Q: Resource Requests

Indicate your unit’s top priorities for resource allocation. Put your projects in order of priority via the CurricUNET program review module.  

THINGS NOT TO ASK FOR IN PROGRAM REVIEW
The following items should be asked for through normal requests:

  • Facilities -- Submit Work Order Request Mailbox: NEW SHOP; Phone: (415) 239-3546.
  • IT -- computers for new faculty, replacement of existing printers

REFERENCE MATERIALS: 

DEPENDENCIES are where you will link multiple resource requests within your program review that depend on each other (must have one with the other -- example: computer lab and lab tech manager). Use judiciously. Link resources as dependent on one another ONLY if they truly are, or else you unnecessarily complicate the evaluation of your resource requests. 

ASSESSMENT REPORT LINKS are where you will link your resource requests to assessment reports submitted over the previous  year. 

 

Criteria for ranking resource requests

Want to make your requests as strong as possible? Review your request and ask these questions:
 
  • Have you linked to the most appropriate college plans?
  • Have you clearly addressed the details needed for your particular resource type (for example, if asking for a technology item, have you followed the link above to see exactly what details we need to best consider the request?)
 

Scoring criteria for resource requests

The following guidelines are used for scoring and ranking resource requests. Review these to get an idea of where your resource request will sit relative to others.
 
 

Imperative Criteria

Imperative Criteria are used to flag requests that supercede other evaluative criteria

  1. Health and Safety: Indicate whether there is a strong health and safety component to the Request, such that failing to fulfill the request will cause/retain a significant hazard.
  2. Mandates: Indicate whether the request is necessary to meet a local, state, or federal regulation, or a requirement of a specific program accreditation.

 

Evaluative Criteria and Scoring

Links to Board Priorities, Approved College Plans, Accreditation Requirements, and Program Outcomes

Are the links between the request and the priorities, planning goals, outcomes, and standards identified and strong? How directly and essentially is the request linked? How many links?

  • 0 (N/A) – there is no reasonable way to claim the request is linked to any specific items.
  • 1 (Minimal) – one or a few links can be identified, but relationship to the request is distant or weak. 
  • 2 (Moderate) – one or a few links identified, relationship is somewhat clear but not strong. 
  • 3 (High) – one or more links identified, relationship is clear and strong: or, the number of moderate linkages is so high that the request is of broad-based value. 
  • 4 (Exceptional) - The request has a direct and essential relationship to the identified links, or multiple high linkages.

 

Rationale for request supported by data and clear plan for evaluation after implementation

Did you full describe the kind of data and to what degree the justification for the Request is supported by quantitative or qualitative information, from internal and/or external sources? Is the proposed Request designed to be continually evaluated for effectiveness?

  • 0 (N/A) – no qualitative or quantitative data/measures provided. 
  • 1 (Minimal) – little or weak supporting data/outcomes provided. 
  • 2 (Moderate) – quantity of supporting data/outcomes is good but content is weak, or very limited strong data/outcomes provided. 
  • 3 (Strong) – quantity and quality of supporting data/outcomes are solid and reasonably thorough. 
  • 4 (Exceptional) - extraordinary and very in-depth supporting data/very well-defined and complete evaluative measures and outcomes.

 

Extent of benefit

Who and how many individuals/groups benefit from the request? Did you include real numbers based on available data? Did you include kinds of people, groups, units? Did you pay attention to cross-group benefits, as well as the directness of the benefit? 

  • 0 (N/A) – no qualitative or quantitative data/measures provided. 
  • 1 (Minimal) – little or weak supporting data/outcomes provided. 
  • 2 (Moderate) – quantity of supporting data/outcomes is good but content is weak, or very limited strong data/outcomes provided. 
  • 3 (Strong) – quantity and quality of supporting data/outcomes are solid and reasonably thorough. 
  • 4 (Exceptional) - extraordinary and very in-depth supporting data/very well-defined and complete evaluative measures and outcomes.

 

Operational necessity

To what degree do local or institutional operations depend on the request? What is the immediacy of the need?

  • 0 (N/A) – not necessary to continuing operations. 
  • 1 (Low Importance) – request supports continuing operations indirectly and/or is not necessary in the near future. 
  • 2 (Moderate) – useful for continuing or enhancing current operations; not an immediate need 
  • 3 (High) – Important for current operations and/or time-sensitive. 
  • 4 (Critical) - if unfunded, there will be a major disruption of existing operations and services in the current year.