Texas A&M University Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Evaluation
The Support Unit Assessment Guidelines is a comprehensive manual that guides Program Coordinators step-by-step through the documentation process. We recommend reviewing the manual before or during development of your unit's Assessment Plan as it describes key components of strong assessment strategies. The manual includes:

  • An introduction to program assessment and general due dates
  • How to use HelioCampus to document your Assessment Plan & Report
  • Detailed information about each section of the Plan & Report, including examples and FAQs 
  • Criteria used by OIEE to assign Compliance Indicators to Reports (Exemplary, Sufficient, Needs Improvement, Noncompliant)

Guidelines Manual

for Support Unit Assessment

Minimum Requirements for Plans & Reports

More information and examples can be found in the Support Unit Assessment Guidelines.

Assessment Plans

  • Outcomes -  The annual Assessment Plan must include at least one measurable outcome related to the mission of the unit (in support of the mission of the institution). Outcomes should not focus on the completion of a specific project, but rather relate to efficiency, effectiveness, and quality of services provided and/or the achievement of identified learning outcomes, where applicable.
  • Measures & Targets - Measures should be clearly and thoroughly described, establishing alignment with the outcome for which it provides evidence. Each measure must include an identified target which the unit will use to determine whether an outcome is achieved.

Assessment Reports


  • Findings -  Select a Target Status Indicator (Met, Not Met, Partially Met) and write a specific Findings Statement. Disaggregate as necessary (by alternate teaching location and/or student subgroup). 
  • Use of Results - Provide an explanation of how the assessment results have been or will be used for improvement of functions and/or services.
    • Academic and student support units, specifically, must:
      • Explicitly address consideration of the effectiveness and/or improvement of services with respect to students at alternate teaching locations, online students, and or other key student subgroups.
  • Status Update - Provide an update on an action described in a previous Assessment Report (i.e., whether the action made a difference in current assessment results or, if the action has not been fully implemented, what stage of implementation the unit is in).

 Compliance Indicators

At the end of each Program Assessment cycle, OIEE staff review all Assessment Reports and assign a Compliance Indicator (CI). CIs are simply meant to inform Program Coordinators and unit leadership of how well documentation requirements were met. OIEE uses the rubric below to assign Compliance Indicators. Qualitative feedback may also be provided. 

Compliance Indicator descriptions
Compliance Indicator Description of Criteria
Exemplary
The report goes beyond minimum requirements. This generally includes the following:
  • There is more than one measure for each outcome.
  • Thorough, detailed descriptions of each section—data collection methods, data analysis, scoring metrics, rubrics, etc.—are included so that the assessment process is replicable.
  • Findings are contextualized, and (if applicable) are appropriately disaggregated by location and/or student subgroup.
  • The use of results is clear, detailed, and focused on improving the unit’s services for the student subgroups it serves.
Sufficient
All minimum requirements are met. For example:
  • Each outcome has at least one measure, and all measures are aligned with their respective outcomes.
  • The report is clear overall. Some areas could be strengthened by including more detail.
  • The use of results is focused on unit improvement. The planned execution may not be fully clear, but the intent is.
Needs Improvement
All minimum requirements are met, but one or more of the following is true:
  • The assessment process is difficult to follow and may not be clearly replicable.
  • Components of the report may be misaligned (e.g., the measure does not align with the outcome).
  • Findings may not be disaggregated (i.e., by location and/or student subgroup, if relevant).
  • The use of results may not be focused on improvement of the unit (e.g., a change to assessment plan and/or scheduling a meeting to discuss results). The use of results may not be clearly tied to findings or may not address one or more of the noted student subgroups.
Noncompliant
Report was not submitted, or one or more required components of the report is missing (outcome, measure, findings statements, and/or use of results). The report does not demonstrate the unit's commitment to continuous improvement. 

This work is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Creative Commons license