financialaccreditation

 

sectiond2g

Page history last edited by Jackie Whitehouse 2 yrs ago

Standard III - Section D 2.G

 


 

1. Review the Specific Standard Section

 

g. The institution regularly evaluates its financial management processes, and the results of the evaluation are used to improve financial management systems.

 

2. List of Team Members working on this Standard

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Read and Review Self-Study Questions and Suggested Source of Evidence

 

Major reference source for analyzing accreditation standards:

“Accreditation Commission Self Study Guidelines, August 2004, Guide to Evaluating Institutions”

http://www.ohlone.edu/org/instruction/docs/200408accredcomm-guidetoevaluatinginstitutions.pdf

 

4. Locate and Review the Evidence. 

 

 

Include Suggested Sources of Evidence from the “Guide to Evaluating Institutions” as well as additional engagement activities conducted by your Team, such as team meetings, special meetings of existing groups, special focus groups, open forums, surveys, etc…)

 

List of evidence being reviewed and engagement activities being conducted:

 

 

 

 

5. Descriptive Summary

 

Draft a brief one or two paragraph description of what the College is doing to meet the standard.

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. Integration Review

 

Is there an expression of our College Values?  Is there a contribution to our College Goals?  Is there an expression of the Accreditation Themes?

 

 Self Assessment: The yearly audit is the primary source of financial management process review. The District implements these strategies as appropriate. Additionally as part of the Budget Program Service Review, a survey was conducted to find out how much the staff and faculty knew about and wanted to participate in the budget and financial processes. As part of the required 311q quarterly report process all aspects of the budget are reviewed and adjustments made to reflect changes in direction, costs and revenue. Cash flow needs are assessed on a weekly basis.

 

 

7. Self Evaluation

 

Provide a rating of how well the College is addressing the specific standard using this scoring rubric:

 

1. Superior: College has worked in this area and considerable improvement is noted

2. Satisfactory: College has taken some actions to address the area and some improvement is noted.

3. Needs Improvement: College has not adequately addressed the area.

 

Rating:

 

Draft a one or two paragraph explanation for this rating based upon your assessment of the College’s activities in relation to the standard. Pay particular attention to the quality of our involvement and interventions since the last WASC self-study report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

8. Planning Agenda

 

If the assessment process does not identify areas in need of change, simply state, No Plan Required

 

If the assessment process identifies areas in need of change, a planning agenda for improvement should be developed. The planning agenda should identify the activities and processes the institution should implement, or is implementing, to produce improvement.  How will these plans be incorporated into the evaluation and planning processes of the institution?  How will the outcomes of this planning agenda improve student learning and foster institutional improvement in general.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.