ࡱ>  ybjbjcTcT 0&>>yEEEEEYYYYuYAlO>EEE EE Y 0AE<A : 91ֱ of Higher Education Performance Evaluation Guidelines April 2010 This document provides performance evaluation guidelines and requirements for reporting related to: I. FY10 Performance Evaluation II. FY11 Performance Funding Pool III. FY12 Budget Development Process I. FY10 Performance MAU performance evaluation and reporting requirements are driven by the universitys FY12 Operating Budget Development Guidelines and State of 91ֱbudget submission requirements. Information provided through the ongoing performance evaluation process allows UA to demonstrate a high standard of accountability and transparency relative to: efficiency and effectiveness of existing programs; ability to successfully execute program requests; strategic linkage to and impact on meeting performance goals; and responsibility for executing system wide priorities. This year, MAU performance evaluations are due to Planning and Budget in the standardized electronic reporting template no later than August 5th, 2010. Following historical practice, preliminary FY10 performance results and future performance projections for the common, system wide performance measures (referred to by the State as End Results) and Strategy measures based to FY10 financial information included in these reports may later be updated if final FY10 financial figures are appreciably different from the preliminary figures reported in August. The projected performance impacts reported in the MAU performance evaluation reports will align with the detailed End Result and Strategy Measure performance impact information submitted with each individual FY12 operating increment request, due to the Statewide Budget Office on July 30th, 2010. Each MAUs performance evaluation submission will be used, in conjunction with MAU increment request detail, to compile initial MAU and UA system performance evaluations submitted to OMB. Each evaluation will be updated to reflect the Board of Regents approved FY12 request, as well as the Governors proposed FY12 budget, before finalization in December. Publication of MAU level performance evaluations provides additional flexibility to highlight and detail MAU-specific strategies in support of progress on End Results performance measures. For example, UAA may use instructional and service grant activity metrics in addition to external research and UAF might report metrics for enrollment and retention on distinct student cohorts. Individual, MAU- specific strategy metrics will be discussed in the spring operating reviews and must be appropriate for external reporting, i.e. clearly defined and independently replicable from UA information systems. II. FY11 Performance Funding Pool Each MAU will control the distribution of its FY11 performance funding pool, to be used in support of performance-related strategies. One percent of general funds is the expected funding pool size, although annual circumstances will dictate the exact amount chosen by the MAU for internal reallocation. These performance funds should be allocated to appropriate strategic investments and reported as part of the overall performance and accountability process. It is important to note that, although performance awards are MAU-based, accountability reporting for performance funding distributions and strategy success will continue to be required in the future. III. FY12 Budget Development Process As a part of the FY12 operating request detail submission process, each MAU will be required to input: The quantitative positive impact of the request on each of the system wide performance measures, or for replacement funding requests the quantitative positive impact of the current program on each measure, relative to projected performance at current funding levels; and What MAU strategy specific sub-metric(s) will be tracked to measure intermediate progress toward moving common, system wide metric goals. For example, a budget request for a new high-demand program might propose tracking applications and enrollment in the program as a preliminary indicator of eventual increases in high demand graduates. Many strategy specific sub-metrics could be appropriate to report in the MAU performance evaluations. The information submitted will be used to note the impact of the Governors proposed budget on the system wide performance measures in relation to the Board of Regents request. /0QR\]^_   * + , - 4 A B Z  " F G ^ i x y  ~hx%OJQJhJOJQJh87OJQJhWOJQJhRDShq>*OJQJ^JhRDShq>*OJQJhRDS>*OJQJhRDSOJQJ^JhRDSOJQJhRDShqOJQJ^Jh$OJQJhRDShqOJQJ^JhRDShqOJQJ10R]_ + - B x y yyy# & 0` P@1$7$8$H$^gdRDS"$ & 0` P@1$7$8$H$a$gdJ & 0` P@1$7$8$H$gdq"$ & 0` P@1$7$8$H$a$gdRDS  < V y | M W Wlq|*+?@AB`a··۷۷····£۷۷h$hq>*OJQJ^Jh$hq>*OJQJh$h$>*OJQJhJOJQJhRDShqOJQJhRDShqOJQJ^Jhx%hx%H*OJQJh$OJQJhx%OJQJh87OJQJh87h87H*OJQJ6 +@Bac>[\&$ & 0` P@01$7$8$H$^0a$gdJ & 0` P@1$7$8$H$gdq"$ & 0` P@1$7$8$H$a$gdJabcl=>Z[\uvwxyºhRDShRDSOJQJhJh$OJQJ^JhRDShqOJQJ^JhJOJQJh$OJQJhJhq>*OJQJ^JhJhq>*OJQJhJh$>*OJQJhRDShqOJQJ^JhRDShqOJQJ \vxy & 0` P@1$7$8$H$gdq"$ & 0` P@1$7$8$H$a$gdJ.:pRDS/ =!"#$% j  OJPJQJ_HmH nH sH tH @`@ 9TNormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D Default Paragraph FontRiR 0 Table Normal4 l4a (k ( 0No List PK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!\theme/theme/theme1.xmlYOoE#F{o'NDuر i-q;N3' G$$DAč*iEP~wq4;{o?g^;N:$BR64Mvsi-@R4Œ mUb V*XX! cyg$w.Q "@oWL8*Bycjđ0蠦r,[LC9VbX*x_yuoBL͐u_. DKfN1엓:+ۥ~`jn[Zp֖zg,tV@bW/Oټl6Ws[R?S֒7 _כ[֪7 _w]ŌShN'^Bxk_[dC]zOլ\K=.:@MgdCf/o\ycB95B24S CEL|gO'sקo>W=n#p̰ZN|ӪV:8z1f؃k;ڇcp7#z8]Y / \{t\}}spķ=ʠoRVL3N(B<|ݥuK>P.EMLhɦM .co;əmr"*0#̡=6Kր0i1;$P0!YݩjbiXJB5IgAФ޲a6{P g֢)҉-Ìq8RmcWyXg/u]6Q_Ê5H Z2PU]Ǽ"GGFbCSOD%,p 6ޚwq̲R_gJS֣9)嗛(:/ak;6j11太x~<:ɮ>O&kNa4dht\?J&l O٠NRpwhpse)tp)af] 27n}mk]\S,+a2g^Az )˙>E G鿰L7)'PK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!\theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] y& ay  \yL# AA@0(  B S  ?{{ qx%87olCRDS$J)>Wy{@y@UnknownG* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * Arial;" Helvetica7K@CambriaA BCambria Math"hffhhr0qq:HP$Pq2!xxsnjdpsnjdpOh+'0T   ( 4@HPX`snjdp Normal.dotmsnjdp2Microsoft Office Word@F#@R @R GVT$mq fd&" WMFC8 k؋lVT$m EMF؋U"   % % Rp@Times New Roman`" %D#P`2%" ,$%O`2%" yu.1"% @u.1PCXG* Times ew RomanE"6'1,#,#y%1T#@dv% % %   ThX UU@@/LUniversity of Alaska System of Higher Education@H22,!'03!H,'2,:0(,N2!H13,!=22-,22TT XUU@@ LP -!"  T, <UU@@,%!LPerformance Evaluation Guidelinesva8,!!2!N,2-,=2,3,22H22,2,'TT  <UU@@ %LP ia-!"  T > UU@@  L`April 2010H2!2222TT > UU@@ LP > -!"  TT"UU@@ LP :CTT3"UU@@ LP er-!"  T $UU@@~NLThis document provides performance evaluation guidelines and requirements for =2'G22,2N,2G2!222-'G2,!!2!N,3,,H,2,2,22G122,2,'G,22H!,32!,N,2'G!2!!"  T9UU@@L|reporting related to: fa!,22!31!,,,22TT:fUU@@:LP ed-!"  TX {UU@@dLPI. TT {UU@@dLP dETd {UU@@dLTFY107H22TT {UU@@dLP seT  {UU@@dLxPerformance Evaluation8,"!2!N,3,,=3,2,22TT  {UU@@ dLP Pr-!"  T`}UU@@LTII.="! TT}UU@@LP LTd}UU@@LTFY117H22TT}UU@@LP ptT}9 UU@@L|Performance Funding Pool8-!!2!O,2,,732221822TT: }f UU@@: LP Pr-!"  TdaUU@@JLTIII.!! TT(aUU@@JLP keTd) aUU@@)JLTFY127H22TT $aUU@@ JLP enT% aUU@@%JLBudget Development ProcessB232,H,3,22N,28!2,,'(TT  aUU@@ JLP U-!"  TTcUU@@LP NTTc3UU@@LP se-!"  Rp@Times New Roman# @'$P`2@'8$ %$'O`2@'8$ yu.18$@' @u.1PCXG* Times ew RomanCl$6'1$$y%1$@dv% % % % % % Tx#GUU@@0L\I. FY10 7H22TT$<GUU@@$0LP ="T=UGUU@@=0 LdPerformance 8,"!2!N,3,,'% Ld;;?;N!??% ( TTVGUU@@V0LP or-!" Rp @Times New Roman%D#P`2%" ,$%O`2%" yu.1"% @u.1PCXG* Times ew omanE"6'1,#,#y%1T#@dvdv% Rp@Times New Roman@u.1PCX |0!A|h]||! @wq!mZ(XX   P !.8"!|8X""wYwdv% ( Rp @Times New Roman|0!A|h]||! @w m |0!A|h|! @l `! |`|]|| |w {0 @w P ,,2!,2,2,23 H 2, T  UU@@  Lupdated to reflect the Board of 223,,2 2!!,!-, 2,!B2-!2 2!!"  T#UU@@kLpRegents approved C,1,2'!0,23!22,20Td$UU@@$kLTFY128H32TT 8UU@@ kLP 0T9 UU@@9kLlrequest, as well!,22,'0,'0H,TT  UU@@ kLP 0T UU@@ kLas the Governor s proposed FY12,'01,0H22,!22!!'02!222(,207H22TTUU@@kLP 0T|UU@@kL\budget, 2222,!"  T2UU@@"Lbefore finalization in December. 2,!2!,!2,-,222H,,,N2,!TT3_UU@@3LP -!"  TThUU@@QLP TT3hUU@@QLP -!"  TDjUU@@TLPublication of MAU level performance evaluations provides additional flexibility to 822,,2232!3YHH3,2,32,!!2!N,3,,3,3,2,22'32!222,'3,2222,3!,32/32!"  TNUU@@7L|highlight and detail MA212124,2232,,3ZHTTGNUU@@7LPUHTTHhNUU@@H7LP-!T`iNUU@@i7.Lspecific strategies in support of progress on '2,,!,3'!,-1,'323'2222!32!32!31",''3223TNUU@@7 LdEnd Results =223C,'2'!"  TPUU@@Lxperformance measures.2,!!2!N,3,,1O,,'2",'TXPUU@@LP 21TPUU@@9LFor example, UAA may use instructional and service grant 72!2,3,N2,1HHH1O-012(,12'!2,22,1,231',!2,,22!,2!"  T@4UU@@SLactivity metrics in addition to external research and UAF might report metrics for ,,205N,!,'525,2222525,3,!2,5!,'-,!-25,225IH75N125",23!5N,!,'5!3"!"  T6UU@@!Lenrollment and retention on disti,2!2N,2,22!,,222222'T060UU@@&Lnct student cohorts. Individual, MAU2,'22,2,222!'22222,YHHTT16QUU@@1LP-!TTR6mUU@@RLP Tn6UU@@nLpspecific strategy '3,,!,'!,-31!"  TPUU@@VLmetrics will be di& WMFC ؋scussed in the spring operating reviews and must be appropriate for N,!,')H)2,)2',2'',2)2)2,)'2!21)22,!,21)!,2,H'),22)N2')2,),22!22!,,)!3!!"  ThUU@@vZLexternal reporting, i.e. clearly defined and independently replicable from UA information ,3,!2,!,22!21,,,,!02,!2,2,2222,3-22,20!,2-,2,!!2NHH2!2!N,21!"  T\UU@@ L`systems. (0',N'TT]UU@@]LP -!" % % 666666666666666666666666666666666666 6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6  6 66 6 66666666666666666666  ~."System--@Times New Roman--- R2 ]/~91ֱ of Higher Education     2 ]~ ,~'=2 m!~Performance Evaluation Guidelines,   2 m~ ,~'2 }< ~April 2010  2 }w~ ,~' 2 e~  2 i~ ,~'2 eN~This document provides performance evaluation guidelines and requirements for            ,~'.2 e~reporting related to:  2 ~ ,~'2 ~I. 2 ~ 2 ~FY10  2 ~ ,2 ~Performance Evaluation  2 ~ ,~'2 ~II. 2 ~ 2 ~FY11  2 ~ /2 ~Performance Funding Pool  2 ~ ,~'2 ~III. 2 ~ 2 ~FY12  2 ~ 22 ~Budget Development Process    2 ~ ,~' 2 e~  2 i~ ,~'@Times New Roman------2 e~I. FY10   2 ~ 2 ~Performance  - @ !se- 2 ~ ,~' @Times New Roman-@Times New Roman- @Times New Roman-@Times New Roman- @Times New Roman--/2 e~MAU performance evaluati  g2 =~on and reporting requirements are driven by the universitys  ,~'2 eS~FY12 Operating Budget Development Guidelines and State of 91ֱbudget submission         ,~'2 (e~re(2 (p~quirements. Inform  22 (~ation provided through the 2 (m~ 2 (p~ongoing :2 (~performance evaluation process  ,~'2 8e~allown 2 8~s  2 8~ 2 8R~UA to demonstrate a high standard of accountability and transparency relative to:  ,~'2 GeR~efficiency and effectiveness of existing programs; ability to successfully execute  2 G~ 2 G~program  ,~'}2 WeL~requests; strategic linkage to and impact on meeting performance goals; and             ,~'72 fe~responsibility for executing 2 f ~system wide   2 fA~ 2 fD ~priorities.  2 f~ ,~' 2 ve~ ,~'42 e~This year, MAU performance   2  ~evaluations 2 Y~ 22 a~are due to Planning and Bu 2  ~dget in 2 <~the ,~'@Times New Roman---------2 e ~standardized 2 ~ 72 ~electronic reporting template  2 Q~ ,2 W~no later than August 5 ---2 ~th---2  ~, 2010. 2  ~Following  ,~';2 e ~historical practice, preliminary    2 ~ 12  ~FY10 performance results i     .2 ~and future performance    ,~'2 e ~projections 2 ~for 2 ~ v2 G~the common, system wide performance measures (referred to by the State      ,~'2 e~as 2 z ~End Result 2  ~s) and St%2 ~trategy measures m 2 G~basedi 2 f~ 2 i~to FYi C2 %~10 financial information included in  ,~'U2 e1~these reports may later be updated if final FY10 l  2  ~financial /2 ~figures are appreciably ,~'e2 e<~different from the preliminary figures reported in August.     2 ~ ,~' 2 e~ ,~'2 eU~The projected performance impacts reported in the MAU performance evaluation reports      ,~')2 e~will align with the  e2 <~detailed End Result and Strategy Measure performance impact     ,~'2 !e~infori+2 !~mation submitted withl    2 !~ 2 !~each 2 !~ 2 ! ~individual 2 !R~ D2 !U&~FY12 operating increment request, due   2 !.~to the ,~'---2 1e~Sta/2 1w~tewide Budget Office on    2 1~July 30 ---2 +'~th---2 1.~, 2010.  2 1S~ ,~' 2 Ae~ ,~'2 PeS~Each MAUs performance evaluation submission will be used, in conjunction with MAU        2 PL~ ,~'|2 `eK~increment request detail, to compile initial MAU and UA system performance            ,~'^2 oe7~evaluations submitted to OMB. Each evaluation will be     ;2 o ~updated to reflect the Board of  ,~'&2 e~Regents approved 2 ~FY12  2 ~ #2 ~request, as well  2 T~ :2 [~as the Governors proposed FY12   2 ~ 2 %~budget, ,~'>2 e"~before finalization in December.    2 ~ ,~' 2 e~  2 i~ ,~'2 eT~Publication of MAU level performance evaluations provides additional flexibility to   ,~'.2 e~highlight and detail MA 2 ~U 2 ~- P2 .~specific strategies in support of progress on 2  ~End Results  ,~'+2 e~performance measures.M  2 ~ a2 9~For example, UAA may use instructional and service grant    ,~'2 eS~activity metrics in addition to external research and UAF might report metrics for     ,~'=2 e!~enrollment and retention on disti  D2 &~nct student cohorts. Individual, MAU 2 ~-  2 ~ &2 ~specific strategy ,~'2 eV~metrics will be discussed in the spring operating reviews and must be appropriate for    ,~'2 eZ~external reporting, i.e. clearly defined and independently replicable from UA information    ,~'2 e ~systems.   2 ~ ,~'--~~~~~~~~~~~~}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}||||||||||՜.+,0 hp  SWPIRq  Title  "#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry F@/ 1TableWordDocument0&SummaryInformation(!DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjy  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q