Findings

Iowa State University implemented several strategies and processes to meet the recommendations of the 1996 review. Given below are a few examples of the University’s response to the suggestions of the earlier evaluation team.

1. The University's mission and strategic plan continue to serve as vital guides for setting priorities and making budget decisions. A five-year strategic plan, Forward Thinking: The Iowa State University Strategic Plan for 2005-2010 was recently completed.

With each new strategic plan, the institution’s goals and performance measures have become more focused and specific, thus improving the plan’s usefulness in setting institutional priorities and guiding capital and budgetary decisions. The various groups that contribute to capital planning priorities and the use of new and reallocated funds are consistently asked to base their recommendations on proposals’ concordance with the University’s mission and strategic plan. In addition, the latest strategic plan has been central in forming priorities for the emerging private fundraising campaign. President Geoffroy recently formed a committee to study the University’s current budget model and to recommend a new model that is easier to understand, more responsive to changes in resources and responsibilities, and better aligns resources with units’ responsibilities and progress on achieving strategic goals. An open, inclusive process is being used to develop the new model. Work on it will be completed by July 2, 2006, with implementation scheduled to begin July 1, 2007 for the FY08 budget cycle. These changes demonstrate the University’s desire to more closely link planning, budgeting, and articulating University priorities. These efforts have been encouraged, reinforced, and commended by the Board of Regents, State of Iowa.

2. The University has taken several steps to increase faculty participation in planning and budgeting. A 41-member committee, half comprised of faculty members, was involved in the strategic planning process. The customary series of focus groups and forums for gathering feedback were augmented by a web site that was used to keep the University community informed and as a mechanism for gathering input. Shortly after his arrival, President Geoffroy formed a Budget Cabinet that includes the University’s three vice presidents and the assistant to the president for budget planning and analysis. Several constituent groups inform Budget Cabinet decisions. The Provost meets regularly with the Resource Policies and Allocation Council of the Faculty Senate to gather their input and concerns in the budget process. President Geoffroy has also formed the President’s Advisory Committee on Budget Priorities and Planning, and meets with this group throughout the year to seek their advice on important budget decisions. The Advisory Committee, comprised of 15 members, includes faculty, student, and professional staff leaders. Nine committee members are faculty, not including the President and assistant to the president, who also hold faculty status.

3. The University has added 1.7 million square feet of new space to the campus and funded many renovation projects since the 1996 accreditation visit. This work has been done in response to the most critical programmatic needs and in accordance with deferred maintenance priorities. Always a significant challenge, deferred maintenance issues have been exacerbated by several years of reduced state funding for higher education. Budget cutbacks have been so deep that the Board of Regents, State of Iowa, has requested that the Iowa Legislature make significant investments to ameliorate deferred maintenance in its capital plan. The University continues to optimize scarce resources and capture every opportunity possible to address deferred maintenance.

4. Iowa State participated in forming the Kellogg Commission’s series of reports on the future of the land grant university. These reports have helped shape the University’s planning documents and its approach to providing Cooperative Extension Services. University Extension recently completed a comprehensive futuring process to:

• Assess the environment in which ISU Extension operates and major tendencies for change in this environment

• Develop a vision for the future of ISU Extension that is consistent with the new environment and the traditional mission of Extension

• Prepare a roadmap and guidelines for change that are consistent with the evolving environment and the vision and mission of Extension

• Establish priorities for change given the vision and roadmap and the tendencies in our environment

The Committee held hearings around Iowa asking citizens what they wanted from ISU Extension Service and then completed a report during spring of FY03. Widely vetted within Extension, the report was also shared external and internal partners and County Extension Councils. Based on related comments, an Implementation Plan was provided by Extension Administration in fall of FY04. The Implementation Plan was again widely vetted and discussed. Task forces to define specific actions for achieving the implementation were appointed and reported in early Summer of FY04.

Implementation started in early FY05 and some actions are already underway. Among the outcomes of the futuring process are actions that will:

• Connect Extension more actively with community initiatives, allocating at least 20% of the budget to this activity—changing over the years with the priorities of Iowa communities

• Align programming more closely with priorities of the state government

• Support different types of local offices consistent with county budgets and service demands

• Focus on high-level content and provide training and expectations of staff and faculty to continuously improve subject matter knowledge

• Add to the cooperation and partnerships with others in the education and technical assistance business

• Increase program focus on economic growth and development

5. The University has made significant progress in its efforts to fully integrate outcomes assessment into its academic culture. The University catalog now includes descriptions of intended student outcomes for every academic program. A dedicated web site provides guidance for developing and evaluating outcomes assessment plans and links to college and departmental outcomes assessment plans. In addition, student outcomes assessment is now an integral part of the program review process required for every academic program.

Student outcomes assessment is an area that needs and is receiving continuing attention. Several University programs and departments have well-developed assessment processes, while others have demonstrated less progress. The Office of the Provost in 2005 added a staff member dedicated to assessing student learning and continuous improvement of the University’s academic programs. This newly created position is intended to provide overall coordination to make these processes more systematic. While the University has made significant progress, there is room for additional improvement. The Office of the Provost is dedicated to using outcomes assessment as the principle tool for guiding the improvement of academic programs.

The University has responded to several other issues raised in the 1996 report by:

• Generating more effective communication among the different constituencies within the University in order to facilitate decision-making

• Focusing on retention of ethnic and racial minorities in both the student and faculty populations

• Developing training in information technologies for faculty, staff and students

• Reviewing the handling of student enrollments, fees and faculty workload calculations for continuing education offerings, assessing graduate education, including enrollment demographics, program size, teaching assistant training, and student stipends and financial assistance.