff reviewed processes and outcomes in order to create a comprehensive narrative, plan, goals, and resource requirements as part of the college‘s Educational and Facilities Master Plan. In late 2008, the college engaged the services of the Monterey Institute for Social Architecture (MISA) to lead an assessment of our enrollment (http://www.misa.ws/Hartnell/Enrollment/Home.html) services (Admissions, Financial Aid, Counseling, Assessment) in order to determine the strengths and weaknesses that resulted in any barriers to student engagement, retention, and success. Throughout 2009, Division management and staff met over several facilitated workshops and retreats to reorganize the flow, structure, and location of student support services in order to better align student support services both programmatically and physically. In the summer of 2009, the Admissions & Records Office and the Financial Aid Office were merged into one area in the new location. The Student Affairs redesign team also developed a new Enrollment Services Specialist position that also serves as a ―one stop‖ position. Employees in these positions are able to assist students who have admissions, records, and/or financial aid questions instead of being directed to another department. In addition, the department restructured its operating hours to better meet the high demand of students seeking financial aid. The area went from being open 53 hours per week to 40 hours per week in 2009-10. Although the reduced financial aid hours continue to today, the customer and employee satisfaction has improved. By closing the office to students, financial aid staff are able to process financial aid files at a much faster pace. Processing time has gone from 12-16 weeks for verified files before the change down to 8-12. The staff developed a Page 140
Institutional Self Evaluation – 12-05-12 new outreach financial aid program called ―Money Mondays.‖ Every Monday from 2 to 6 p.m., students can come into the open lab and receive one-on-one assistance in completing their online FAFSA application from a financial aid professional. Because it proved so valuable to students, this service is now available all year round. [Reference Student survey results] The department welcomes high school students to avail themselves of these services as well. During Fall 2011, the following Student Affairs Division student success services and programs undertook a new PEER program review and assessment: Financial Aid, Admissions and Records, EOPS, DSPS, Counseling Services, Veterans Services, and TRIO/Student Support Services. These comprehensive program reviews and assessments identified, by support service, services provided, students served, impact of programs, best practices, goals and objectives for the upcoming period, and resources required. Further, all of our categorical programs (e.g., EOPS, CARE, CalWORKs, TRIO, GEAR UP) are required to track utilization and impact data and report those data in quarterly and/or annual reports. For example, the TRIO program tracks data relating to academic performance, post secondary awareness and preparation, retention, persistence and graduation, along with the evaluation by students of services provided and various demographic data. In addition to completing state and federal reporting requirements, these programs are also required to complete a PEER program review every three years. In addition to these comprehensive program review and evaluation measures, programs within the Division and College have implemented a variety of point-of-contact student intake and survey forms to gather more robust data for planning, review, reporting, and revision purposes. Sample surveys and forms include: Student Affairs Department Student Feedback Form (II.B.1) Hartnell College Counseling Department Student Survey (II.B.2) Financial Aid Department Student Survey (II.B.3) Financial Aid Money Mondays Survey (II.B.4) Registration Rally Experience Survey (II.B.5) EOPS Student Intake and Evaluation Forms (II.B.6) K-16 Student Intake Form (II.B.7) TRIO Program Student Intake and Evaluation Forms (II.B.8) GEAR UP Intake and Evaluation Forms (II.B.9) EOPS/CARE Social Media (II.B.10) These programs and service evaluations and assessments were complemented by two additional efforts launched Fall, 2011. The Division conducted the 2011-12 PEER assessment across each of its student support services in order to update the 2006 PEER assessment and the 2008-09 external assessment conducted by MISA (Monterey Institute of Social Architecture). To gather comparable data across Division services, management worked with staff from each service area to finalize and implement a student feedback survey form to gather the same ―quality and efficacy of service‖ information across programs, while Page 141
Page 1 and 2:
H A R T N E L L C O M M U N I T Y C
Page 3 and 4:
Institutional Self Evaluation - 12-
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
BSI Improvement (%) Institutional S
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92: Institutional Self Evaluation - 12-
Page 141: Institutional Self Evaluation - 12-
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Approximately $9.7 million or 21% o
Page 253 and 254:
The college meets this standard. Pl
Page 255 and 256:
levels that support the college’s
Page 257 and 258:
III.D.1.b Institutional planning re
Page 259 and 260:
Assumptions are reviewed during the
Page 261 and 262:
The institutional planning and asse
Page 263 and 264:
The audit report includes a managem
Page 265 and 266:
financial decision making process i
Page 267 and 268:
III.D.3.a The institution has suffi
Page 269 and 270:
and restricted funds; and to demons
Page 271 and 272:
Planning Agenda None. III.D.3.d The
Page 273 and 274:
III.D.3.g Contractual agreements wi
Page 275 and 276:
III.D.4 Financial resource planning
Page 277 and 278:
Standard III D: Evidence III.D.1 Ha
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331:
show all

Accreditation - Hartnell College!!

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?