AIEC - Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Council (AIEC)

Institutional Effectiveness Plan

Revised: June 2026
Cabinet Approved

Executive Overview

The Institutional Effectiveness Plan articulates Frostburg State University’s integrated framework for aligning mission, planning, assessment, and resource allocation in support of continuous improvement and student success. The Plan documents how the University systematically evaluates academic programs, administrative and support services, and strategic initiatives to ensure accountability and effective use of resources, while meeting the expectations of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, the University System of Maryland, and other external stakeholders.

Through an institution-wide cycle of goal setting, assessment, review, and action, the Plan emphasizes alignment across institutional, divisional, and departmental levels; consistent use of evidence and data; and transparent governance processes. Annual reporting, program review, and strategic enrollment management activities ensure that assessment results inform decision-making and resource priorities. Collectively, this framework reinforces a culture of shared responsibility, evidence-based planning, and ongoing improvement across the University.

Commitment to Institutional Effectiveness

Frostburg State University’s (FSU) Institutional Effectiveness Plan codifies commitment to a culture of continuous quality improvement. The University demonstrates accountability through systematic planning and assessment, both internally and to external agencies, including the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, the Maryland Higher Education Commission, the University System of Maryland, as well as other federal and state entities and outside accrediting bodies.

The objectives of the Institutional Effectiveness Plan are to:

Guide the development of assessment activities that measure effectiveness in meeting the mission, goals, and priorities;
Identify institutional priorities for improvement; and,
Inform analysis, decision-making, and the allocation of resources.

The Institutional Effectiveness Plan

The Institutional Effectiveness Plan establishes the University’s integrated planning, assessment, and resource allocation cycle. The cycle ensures that the following activities are implemented:

Development of clearly defined mission, goals, and
Alignment of university, divisional, academic and administrative goals and key results.
Development of measurable goals and student learning outcomes that align with the University’s mission, goals, and priorities.
Effective assessment to determine the extent to which the goals and student learning outcomes have been achieved.
Documentation and use of the results for the improvement of academic programs and administrative and support services through a transparent process of review, planning, and resource allocation.

Establishing Measurable Results: Frostburg State University develops effectiveness measures that align with the University’s goals and priorities. Measures from various institution-wide reporting sources, including the data warehouse (HelioCampus), Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), Maryland Higher Education Commission (MHEC), and National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) inform the planning process. These data including trend analyses are reviewed and are often compared and benchmarked to other similar USM institutions and the USM-defined comparison and aspirational institutions. FSU is committed to continual assessment of many data points and sources to ensure focused efforts are attributed to initiatives that call for resources.

Ensuring Alignment of Divisional and Department/Unit Plans: Each of the University’s (Vice Presidential) Divisional plans align to the institution’s strategic plan and annual priorities. The division plans articulate a more comprehensive or inter-departmental view than the Department/Unit plans. AIEC reviews these plans annually. These divisional plans are then used to develop Department/Unit plans and ensure alignment with institutional priorities. VPs and Deans are responsible for reviewing Departmental Plans, providing continuous improvement recommendations, and ensuring alignment to the university’s strategic plan.

Departments and administrative units in consult with their VP are accountable for implementing their plans, assessing the achievement of their goals, and determining what revisions and adjustments are necessary for improvement. AIEC reviews these activities annually. Departments/planning units use the Assessment Cycle to ensure planning and assessment activities can inform future programming and budget cycles.

Conducting the Review Process: On an annual fiscal year basis, academic and administrative departments document and evaluate progress toward achieving their goals and objectives using defined performance measures. Direct reports to the Vice Presidents also provide annual divisional reports. These divisional reports are reviewed annually by the Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Council (AIEC). AIEC meets with University Advisory Council and the Cabinet during the summer to discuss progress and achievement of goals at the institutional level. The institution’s performance is discussed and disseminated university-wide in the fall. AIEC also provides specific feedback to departments and division leaders in the fall.

“Closing the Loop” Activities – Mid-Year and Annual Reports

The President and Cabinet, in consultation with the Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Council (AIEC), shall finalize the division-level reporting instrument and accompanying rubric by the beginning of each fiscal year. The report format, rubric, and general timeline will be reviewed and finalized annually at the summer meeting to ensure continued alignment with institutional priorities, accreditation expectations, and strategic planning needs.

Vice Presidents are responsible for ensuring that their division is informed of the finalized reporting expectations and understand both their role and their unit-level contributions to the University’s strategic plan. Divisional leadership must ensure that assessment results, progress on objectives, and use of findings are clearly documented and incorporated into planning and decision-making processes.

The AIEC will use the finalized rubric to review and analyze divisional reports, identify institutional themes and trends, and provide synthesized feedback and recommendations to executive leadership.

Departments and units document accomplishments and progress towards stated goals. A mid-year review is submitted to their respective Deans or Vice Presidents and uploaded to the designated place in Microsoft Teams (date determined each year). Department/Unit annual reports are reviewed by their respective deans or vice president and presented to the University Cabinet in January. The goal of the mid-year review is to track progress, to identify needed corrective actions, and to refine or update priorities and key results, as necessary.

In addition to the Cabinet level review, AIEC reviews these reports and prepares a mid-year report to the University Advisory Council in February with any recommendations for priority adjustments and resource allocations. This same cycle is repeated at the end of fiscal year. Year end reports are submitted in June to respective Deans or Vice Presidents for review and presented to the University Cabinet and the AIEC in late June or early July (date to be determined each year). The AIEC prepares an annual report and presents it to University Cabinet and UAC in advance of the University’s Annual Planning Retreat in July. At this meeting, priorities for the new academic year are identified, key outcomes determined, resource allocations identified, and alignment with the strategic plan are reviewed and updated, if necessary.

The President provides a report to the University community in the State of the University address early in the fall semester outlining the discussion and actions from the summer meeting. AIEC will work with appropriate entities, including the Deans, VPs, Faculty Senate, Student Government Association and Staff Senate, to support the assessment processes for the upcoming year.

Other Institutional Assessment Activities

Assessment of Student Learning
Frostburg State University has an institutionalized process of assessing student-learning outcomes in the majors which include disciplinary accrediting bodies and college assessment committees at the college level for the Colleges of Business, Engineering, and Computational & Mathematical Sciences, College of Education and Health & Natural Sciences, and College of Arts, Humanities, and Social & Behavioral Sciences. The Student Learning Assessment Advisory Group (SLAAG) and Graduate Learning Assessment Advisory Group (GLAAG) operate at the institutional level and focus on student learning outcomes following the timelines for the Institutional Effectiveness Cycle.

Academic Program Review
The University System of Maryland Board of Regents requires academic program reviews which are intended to improve the resources and quality of the academic offerings, ensure the appropriate use of resources, and determine a program’s effectiveness. The Program Review process advances opportunities for academic planning and budgeting and assesses whether the program satisfies state-level review requirements. This requirement is outlined in SB682, Sec.12-106IV of the Code of Maryland. Halfway through the cycle (i.e., at 3.5 years), an updated report is submitted that reflects the status of assessment activities. The University has opted for a 3.5-year reporting cycle, reflecting the belief of the faculty that this time provides an optimum period to design, implement, and evaluate assessments and then use the results for continuous improvement.

The program review schedule serves as the foundation for assessment initiatives. It identifies priorities for the upcoming cycle. Every seven years, academic program reviews are conducted, including an assessment of student learning outcomes. Academic programs define their student learning outcomes, evaluate learning progress and make improvements when necessary.

An external review of each program is a required part of the assessment initiative. External reviewers provide an independent and objective evaluation of a program’s strengths and weaknesses as well as recommendations for improvement. Academic programs with external accreditation responsibilities meet FSU’s assessment requirements.

Academic Programs use a recommended “Guidelines for Department Discussions in Preparation for Program Review” checklist. Components of the comprehensive program review include mission and purpose, plan of curriculum, student learning goals, student learning assessment, student technology and information literacy and fluency, enrollment and student profile, alumni perceptions, faculty profile, library holdings, response to the external reviewer, and an action plan for the next seven years.

As part of the assessment process, programs are required to review earlier assessment findings and document what changes were made based on those results. The annual reports submitted to the Academic Deans document assessment activities, findings, and improvement efforts.

General Education

The General Education Review Committee coordinates the assessment of the General Education Program, and based on that assessment, facilitate any revision to the General Education Program. SLAAG supports and reviews the progress of the General Education Review Committee regarding effective assessment.

Student Engagement, University Support, and Services

The Divisions of Administration and Finance, Student Affairs, Human Resources, University Advancement, and support areas in Academic Affairs continuously engage in assessment activities to measure progress in achieving their unit level goals as well as support the achievement of University goals and priorities. These activities generally include methods to monitor and measure productivity, adherence to timelines and processes, responsiveness to requests, accomplishments of unit goals as well as satisfaction with services and programs.

Assessment of student services, support, and engagement occurs regularly through the administration of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). Also, Frostburg State University uses two new tools that will offer support in the intersecting areas of Student Affairs and Academic Affairs. Helio Campus, our data warehouse uses institutional data to provide powerful dashboards for admissions, financial aid, enrollment, course completion, persistence, retention, and graduation.

Strategic Enrollment Management Plan

Frostburg State University’s Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Plan was developed following extensive and collaborative discussions with academic department chairs, academic affairs leadership and staff, admissions, and marketing, and is based on achieving the key performance indicator (KPI) of the enrollment headcount targets submitted to USM. The plan describes the initiatives that have been developed to increase headcount, which focus on undergraduate (UG) recruitment and retention (moving 1st to 2nd year retention from mid-70% to 80%).

The SEM team includes the President, Provost, VP of Administration and Finance, Director of Admissions, Associate Provost and Associate VP for External Affairs and Budget Management, and other key enrollment management positions. This group reports to USM and updates are provided to the Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Council.

APPENDIX

DEFINITIONS OF KEY TERMS

Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness Committee (AIEC) – Serves as an advisory council to the President. The Committee works with and provides information to the Executive Cabinet and the University Advisory Council. The Council generates a report to be delivered in June for the Annual Summer Planning Retreat. This report has information and assessments on action priorities and becomes the basis for the yearly USM Managing for Results (MFR) report. The Committee makes recommendations for planning, but it is not a decision-making body. Committee membership includes designees for each Vice President, the Director of Assessment and Institutional Research, and Faculty representatives from Faculty Senate.

Student Learning Assessment Advisory Group (SLAAG) monitors student learning assessment practices at the undergraduate level. SLAAG advises and makes recommendations to the Provost, deans, faculty and AIEC on issues affecting the assessment of student learning for undergraduate programs and the General Education program. Committee membership includes four (4) faculty appointed by the Provost, Director of Assessment and Institutional Research, one Academic Affairs Administrator appointed by the Provost, and one Student Affairs Administrator appointed by the Vice President.

Graduate Learning Assessment Advisory Group (GLAAG) is a complement to SLAAG for student learning assessment practices at the graduate level. GLAAG advises and makes recommendations to the Provost, the appropriate dean, program faculty and AIEC on issues affecting the assessment of student learning for individual graduate programs. Committee membership includes representatives from the colleges, One Academic Affairs Administrator appointed by the Provost, designee from the offices of Graduate Services and Assessment and Institutional Research.

Executive Cabinet – the President and Vice Presidents are responsible for the operations of the University at the highest level.

University Advisory Council – The University Advisory Council serves to enhance shared governance at Frostburg State University. It focuses on campus-wide planning and implementation of those plans and facilitates real-time understanding and discussion of pressing matters affecting the mission and operations of the university. The council includes the Executive Cabinet, three faculty members, three student leaders, and three staff members.