Key Performance Indicators Key Performance Indicators 1998 launch

Key Performance Indicators.

Key Performance Indicators 1998 launch Ministry mandated Accountability Framework 5 key measures Funding implications

Key Performance Indicators Student Satisfaction Graduate Satisfaction Employer Satisfaction Employment Rate Graduation Rate

Student Satisfaction In class paper-based survey Funded students semester 2 + Student Satisfaction KPI calculated based on average of 4 Capstone Questions (all 4 questions must be answered)

Student Satisfaction 2009/10 SYSTEM Very Satisfied/ Satisfied % Student Satisfaction Capstone Questions 14. Overall, your program is giving you knowledge and skills that will be useful in your future career 87. 2 26. The overall quality of the learning experiences in this program 80. 2 44. The overall quality of the facilities / resources in the college 69. 3 45. The overall quality of the services in the college 68. 6 Student Satisfaction Rate (based on Capstone Questions) 76. 3

Student Satisfaction Trends System (Province) Student Satisfaction Trends 90 85 % Very Sat/Sat 80 77. 8 77. 4 77. 9 78. 4 2006 2007 2008 2009 76. 3 75 70 65 60 55 50 Year 2010

Student Satisfaction Trends 2005 -06 KPI 2006 -07 KPI 2007 -08 KPI 2008 -09 KPI 2009 -10 KPI 5 Year Avg KPI Algonquin 83. 5 82. 3 82. 1 81. 8 80. 7 82. 1 Boréal 78. 3 80. 1 73. 7 78. 7 74. 8 77. 1 Cambrian 79. 0 77. 7 75. 4 77. 8 74. 8 76. 9 Canadore 71. 8 68. 9 72. 5 75. 3 74. 8 72. 7 Centennial 75. 8 70. 9 73. 3 74. 6 66. 8 72. 3 Conestoga 83. 7 80. 6 79. 1 79. 3 76. 5 79. 8 Confederation 75. 1 78. 7 79. 2 80. 5 77. 8 78. 3 Durham 77. 9 75. 7 77. 4 77. 3 71. 5 76. 0 Fanshawe 81. 7 81. 2 80. 5 81. 3 79. 8 80. 9 George Brown 71. 3 71. 1 73. 1 71. 5 70. 8 71. 6 Georgian 78. 5 79. 7 79. 5 80. 3 77. 9 79. 2 Humber 76. 6 74. 4 77. 6 78. 4 77. 0 76. 8 La Cité 85. 9 82. 7 85. 5 84. 6 82. 3 84. 2 Lambton 78. 8 80. 5 76. 8 77. 9 76. 4 78. 1 Loyalist 78. 3 80. 2 80. 9 81. 0 80. 5 80. 2 Mohawk 76. 3 78. 4 76. 3 76. 9 73. 5 76. 3 Niagara 86. 4 87. 2 86. 1 85. 2 83. 1 85. 6 Northern 72. 6 71. 2 72. 8 73. 6 75. 2 73. 1 Sault 72. 4 76. 8 74. 8 80. 2 79. 5 76. 7 Seneca 74. 8 76. 1 76. 5 77. 7 75. 4 76. 1 Sheridan 73. 5 74. 0 76. 2 75. 0 74. 5 Sir Sandford Fleming 81. 7 79. 6 80. 0 81. 3 78. 1 80. 1 St. Clair 71. 9 75. 0 76. 5 76. 9 78. 8 75. 8 St. Lawrence 77. 0 78. 2 79. 8 78. 5 Province 77. 8 77. 4 77. 9 78. 4 76. 3 77. 6

Graduate/Employer Satisfaction Graduate Outcomes Survey conducted by Forum Research Inc. 6 months after graduation Employer Survey conducted with employers of graduates who have given Forum Research Inc. permission

Graduate Satisfaction Capstone Question 34. How would you rate your satisfaction with the usefulness of your college education in achieving your goals after graduation? 2009/10 SYSTEM Very Satisfied/ Satisfied % 79. 8

Graduate Satisfaction Trends System (Province) Graduate Satisfaction Trends 90 85 81. 6 82. 0 82. 8 2006 2007 2008 82. 7 79. 8 % Very Sat/Sat 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 Year 2009 2010

Employer Satisfaction Capstone Question 74. In general, how would you rate your satisfaction with this employee’s overall college preparation for the type of work he/she was doing? 2009/10 SYSTEM Very Satisfied/ Satisfied % 93. 0

Employer Satisfaction Trends System (Province) Employer Satisfaction Trends 100 92. 1 92. 6 93. 1 93. 3 93 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 % Very Sat/Sat 90 80 70 60 50 Year

Employment Rate Obtained from Graduate Outcomes Survey conducted 6 months after graduation Represents graduates who were employed during a specified reference week (based on those who were available for work)

Employment Rate Employed during reference week (6 months after graduation) 2009/10 SYSTEM % 84. 8

Employment Rate Trends System (Province) Employment Rate Trends 100 % Very Sat/Sat 90 89. 3 90. 1 90. 5 88. 9 84. 8 80 70 60 50 2006 2007 2008 Year 2009 2010

Graduation Rate Tracks individual students in eligible programs who complete program requirements within 200% of normal program duration

Graduation Rate Completed program within 200% completion timeframe 2009/10 SYSTEM % 65. 1

Graduation Rate Trends System (Province) Graduation Rate Trends 100 % Very Sat/Sat 90 80 70 60. 1 63. 3 64. 9 64. 4 65. 1 2008 2009 2010 60 50 2006 2007 Year

12 Years Later Year over year general consistency with results Some modifications to tools and administration practises Interest in the OEN and student tracking Some frustration re reporting requirements Graduation rate review Heightened focus on accountability • KPIs incorporated into MYAA • Annual Reports to include KPI results MYAAs Audited Financial Statements

Questions to Consider Do KPIs provide measures of core outcomes directly tied to the missions of colleges? Are there other measures that should be considered? Are the methodologies used for calculation and administration sound? What is the effective balance between accountability/measurement and flexibility?