1. CYCLES OF IMPROVEMENT
    1. three distinct cycles that occur simultaneously
    2. Action
      1. one-year cycle
      2. three or four Action Projects
    3. Strategy
      1. four year cycle
      2. create and maintain an up-to-date Systems Portfolio
    4. Accreditation ᾰ
      1. seven-year cycle
      2. reviews evidence from both the action cycles and strategy cycles demonstrating that
        1. an AQIP organization continues to comply with the Higher Learning Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation
        2. continuing its participation in AQIP will result in measurable performance improvement.
      3. Check-Up Visit t
        1. year or two before its Reaffirmation of Accreditation review
        2. confirms the improvements as well as the accuracy of the evidence it has provided to AQIP
        3. provides helpful feedback and consultation on specific issues of its choosing.
  1. APPLICATION
    1. Self Assessment
      1. Examiner –
        1. For information on the instrument see attached sheet
        2. designed to help institutions
          1. gauge their progress in creating a culture of continuous improvement
          2. discover how and where they can next profitably invest their efforts
      2. Consultant
        1. assists in interpretation of Examiner
        2. can be colleague from a similar institution that currently participates in AQIP
    2. Questionsgauge the organization’s compliance with he Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation and its readiness to benefit from participating in the Academic Quality Improvement Program
    3. Total response to all 8 questions should not require more than 10 ᾰ 12 pages..
    4. Helpful if refer to supporting evidence
      1. Questions
        1. (Questions 1 – 2) Evidence of Compliance with Accreditation Expectations
          1. Question 1 provide evidence that your organization meets each of the Higher Learning Commission’s five Criteria for Accreditation.
            1. several paragraphs (and/or lists of bullets) per criterion
          2. Question 2
            1. Part A: explain how the university has demonstrated responsiveness to concerns/opportunities for improvement raised by the Commission in previous reviews
            2. Part B: identify plans for responding to any remaining concerns.
      2. (Questions 3 – 6) Evidence of Understanding and Commitment to Continuous Improvement.
        1. An adequate response 300-500 words each.
        2. convince the AQIP Review Panel you understand what organizational commitment to continuous improvement and AQIP means, and that you already have ᾰ and will continue to ᾰ take actions that demonstrate your commitment to both.
        3. Questions 4, 5, and 6 need clear, strong responses to demonstrate your organization’s enthusiasm for continuous quality improvement.
      3. (Questions 7 – 8) Evidence of Readiness for AQIP Processes
        1. An adequate response 300-500 words each
        2. timeline you will follow to participate in Strategy forum
        3. Question 7, not necessary to have completed a self-assessment, but must clearly and substantively explain how and when plan to meet this expectation.
  1. STRATEGY FORUM
    1. Forum team
      1. at least six (and no more than twelve) members Most teams average 8-9 people
      2. should include CEO, an academic dean or vice president, a leader of the faculty, a leader of the staff, and a member of your governing board
      3. should include people who possess some knowledge of systems thinking and quality principles.
      4. connected with the group(s) that will take the lead in driving the quality improvement program
    2. Purpose
      1. provide a supportive, facilitated peer feedback that will stimulate and assist in selecting, critically examining, and committing to a key set of Action Projects.
      2. launch preparation of Systems Portfolio.
    3. New AQIP institutions concentrate first Strategy Forum on selecting initial Action Projects
      1. In preparation tentatively identify three or four Action Projects
      2. List tentative Action Project ideas in the Strategy for Action Workbook (homework for the Forum).
      3. At the Forum receive feedback that could cause the team to reconsider if the three or four tentative Projects will best help you address your opportunities and gaps;
      4. several months to digest the feedback and settle on the Action Projects after the Forum
    4. Subsequent Strategy Forums concentrate on using the feedback from the Systems Appraisal to identify broader institutional improvement strategies, while continuing to use Action Projects to implement these strategies.
  1. SYSTEMS PORTFOLIO
    1. No more than 75 to 100 single-spaced pages in length,
      1. including the Institutional Overview and all graphics
    2. Web based posted on University Web site
    3. Describes
      1. key systems and processes the organization uses to achieve its goals
      2. performance results it obtains from them.
    4. Organized around the nine AQIP Criteria
      1. mission-focused and comprehensive.
      2. together, provide a framework that supports improvement within any college or university.
      3. each deals with a group of related pocesses,
      4. allows an institution to analyze, understand, and explore opportunities for improving these rocesses.
      5. each Criterion demands a set of key measures that track an institution's performance in both these processes and their outcomes.
      6. The AQIP Criteria encompass (and exceed) the expectations of the Commission’s traditional Criteria for Accreditation.
      7. Categories
        1. AQIP Category One HELPING STUDENTS LEARN
        2. AQIP Category Two ACCOMPLISHING OTHER DISTINCTIVE OBJECTIVES
        3. AQIP Category Three UNDERSTANDING STUDENTS’ AND OTHERSTAKEHOLDERS’ NEEDS
        4. AQIP Category Four VALUING PEOPLE
        5. AQIP Category Five LEADING AND COMMUNICATING
        6. AQIP Category Six SUPPORTING INSTITUTIONAL OPERATIONS
        7. AQIP Category Seven MEASURING EFFECTIVENESS A
        8. QIP Category Eight PLANNING CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
        9. AQIP Category Nine Building Collaborative Relationships
    5. Answers questions in four areas for each criterion
      1. Context for analysis institution characteristics relevant to the area
      2. Processes what process are currently in effect in this area
      3. Results what are the results of these processes
      4. Improvement : how does the institutions improve this area
    6. Incorporates mprovements in the processes an institution employs or the performance results it achieves from action projects
    7. System Appraisal of the Systems Portfolio
      1. provides written, actionable feedback to create strategies and actions that will move the university quickly toward achievement of their goals.
  1. ACTION PROJECTS
    1. What Action Projects Accomplish
      1. build and strengthen universities quality initiative
      2. demonstrate to AQIP the earnestness and vitality of the institutional commitment to quality
    2. Not all university initiatives will be action projects
      1. timing not appropriate
      2. content not appropriate
      3. limit ongoing AQIP projects to 3 or 4
      4. Three or four “vital few” Action Projects
      5. swiftly and determinedly move the institution closer to being the institution it wants to be.
      6. mix of projects
        1. complete in no more than three years.
        2. complete more quickly -- perhaps in six months
    3. Based on Self assessment
      1. insight into where gaps exist in the institution.
      2. which systems could benefit most from a focused improvement effort.)
      3. opportunities (e.g., “if we had a stronger process for student recruitment, we could…” or “if our planning system allowed us to foresee major changes early, we might…”)
      4. problems and irritants ᾰ systems that have worked poorly in the past ᾰ (e.g., “everyone’s complained for years about the way we plan and schedule classesᾰnow’s our chance to repair the problem by redesigning our system”).
    4. Characteristics
      1. Important to the institution
      2. Make a serious difference to institutional performance.
      3. Embody challenging but “do-able” goals.
      4. Stretch the institution in new ways.
      5. Focus both on efficiency and on benefits to students and other stakeholders.
      6. Help the institution learn and change as it accomplishes something significant.
    5. least one must fall primarily under Helping Students Learn
    6. Organizations can complete Action Projects and begin new ones at any time
    7. Each fall, Action Project Updates provided to AQIP
      1. AQIP provides written feedback on these reports.