2.5 – Institutional Effectiveness

The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission.

__X_ Compliance ____ Partial Compliance ____ Non-Compliance

Statement of Rationale for Judgment of Compliance

The Planning & Evaluation Process

The current planning and evaluation processes of the university were established in 1998 with the printing of the Handbook for Institutional Effectiveness Through Administrative Planning and Educational Program Assessment (p9-42). The Handbook dictates that every unit will annually prepare a plan of action in the spring and Effectiveness Report in the fall. Each Effectiveness Report includes a revision statement showing any changes from the previous year, a renewed strategic plan and an improvement summary section.

Although the University Strategic Planning Process has slightly interrupted unit planning with downward expansion needs, the planning process has remained intact with a spring plan in preparation for budget requests and a fall evaluation. This planning process is required of all major administrative units in the university. Particularly small units work with their main department to submit their reports. A current organizational chart is included to illustrate the administrative organization of the university.

For evaluation processes related to individual academic programs (also referred to as “assessment plans”), see Comprehensive Standard 3.4.1. Units systematically participated in this process until the Spring 2002. The Physical Plant and Office of the President offer examples of this participation.

The systematic and cyclical nature of the prescribed processes was interrupted in the Spring of 2002 as the university prepared to form a partnership with Texarkana College in response to requests from the residents of the region. The University and residents supporting the University hoped to directly advance the University’s mission by providing an increase in educational opportunities to the area. The Texarkana College partnership would allow shared administration with the formation of two distinct institutions—Texarkana College and A&M-Texarkana.

The University Planning and Assessment Committee (UPAC) formed and met twice a month to re-configure the University Strategic Plan and coordinate with the new administrative structure. Unit plans were put on hold as the details of the new plan were deliberated in detail to accommodate a significantly different administrative structure.

After months of negotiations, the plan was approved by the Texas A&M University System Board of Regents and by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. However, the partnership was not approved by SACS Commission on Colleges. The University, therefore, had to revamp its expansion efforts. University administration, community leaders and the governing board designed a new plan for downward expansion and the physical campus move. The UPAC responded immediately by redesigning goals. Downward expansion and the campus move were approved by the Texas A&M University Board of Regents and by the 78^th Texas Legislature on June 21, 2003.

With the new institutional vision, UPAC focused on goals that would reflect the new University vision: to become a full 4-year region institution of higher education. Unit plans were still on hold until clear university goals could be established.

Fall 2003 allowed for focused campus planning. The administration organized a Downward Expansion Committee (DEC) to develop a specific development plan. A&M-Texarkana finalized the University Strategic plan in Spring 2004. Administration instructed all units to link the Fall 2004 plans to the new University Strategic Plan. All fourteen administrative units completed these plans.

Research-Based Planning

Administration instructs each unit to incorporate success indicators into the strategic plan. These success indicators identify how units will assess progress toward each objective and include a description of required research-based assessment instruments. (Success Indicators were referred to as Assessment Measures in the 1998 Handbook).

From Spring 2002 to Spring 2005, administrative unit staff were heavily involved in (1) campus-wide construction of the new University Strategic Plan, (2) Subsequent planning for reorganization related to the planned partnership with Texarkana College, (3) Downward expansion planning; and (4) the new campus master plan. Staff based each initiative on feasibility studies of the area and institution. These studies include Shaping the Future and Gateway to the Future, both prepared by the Texas A&M Public Policy Institute of College Station, TX. Shaping the Future, released in 2001, details the economic, educational and demographic growth of the region and explains how a lack of regional educational opportunities has stunted this growth. This document served as a primary reference for planning documents related to both the partnership with Texarkana College and downward expansion. Gateway to the Future, released in 2005, focuses on the economic impact that the new campus will create from an increase in educational opportunities. This document also considers the impact of adding a College of Engineering to the University.

Improving the Process

After exploring the results of Shaping the Future, the University began an aggressive program to broaden its degree program offerings. The University performed feasibility studies on nineteen planned programs. Ten of these programs have been successfully established, with four programs currently under construction.

Gateway to the Future has influenced local community leaders and state legislators to support the relocation of the new expanded campus to a 400+ acre site donated by Texarkana, Texas. Gensler and Associates of Houston designed the campus, now approved by the Texas A&M University Board of Regents. Requests have been made from the Texas Legislature for $65 million to complete Phase I of the construction of the new campus and to add new programs necessary to expand the curriculum to include first and second year classes.

Effectively accomplishing the mission

Through these feasibility studies, A&M-Texarkana is improving its future outlook. Although the Texarkana College partnership was not feasible, downward expansion and the campus move provide an infinite number of opportunities to the area, resulting in an even stronger regional tie between economics and education. Through approval of the Texas A&M University System Board of Regents, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and the Texas State Legislators, A&M-Texarkana steps closer to new possibilities as it continues to meet its mission.

On-going unit planning has fully resumed and addresses the new goals of the university. Budget ties are created through budget request forms, allowing each unit to link budget requests to unit objectives and specific University-wide goals. The Administrative Council, comprised of the President and Vice-Presidents, allows unit supervisors to justify their annual budget requests through ties to the University goals and mission.

Prior to 2002, the budget link was made through a process of Strategic Initiatives (SI) in which the Administrative Council allocated $100,000. During this time, UPAC annually reviewed applications to determine fund allocation. Since 2002, the State Legislature of Texas has become increasingly prudent with its funding. This change in budget allocation made the Administrative Council rethink the budget request process. The new process allows departments to link budget requests to the University strategic plan for a better chance of gaining the requested funding.

Organizational unit responsible for this requirement: Office of the President, Office of the Provost and VPAA, Office of Institutional Effectiveness