TSPR Higher Education Protocols- Chapter 1

Chapter 1
Governance and Leadership - Institutional Support

The Institutional Support chapter evaluates the leadership of the institution and how effectively it puts in place systems that ensure that the institution is well managed and academically successful. These areas include:
Part 1
1.A. Governance
1.B. Meetings
1.C. Board Policies
1.D. Institutional Policies and Procedures
1.E. Organizational Structure
1.F. Office of the President
Part 2
1.G. Office of the Chancellor
1.H. Internal Communications
1.I. Legal Services
1.J. Planning
1.K. Review and Evaluation of Contracting Process

PART 2
1.G. Office of the Chancellor
In a system setting the chancellor, aided by vice chancellors and other administrative staff are responsible for carrying out board policy and managing the member institutions in the most cost effective and efficient manner possible.
Data Needs

Chancellor's contract, resume and last three evaluations
Financial disclosure statements for the last three years
Documentation of recent hiring or search for a chancellor

Possible People to Interview
Board members
Chancellor and vice chancellors (if system)
Presidents
Activities to Perform

1.G.1. Examine the chancellor's contract and outline the terms and conditions of the contract including a history of renewals and compare the contract to statutory requirements, noting any variances. Outline all performance components and terms that might protect the institution from the necessity of "buying" out the contract if either the institution or the president wants to separate.
1.G.2. If a recent chancellor search or hiring process was conducted in the institution, outline the process used by the institution and evaluate the effectiveness of the process.
1.G.3. Examine the last three board evaluations of the chancellor and assess whether expectations defined clear and measurable goals and objectives, and whether the chancellor was given honest and meaningful feedback based upon progress toward expectations.

Questions to Ask
Does the chancellor acknowledge his position as chief executive officer for the institution by:

Effectively providing leadership and direction to member institutions?
Making other recommendations to the board regarding operation of the institutions including annual budgets?
Attending all meetings of the board?
Recommending policies to the board?
Implementing adopted board policies?
Establishing a process to communicate regularly with the board to keep them informed of institution activities?
Delegating authority when appropriate?
Coordinating the implementation of procedures regarding the operation of the member institutions?

Does the chancellor actively participating in local, regional and national higher education administration associations?
1.H. Internal Communication
Internal communication includes the communication among administrators, faculty and staff of the institution as well as communication with associated institutions within a university system.
Data Needs

A list of any grievances filed with THECB, the Secretary of State, law enforcement agencies or the courts against the institution or individuals within the institution, the board or individual board members in the prior three years
Copies of any employee communication tools, such as newsletters and the like
Copies of employee surveys or other mechanisms used to gather information regarding employee satisfaction

Possible People to Interview
Board members
Chancellor and vice chancellors (if system)
President
Cabinet members (vice presidents and provost)
Board Secretary
Representatives of faculty organizations, campus improvement committees and institution improvement committees
Activities to Perform

1.H.1. Examine the information flow from systemwide boards or administrators to the President (if such a system exists) and from the President's office to the various departments and schools and prepare a list of all formal communication devices showing the frequency, content, audience and volume of each publication or communication.
1.H.2. Examine the flow of communication from the various schools or departments to the President's Office, administrators and statewide boards and prepare a list of all formal and informal communication devices used to gather feedback and suggestions for improvement.
1.H.3. Examine emergency and non-recurring communication mechanisms used to disseminate information to faculty, staff and students.
1.H.4. Prepare a list of all staff and student advisory committees, planning committees, employee organizations and the like, and determine what mechanisms are in place to involve these stakeholders in the institution's decision-making process or build consensus.
1.H.5. Examine survey, public forum and focus group results to gain an understanding of the staff and student perception of internal communication. List areas of strength or concern and any suggestions for improvement.
1.H.6. Document all formal and informal grievance or suggestion processes and evaluate the extent to which the processes encourage employee feedback.

Questions to Ask
How does the systemwide board, if one exists, communicate expectations to member institutions? What mechanisms are in place to allow feedback from member institutions before final decisions are rendered by the systemwide board? How do member institutions receive and disseminate board activities to staff and faculty in their institutions? Is the organizational approach used within the system conducive to open, two-way communication between member institutions? Between member institutions and the system board and administration?
How is shared decision-making or consensus building carried out in the institution? When there are conflicts between faculty and staff, how are those conflicts resolved? Has the internal communication process produced increased staff productivity and satisfaction and less faculty turnover?
Does shared decision-making have the support of both the board and the president? Does the institution provide extensive and continuous training before and during implementation of new programs within the institution? What type of training is provided?
Is an appropriate amount of time spent changing role definitions, training staff, educating the public, establishing objectives, developing and implementing programs and monitoring program success? Do departments or schools have access to accurate information so that they can establish objectives and develop and implement programs to meet those objectives?
What is the board's role in shared decision-making? What is the president's role? How do they strive to decentralize decisions to the department or school level and solicit the input of stakeholders in the decision-making process? How are the parameters set for the decision-making process that is shared or decentralized? Who determines the level of decision-making authority and how is that formalized or understood?
Do deans or department heads develop their respective colleges, school's or department's shared decision-making policies and procedures? How do faculty, parents, students and the public provide input for their respective college's, department's or school's shared decision-making policies and procedures and campus improvement plan?
Are goals determined on a campus level from a campus needs assessment and outcome data?
Are activities based on goals and are they initiated and directed by the campus staff with measurable outcomes? To what extent is budget development and allocation of resources campus-controlled?
How do college, school or departmental plans link to the overall mission and goals of the institution? What processes are in place to ensure that colleges, schools or departments are working in concert with the mission and vision of the institution? What mechanisms are in place to prevent activities within colleges, schools or departments that run contrary to the overall vision and mission of the institution?
Are staff selection criteria guided by standards developed by a campus within the context of state and institution guidelines? Is the campus organizational structure arranged functionally to encourage and facilitate shared decision-making and input? Does campus staff verify that shared decision-making is established and working?
1.I. Legal Services
All institutions need legal services, whether they operate as part of a system or as an independent institution. The question is how and where those services are provided. In system settings, legal services may be provided at the system level, yet some member institutions retain their own counsel for very specific purposes.
Data Needs

Legal contracts, procedures and expenditures for current and prior year
A list of any grievances filed with THECB, the Secretary of State, law enforcement agencies or the courts against the institution or individuals within the institution, the board or individual board members in the prior three years
Copy of legal liability insurance policy
History of major lawsuits
Legal services budgets for current and preceding year including updates
List of contracted, cooperative and partnership services including legal liability insurance coverages

Possible People to Interview
Chancellor and vice chancellors (if system)
President
Cabinet members (vice presidents and provost)
General Counsel, if applicable
Internal auditors
Activities to Perform

1.I.1. Examine the actual expenditures, current year's budget and invoices for legal services for the last 1-2 years, as available, and create a chart that shows the name of the in-house attorney or external law firm that represent the institution, the nature of the work done by each firm, and the amount paid to each firm.
1.I.2. Create a list of major lawsuits, judgments or litigation and show the associated costs and current status.
1.I.3. Determine the terms and conditions of any existing legal liability insurance contracts.

Questions to Ask
Does the institution use cost-efficient legal services to keep abreast of changes in the law, review policy, provide representation in legal actions and reduce the risk of lawsuits? Does the institution employ an attorney (either in-house, on a retainer, or in a cooperative arrangement with another institution) with the primary responsibility of advising the board, reviewing policy and reducing the risk of lawsuits? Is legal counsel available to the board in a timely manner?
Does the institution use an organized evaluation process to determine the circumstances under which outside counsel should be used with cost effectiveness as a consideration? Has the institution established a system to review legal costs to determine whether it is more cost-efficient and practical to have a staff attorney or to contract out for legal services on an as-needed basis?
Does the institution use a tracking system that alerts of pending deadlines, produces reports for the board and categorizes types of legal actions?
Is the institution paying for legal liability insurance that protects itself from catastrophic litigation costs? Does the institution routinely request cost proposals for legal services? Is the institution paying a fair market rate for legal services? Who is responsible for monitoring legal bills using billing rates, number of hours billed, nature of work performed and the individual performing the service?
1.J. Planning
State law requires institutions to ensure that careful planning and evaluation occur at the campus and institution level. An institution with a strategic plan that has received broad-based input and has well defined goals will be better able to attain state standards in respect to academic excellence indicators. Evaluation of an institution's programs allows the board and administrators to gauge the success of each program by determining if key objectives and results were obtained and if the benefits merit the costs. Planned programmatic changes can then be made based on those results. SEE INSTRUCTION AND ACADEMIC SUPPORT CHAPTER.
Data Needs

Institution mission, strategic plan and goals
Description of the strategic planning process
Copies of all planning documents including the strategic plan, Facility Plan (FP) including institution owned sites and growth projections specific to each attendance area in the institution and Technology Plan (TP)
Evaluation /Institutional Effectiveness Processes
Copies of all external audits, reviews, reports, surveys and survey results submitted by outside consultants in the past three to five years.

Possible People to Interview
Board members
Chancellor and vice chancellors (if system)
President
Cabinet members (vice presidents and provost)
Individuals responsible for tracking institutional effectiveness
Deans or department heads
Representatives of faculty organizations, staff councils, planning councils, business community and the like
Members of facilities committee if one exists
Internal auditors
Activities to Perform

1.J.1. Prepare a flow chart of the institution's planning activities beginning with the development of a mission and goals by the board and ending with the approval, implementation and evaluation steps. Show the technology links, as well as the individuals or departments responsible for each step in the process. Describe the level of involvement in planning, i.e., do staff have a role, are department heads involved, etc?
1.J.2. Compile a list of instructional materials, training events and the like that are used to communicate instructions to participants in the planning process.
1.J.3. Using copies of all institution planning documents including Strategic Plans, Facility Master Plans, Technology Plans and the like determine the nature and scope of each plan, the time frame of the plan, and the process by which the plan was developed.
1.J.4. Using the compiled planning documents, create a chart to show whether each plan contains board approved goals, objectives, implementation strategies, assignments of responsibilities, links to the annual budget, annual monitoring activities, and the like. In addition, evaluate how the goals, objectives and strategies of each plan are linked to each other and the budget, the assignment of responsibility for implementation, and the process by which the plan's implementation is monitored.
1.J.5. Conduct a comparative analysis of campus performance data to the institution's allocation of resources in order to determine if academic performance data is being used to determine the appropriate alignment of resources on all campuses? Compare findings to that of comparable institutions.
1.J.6. Examine any formal or informal program or services evaluation processes. Determine what staff perform specific evaluations, whether the evaluations are required by state or federal law, whether evaluation activities are prioritized, and if so, by what methodology (e.g., board policy, student needs, etc.)

Questions to Ask
Planning Capabilities
Does the institution have an individual that oversees the planning and evaluation process? Does this individual have sufficient support staff? Does the position in charge of planning have sufficient authority to encourage the participation of all areas of the institution?
From an organizational standpoint, do all participants in the planning process have a clear understanding of the process and their role in that process? Are instructions clear and provided to all participants in a timely manner? Are there training sessions sufficient to ensure that every participant has a clear understanding of the steps in the process?
What are the obstacles within the institution to effective planning? What attempts have been made to overcome those obstacles? What areas of the institution are doing the best job of planning and implementation? Are there things to be learned from the successful groups that could be shared with groups that are struggling?
How is technology used in the planning and evaluation process? What are the weaknesses and strengths of the current technology for planning purposes? Can individuals from throughout the institution enter and retrieve information from the planning documents or is duplicative entry required? What could be done to ensure that the process is paperless and that each piece of information is entered only once?
What is the board's role in the planning process? When planning documents are presented to the board, how long does it take for the board to act on the recommendations? Is the board supportive of the planning process and how is this support exhibited?
Are external consultants used to facilitate planning? Have they been effective? What value are they adding to the process? At what point will the planning process be self-sustaining, or is it more desirable to continue to use outside consultants? If so, why?
Strategic Planning and Institutional Mission
Are the goals of peripheral plans compatible with the strategic plan? Is the strategic plan aligned with plans for member institutions, departments and schools? Does the budget reflect goals, strategic plan, facility plan, technology plan, etc.? How are the departmental budgets tied to the institution's strategic plan? What is the process for assuring that funds are budgeted in accordance with the institution's strategic plan?
Does the board establish annual goals and undertake a formal planning process? Does the board, chancellor and/or president conduct annual goal setting and planning sessions? Is the board involved in adopting annual goals to improve the institution's programs and operations?
How are institution plans and goals publicized? Is the institution reviewing progress of goal achievement regularly, or at least once a year? Is a priority placed on instructional program goals and student achievement goals? Are essential resources dedicated for goal achievement?
Are the Board of Regents, president and other administrative staff involved in developing a multi-year strategic plan for the institution? Does strategic planning include these components: general administration, education (including instruction), evaluation and student services, business operations, human resource operations, communications and university and alumni involvement?
Are demographic projections collected from verifiable sources? Do plans include full disclosure of the fiscal impact of policy or programmatic changes? Has the institution done a future needs analysis and an evaluation of future capability in each functional area? Is there a documented process for measuring progress toward its goals? Are there direct ties to annual budgets? Does the system of annual reviews and updates keep pace with ever changing needs? Has the institution developed a technology plan that realistically meets the projected demographic needs and academic goals of the institution within budget constraints and policy guidelines?
Has the institution allocated adequate resources to develop and implement a realistic long-range master plan for educational facilities? Will the plan meet the projected needs of the institution as anticipated through demographic study? What internal and external groups were involved in the planning process?
Does the institution use a system to select and acquire proper school sites in a timely manner using school site selection criterion to ensure facilities are located to serve the proposed attendance area economically, with maximum convenience and safety? Is there a system to assess sites that also evaluates fair market value? Is there a process to systematically determine the student capacity and educational adequacy of existing facilities and evaluates alternatives to new construction? Does the institution seek donated land from developers?
Relationship Between Planning Processes and Actions
Does the institution make itself accountable to its customers by:

Having clearly stated goals and measurable objectives for its major educational and operational programs?
Using appropriate performance and measures to evaluate its major educational and operational programs and using these in management decision-making?
Setting performance benchmarks for its major educational and operational programs that may include appropriate standards from comparable school institutions, government agencies, and private industry?
Reporting on the performance and cost efficiency of its major educational and operational programs to ensure accountability to students, parents and other constituents?

Does the institution regularly review and use evaluation results to improve the performance and cost efficiency of its major educational and operational programs as defined in the strategic plan and other planning documents? Are these evaluations used when deciding to keep or replace educational programs?
How are non-educational programs evaluated? Does the board conduct an annual self-evaluation? Does the institution regularly evaluate the food service program based on established benchmarks and implement improvements to increase revenue and reduce costs? Does the institution regularly monitor and evaluate its self-insurance program to ensure the feasibility of its self-insured coverage?
Do locally developed board policies require institution management to conduct periodic program evaluations? Is a program evaluation schedule presented annually to the Board of Regents?
Are long-range plans for program evaluation reviewed and revised annually?
Is there a periodic review of all institution programs? Are procedures for review and evaluation of institution programs and services published and disseminated? Are evaluations of program and services reviewed with staff before the next year's planning process? Are program and services evaluation results shared with the Board of Regents, and where appropriate, advisory committees? Is cost data reviewed and compared with program and service objectives and results?
How does the board and administration review Comptroller, THECB and SAO audits, evaluations and monitoring initiatives? What is the decision-making process regarding the types and number of internal/external special audits completed each year? How does the board and administration ensure that they receive an annual external audit and use the audit to improve operations?
What reports have been prepared by external groups? How are the results tracked and reported?
Has the institution established an internal audit function that:

Provides assurances that the internal control processes in the organization are adequately designed and functioning effectively?
Offers recommendations and counsel to management that improve process performance?
Reports directly to the board and is independent of influence by institution administration?

SEE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT CHAPTER
What staff and procedures are in place that encourage and facilitate the evaluation of potential cost savings alternatives such as outside contracting and privatization?
Has the institution established and implemented strategies to continually assess the reliability of its data?
Are customer satisfaction (internal and external) surveys conducted by the institution?
1.K. Review and Evaluation of Contracting Process
Institution management functions such as legal services can be purchased or contracted for through private companies or interlocal agreements with neighboring institutions or other governmental entities. It is important to regularly evaluate whether there are goods or services that can be obtained from the private sector at a lower cost, higher quality or both. It is equally important to continually evaluate existing contracts to determine if the institution is getting the best value possible through the contracting arrangement. Further, institutions are subject to the state's contract workforce provisions, consequently all contracted positions must be tracked and reported to the state. This contracting and evaluation process is discussed in great detail in the PURCHASING CHAPTER.

1.G.1.	Examine the chancellor's contract and outline the terms and conditions of the contract including a history of renewals and compare the contract to statutory requirements, noting any variances. Outline all performance components and terms that might protect the institution from the necessity of "buying" out the contract if either the institution or the president wants to separate.
1.G.2.	If a recent chancellor search or hiring process was conducted in the institution, outline the process used by the institution and evaluate the effectiveness of the process.
1.G.3.	Examine the last three board evaluations of the chancellor and assess whether expectations defined clear and measurable goals and objectives, and whether the chancellor was given honest and meaningful feedback based upon progress toward expectations.

1.H.1.	Examine the information flow from systemwide boards or administrators to the President (if such a system exists) and from the President's office to the various departments and schools and prepare a list of all formal communication devices showing the frequency, content, audience and volume of each publication or communication.
1.H.2.	Examine the flow of communication from the various schools or departments to the President's Office, administrators and statewide boards and prepare a list of all formal and informal communication devices used to gather feedback and suggestions for improvement.
1.H.3.	Examine emergency and non-recurring communication mechanisms used to disseminate information to faculty, staff and students.
1.H.4.	Prepare a list of all staff and student advisory committees, planning committees, employee organizations and the like, and determine what mechanisms are in place to involve these stakeholders in the institution's decision-making process or build consensus.
1.H.5.	Examine survey, public forum and focus group results to gain an understanding of the staff and student perception of internal communication. List areas of strength or concern and any suggestions for improvement.
1.H.6.	Document all formal and informal grievance or suggestion processes and evaluate the extent to which the processes encourage employee feedback.

1.I.1.	Examine the actual expenditures, current year's budget and invoices for legal services for the last 1-2 years, as available, and create a chart that shows the name of the in-house attorney or external law firm that represent the institution, the nature of the work done by each firm, and the amount paid to each firm.
1.I.2.	Create a list of major lawsuits, judgments or litigation and show the associated costs and current status.
1.I.3.	Determine the terms and conditions of any existing legal liability insurance contracts.

1.J.1.	Prepare a flow chart of the institution's planning activities beginning with the development of a mission and goals by the board and ending with the approval, implementation and evaluation steps. Show the technology links, as well as the individuals or departments responsible for each step in the process. Describe the level of involvement in planning, i.e., do staff have a role, are department heads involved, etc?
1.J.2.	Compile a list of instructional materials, training events and the like that are used to communicate instructions to participants in the planning process.
1.J.3.	Using copies of all institution planning documents including Strategic Plans, Facility Master Plans, Technology Plans and the like determine the nature and scope of each plan, the time frame of the plan, and the process by which the plan was developed.
1.J.4.	Using the compiled planning documents, create a chart to show whether each plan contains board approved goals, objectives, implementation strategies, assignments of responsibilities, links to the annual budget, annual monitoring activities, and the like. In addition, evaluate how the goals, objectives and strategies of each plan are linked to each other and the budget, the assignment of responsibility for implementation, and the process by which the plan's implementation is monitored.
1.J.5.	Conduct a comparative analysis of campus performance data to the institution's allocation of resources in order to determine if academic performance data is being used to determine the appropriate alignment of resources on all campuses? Compare findings to that of comparable institutions.
1.J.6.	Examine any formal or informal program or services evaluation processes. Determine what staff perform specific evaluations, whether the evaluations are required by state or federal law, whether evaluation activities are prioritized, and if so, by what methodology (e.g., board policy, student needs, etc.)