TO: The University Community
FROM: Hanko Dobi & Bill Norton, Co-Chairs of the Administrative Prioritization Task Force
DATE: September 12, 2013
RE: Results of the Charging Forward Survey of Administrative Program Prioritization
We thank the members of the University community who responded to the call for feedback on the administrative program criteria and draft template, which the Administrative Prioritization Task Force had developed. The survey was sent to UNH officers, deans, and staff in May 2013. We received many useful and thoughtful comments from the 84 people who responded. The Task Force members carefully considered all of these comments in revising the template, which will be piloted with some selected administrative programs. Based on the results of the pilot, the template may see further revisions; however, the Task Force has confidence in the criteria that we have selected along with the questions put forward under each criterion in the template. We believe this will allow the administrative programs to provide the Task Force with the information necessary to successfully complete our task. Consultant Larry Goldstein’s reaction to the Administrative criteria and template was also very positive. He said that our approach may provide more feedback than we want but that folks will appreciate being asked.
The Administrative Prioritization Task Force has strong confidence in the six criteria that we have identified. We found the same from the respondents to the survey, with 55.95% indicating that to “a great extent” the application of the six criteria would produce a fair, holistic evaluation of administrative programs and with 39.29% selecting “to a moderate extent.” Comments such as “every item I could think of to analyze the programs can be traced back to one of the criteria” were supportive. A more detailed breakdown of the quantitative survey data can be found here.
Please be assured that once the pilot is concluded and any necessary adjustments are made to the templates to ensure that the most comprehensive information and data are gathered, all administrative program directors or managers who will be asked to complete the template will be provided with training sessions along with a liaison to the Administrative Task Force.
Based upon the Administrative Prioritization Task Force members’ careful review of all the responses to the survey, some modifications to the template were made to ensure clarity.
In question 1 of both the External Demand & Mandates and Internal Demand criteria sections:
Changed the wording in both the chart and instructions from “proposed university
programs…” to “pending university programs…”
In question 2 of both the External Demand & Mandates and Internal Demand criteria sections:
Changed the number of hours/year from 2,000 hours/year to 1,820 hours/year
In the explanation of the External Demand & Mandates criteria we have added “donors” to the
list of groups that would represent external demand.
In the Cost Effectiveness criteria section we changed the wording from “Identify specific steps
taken to reduce costs and/or to get better results for your budget dollars...…” to “Identify specific
steps taken to get a better return on investment for your budget dollars through cost reductions
and/or improved productivity….”
In the Program Snapshot we added “fiscal” to the years in the charts.
The Administrative Prioritization Task Force appreciates your thoughtful feedback and suggestions for improving the template. For more information about the Charging Forward initiative, please visit the Charging Forward website at http://www.newhaven.edu/ChargingForward/. You are also welcome to email us with any questions or concerns at email@example.com.