Program Review Key Performance Indicator and Data Profile

Program Review Key Performance Indicator and Data Profile Example 2021 -22

Unit XYZ Example Data Profile 2021 -22

CONTENTS • UNIT COMPOSITION o Composition o Organizational Chart o Staff Counts o Staff Demographic Data • UNIT PERFORMANCE o Operational Metrics o Process Time o Workload by Role o Customer Satisfaction o Survey Results o Peer Data o Benchmarking: Office Size o Benchmarking: Ratio of Staff to Projects

Unit Composition

UNIT COMPOSITION Organizational Chart Name (Title) Name (Title) Name (Title) Name (Title) Name (Title)

UNIT COMPOSITION Staff Demographics – Size Program Review will provide data on staff counts for units with five or more staff members. All counts are taken on November 1 st of the academic year (November 1, 2012 = AY 2013). Source: my. HR

UNIT COMPOSITION Number of Employees by Functional Unit Program Review will provide data on staff counts for units with five or more staff members. All counts are taken on November 1 st of the academic year (November 1, 2012 = AY 2013). Counts of Employees by Functional Unit 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 2 1 0 Administrative Advising Count Research Total Available Administrative Advising Research Count 4 5 4 Total Available 5 5 6 Source: my. HR

UNIT COMPOSITION Employment Changes List of recent terminations, hires, promotions, or transfers. All counts are taken on November 1 st of the academic year (November 1, 2012 = AY 2013). Title Focus/Description of Goals Change in Employment Senior Advising Analyst Advising Analysis Promotion Survey Administrator Administration of Qualtrics Surveys and development of robust database Hire (newly created) Source:

Unit Performance

UNIT PERFORMANCE Count of Unique Users by Year 350 310 280 300 250 273 257 210 236 223 200 290 286 175 150 100 50 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Unique users September October November December January 2018 1 3 7 11 16 February March 21 22 April May June 24 27 31 2019 1 4 7 12 17 21 23 24 28 31 2020 8 11 15 20 25 29 31 33 37 40 Source:

UNIT PERFORMANCE Cumulative Count of Completed Events and Activities A running total of Events and Activities for the academic year Cumulative Number of Events 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 September October November December January 2018 February March April 2019 May 2020 September October November December January 2018 1 3 7 11 16 February March 21 22 April May June 24 27 31 2019 1 4 7 12 17 21 23 24 28 31 2020 8 11 15 20 25 29 31 33 37 40 Source: June

UNIT PERFORMANCE Percentage of Clients by Level/School – This visualization can be repeated for different demographics with a list of supplied ID numbers and/or information from department. Percentage of Clients by Level/School 100 90 80 5 10 7 8 12 13 15 18 70 19 60 30 23 50 24 40 30 20 40 40 2018 2019 36 10 0 Undergraduate TGS Kellogg 2020 Feinberg Pritzker Law Source:

UNIT PERFORMANCE Process Time to Process Service Requests 400 350 300 283 Number of Requests 250 203 200 180 152 150 90 100 45 50 0 23 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10 10 5 4 2 0 0 0 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 Days to Process Source:

UNIT PERFORMANCE Workload by Role 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Transactions Processed (0 Revisions) Total Per Analyst Revisions (1 or more) Per Officer Source:

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION Customer Feedback Survey Results Program Review will provide customer survey results for each administrative unit. Source:

PEER DATA Benchmarking – Unit Size and Scope Comparison of Size and Scope to Peer Institutions Staff Count Staff Per Project Average Time Per Project (in weeks) 6 2 10 13 12 12 14 12 4 7 5 3 8 8 1. 5 3 5 4 4 2 60 5 12 6 4 65 35 91 25 90 83 1 5 5 1 4 2 14 13 14 14 15 12 4 2 6 4 3 6 2 4 5 3 Active Projects Brown University Columbia University Cornell University Dartmouth College Duke University Harvard University Massachusetts Institute of Technology Northwestern University Princeton University Stanford University of Chicago University of Pennsylvania Yale University New Projects Approved Per Year 5 6 9 18 57 88 44 50 75 Source:

Active Projects ity rs ve ni le Ya of U C ni ve rs U ity ia an lv sy o ag hi c ty ty si er ni v y ity rs i ve ni ni ve rs U U en n of P ity rd an fo ni ve rs U St n to rn te ol og hn ity rs ve ni U ity e le g ol C ity rs ni ve rs U ec of T ce in Pr es w te rd e uk ar va itu H th or st In N ts U et ch us sa as M D th ou ar tm ve ity si ty er ni v ni U ni ve rs U ll U ne or C a n bi ol um D C ow Br PEER DATA Benchmarking – Projects by Staff Count Peer Benchmarking 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Staff Count Source:

PEER DATA Benchmarking – Ratio of Students to Staff Source: