|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policy and Procedure ManualChapter 200, Campus Organization and Management Responsible Department: Offices of the Chancellor and Provost A. This section defines the policy for formal review of administrative units in order to assess overall performance in support of the University's mission of teaching, research, and public service. This policy was adopted in July 1996 in response to State budget reductions and the need for ongoing evaluation of support services. B. This policy applies to all administrative units, including academic support and student services units, within the purview of the Provost & Executive Vice Chancellor, the Vice Chancellors for Administration, Research, Student Affairs, and University Relations, and the Dean--Graduate Studies. (For purposes of this policy, these positions are referred to as "senior administrators.") The units reporting to the senior administrators are listed in the UC Davis administrative organizational chart, Section 200-10. Senior administrators and their management teams have primary responsibility for ensuring that unit goals are defined, agreed upon, and met and that units are operating effectively and efficiently. To that end, senior administrators are responsible for periodically assessing unit performance through administrative unit reviews. Senior administrators may identify units for review for a variety of reasons; for example, to determine a unit's program direction, to determine whether unit plans fully consider service demands and conditions that may have an impact on service, or to determine the adequacy and effectiveness of units. A. Review requirements Senior administrators will assure that each administrative unit within their purview receives a comprehensive review at least once every five years. Each review must address the following: 1. Mission and goals--Confirm that the unit has an appropriate mission statement and achievable goals that are supportive of, and in alignment with, the campus mission, and that managers and employees clearly understand and carry out their mission and goals. 2. Planning--Confirm that there is a short- and long-term planning process that helps the unit anticipate and effectively respond to changes in internal and external environments. The process should address such issues as budget constraints, technology developments, regulatory requirements, and directions being taken by peer organizations. The planning process should also include methodology for assessing and improving the unit's performance. 3. Resource management--Consider whether resources available to the unit are used efficiently and effectively to meet unit and campus goals, and whether changes in the level of resources available to the unit may be warranted by changes in the unit's mission, its internal business practices, or the level and types of services required from the unit by campus and external customers. 4. Service delivery--Examine the assessment processes that the unit uses to learn about the needs and expectations of groups for which they provide services and the satisfaction levels of these groups. 5. Communication--Ensure that effective communication strategies are in place to meet the needs of customers and employees. 6. Workplace climate--Examine efforts to build and maintain an environment conducive to excellence, full participation, appreciation of diversity, and personal and organizational growth. 7. Policies, practices, and processes--Assess the unit's policies and practices to determine whether they are consistent with the unit's mission and goals and with University and campus policies. Examine how the unit's administrative, support, and operational processes are developed, managed, and improved: Are there steps that could be shortened or eliminated, procedures that could be streamlined, additional training that might be provided, technology that could be introduced to expedite the process. B. Review structure and format 1. The senior administrator will determine the specific form of the review. Administrative reviews can take several forms, including: an internal review team, an external review team, peer review, or a team comprised of internal and external reviewers. When determining the most appropriate form of review, the senior administrator and unit manager should assess the circumstances within the unit to be reviewed, the review objectives, and resources available for the review. 2. A review should incorporate an external dimension that may be met by using external models that would provide comparable performance indicators, consulting peers or consultants outside the campus who are familiar with comparable institutions and can provide reliable performance criteria, or inviting reviewers outside the unit to conduct or assist with the review. 3. A review should include the opportunity for significant customer and employee input (e.g., surveys, participation on review teams) on the quality, effectiveness, efficiency, and work climate of the unit. The unit manager should communicate with unit employees regarding the status and preliminary findings of the review and provide an opportunity for employee feedback and discussion. C. Waiver of review To optimize the effective use of resources required for these reviews, senior administrators may waive formal review of units that they and their senior managers have determined are performing effectively and efficiently. The senior administrator must support the decision to waive formal review with data, e.g. customer surveys, performance indicators. D. Reports 1. The unit manager or the chair of the administrative unit review team will summarize review findings and recommendations in a report to the senior administrator. The senior administrator or designee will assure that appropriate actions are taken in response to the report. 2. By September 1 each year, each senior administrator will provide to the Chancellor, vice chancellors, and deans a report that lists the administrative unit reviews that were completed during the previous fiscal year and that specifies reviews planned for the upcoming fiscal year. After the first five-year review cycle (July 1, 2001) and annually thereafter, the list shall also identify those units for which the senior administrator has waived review. Individual vice chancellors and deans may provide advice or comments directly to the senior administrator regarding those units proposed for review during the coming year. Copyright © 2006 The Regents of the
University of California, Davis Campus. All Rights Reserved. |
|
