CCIS Program Review Guidelines

Summary of Responsibilities and A Step-by-Step Guideline


February 2006

The Program Review Subcommittee (PRS) is a subcommittee of the Academic Programs Committee (APC) under the jurisdiction of the chair of the APC. The chair of the APC names individuals from the CCIS membership to serve on the PRS. These names are then presented to the APC. Each member will serve a three-year term and rotate on an annual basis. Preferably, the members of the PRS are not sponsors of CCIS-approved programs scheduled to be reviewed during their tenure on the PRS.

The program review rotation schedule was established by the program review task force, with the approval of the sponsoring institutions, prior to the adoption of the program review guidelines. This rotation cycle should be sufficient to monitor program quality given adjustments made as old programs are canceled or withdrawn and new programs are approved and added to CCIS. (Please see Section VI for specifics of postponing a review.)

I. Procedure for Selecting Reviewers
  • PRS issues an annual 'Call for Program Reviewers' to the CCIS membership. The call for reviewers will be made each year and will be announced in an e-mail sent to the membership from CCIS Washington, posted on the CCIS web site, listed on the CCIS web site calendar, announced at the CCIS annual conference, and included in the newsletter. (Please see program review guidelines for requirements for submissions.)
  • The PRS members review all program reviewer submissions. Following selection by the PRS, notification will be made to CCIS Washington. Washington will notify selected reviewers. This announcement is sent to the reviewers, and copied to the PRS members and program sponsors.
  • The PRS selects both a site visit reviewer and a paper reviewer for each program to be reviewed. The PRS consider all factors when selecting reviewers, including but not limited to, the most economical means of conducting the reviews with regard to travel costs considerations. At no time, however, should economic considerations compromise the integrity and/or quality of a program review.
  • At this point, all parties are involved and include reviewers (both site and paper), program sponsor(s), the PRS and CCIS Washington. While all communication with the program host institution representatives will be conducted through the program sponsor(s), it is imperative that when program review is for a "co-sponsored" program, each sponsor cc's the other and Washington in all communication regarding the review.
II. Role and Responsibilities of the PRS
  • The Program Review Subcommittee has, at this point, recruited, selected and announced the program reviewers for the upcoming review year. Until reviews are completed and submitted to the PRS, the major responsibility of the PRS is to liase with the review team and assist where necessary.
  • The PRS members will receive the completed program review report (submitted through CCIS Washington) and each member will review the report. The reviewers will make recommendations to the PRS based on their assessment of each program. The possible range of recommendations will be as follows:
  1. Recommend for continued sponsorship without conditions or reservations
  2. Recommend with conditions
  3. Not recommended for continued CCIS sponsorship
  4. Program review not completed (attach explanation and expected timeline for compliance)
  • The PRS will determine whether the program under scrutiny is performing at a level that meets the criteria and standards of CCIS and it will inform the Academic Programs Committee of its recommendation. The Academic Programs Committee then considers the recommendation and decides whether further action is to be taken.
III. Role and Duties of CCIS Washington
  • The role of CCIS Washington in the program review process is primarily that of shepherding the process (i.e. making announcements on behalf of the PRS, collecting and forwarding reviewer submissions, distribution of final review documents to the PRS, providing follow-up on PRS recommendations etc.)
IV. Role and Responsibilities of Site Reviewer
  • Following selection and announcement of the reviewers by the PRS, the site reviewer and paper reviewer must confirm their acceptance of the assignment to CCIS Washington and initiate communication with each other. The reviewers will be contacted by the program sponsor(s) immediately and they will receive and examine the Program Review Portfolio from the sponsor(s).
  • The site reviewer will then consider travel dates and duration of the site visit. Once the review dates are determined (with the concurrence of the reviewer, the sponsor(s) and the host institution(s)), travel and final arrangements are made between the site reviewer and the sponsor(s). The reviewer will then send a preferred review agenda to the sponsor(s) who coordinates scheduling arrangements with the host institution.
  • The site reviewer conducts the site visit. This visit will allow the reviewer sufficient time to investigate all aspects of the program under review (2-3 days in most cases).
  • Following the site visit, the site reviewer forwards all information to the paper reviewer. The site reviewer assists in completing the review document with the paper reviewer prior to submission to CCIS Washington. 'Assist', as used in the previous sentence, shall be interpreted as proof reading and clarifying as well as any other tasks as required to produce a final document, incorporating commentary on all aspects of the program as outlined in the full Program Review Guidelines. This document must be useful to the PRS in making a critical evaluation of the ongoing quality of the program under review.
V. Role and Responsibilities of Paper Reviewer
  • The paper reviewer plays the primary role (in conjunction with the site reviewer) in the production of the final review document. The paper reviewer will utilize the information supplied by the sponsoring and host institutions (program review portfolio) and the site reviewer (site visit notes) plus any additional documentation supplied by the involved parties. Following review of all documentation, the paper reviewer will prepare a draft report for discussion between him/herself and the site reviewer.
  • At this point there is no standard format which must be followed in producing the final report. Reviewers are encouraged to follow the recommended format for the program portfolio in compiling their report (see CCIS-Approved Program Review: Review Guidelines on the CCIS website). After the draft has been worked into a final document agreed upon by both the site and paper reviewers, the paper reviewer will submit the review to CCIS Washington. This review shall be submitted electronically and in hardcopy.
VI. Role and Responsibilities of the Sponsoring Institution(s)
  • The sponsor(s) plays a supporting role throughout the program review process. When the announcement is made designating the site and paper reviewers for their program(s), and the assignment has been accepted, the sponsor(s) contacts the reviewers. The sponsor(s) then forwards copies of the Program Review Portfolio (prepared based on requirements outlined in the program review guidelines) to both reviewers. The sponsor(s) will act as a conduit of communication between the site reviewer and the host institution(s) while working to establish travel dates, review dates, review agendas, and schedules between the relevant parties.
  • The sponsor(s) are wholly responsible for the financial resources to be used in the execution of the program review. Usual costs involved in conducting a program review are expected to be supplied and include, but are not necessarily limited to, round-trip travel from the reviewers home to the review site and sufficient cash to cover the costs of adequate lodging, meals and incidental expenses. A sponsor(s) may elect to provide adequate lodging and meals through the host institution in lieu of a cash payment but must always provide a cash sum for incidental expenses to the site reviewer.
  • The sponsor(s) does not accompany the site reviewer on the site visit.
  • Should circumstances arise which make it necessary for the CCIS sponsor(s) or host institution(s) to defer program review, the request for deferral must be made in writing to CCIS Washington, which will forward requests to the Program Review Subcommittee for consideration. Under no circumstances will finances or inadequate time to prepare for a review be considered legitimate reasons to request deferral. The Program Review Rotation was approved by all sponsors prior to implementation and it is the responsibility of each sponsor to budget time and funds for review activities. In cases where postponement of the review is necessary, deferral may be requested and approved a maximum of two (2) times before the program is recommended for suspension to the Academic Programs Committee.
VII. Role and Responsibilities of Host Institution
  • The host institution will be intimately involved in the preparation of the Program Review Portfolio in conjunction with the sponsor(s). The host institution will also participate fully in doing all they can to accommodate the desired review agenda of the site reviewer.
  • Once the review is underway and the site reviewer has arrived in-country, the host institution(s) will facilitate the previously approved review agenda including the provision of all documentation requested by the reviewer. The host institution may also provide local transportation, meals and lodging to the reviewer as per agreement with the sponsor(s). In some cases, the sponsor(s) may have provided a cash allowance for lodging, meals and in-country transport for the reviewer. The PRS recommends that once the reviewer has arrived at the host institution(s), all transport to, from and between host institution facilities be provided by the host institution(s) in order to facilitate a timely and efficient completion of the site review.
  • Once the site review is complete, and the reviewer has departed, the host institution has completed the majority of their responsibilities to the program review process. Additional questions may arise from the reviewer and be received from the reviewer directly or through the sponsor(s). The host institution is expected to fully respond to any additional questions in a timely manner.

Time Line


Spring Governance Meetings/Annual Conference (March-April)

1. PRS directs CCIS to announce the 'Call for Program Reviewers.'

CCIS Washington will:

  1. send an e-mail to the membership announcing the 'Call for Program Reviewers' detailing deadlines, submission requirements and the programs to be reviewed in the upcoming cycle;
  2. post an announcement on the CCIS web site detailing the same;
  3. list the 'Call for Program Reviewers' by submission deadline on the web site calendar of events;
  4. announce a 'Call for Program Reviewers' in the CCIS newsletter.

Applicants will submit their letter of interest and resume to CCIS Washington by announced deadline.


EARLY MAY

2. CCIS Washington will forward completed submissions to each member of the PRS. PRS members will inform Washington of the selected reviewers for the upcoming review cycle, within fifteen (15) days.

3. CCIS Washington, will immediately notifyselected reviewers with a cc to the sponsoring institutions(s) and to the PRS.

4. The selected reviewers respond to Washington by accepting or declining the invitation to serve as a program reviewer within ten (10) business days. If a reviewer declines, the PRS will immediately replace that individual with 'first alternate' selection from the submissions received.

Washington will forward all responses to the PRS members and relevant sponsor(s).

5. CCIS also directs the sponsor(s) to contact the reviewers for their program(s) within five (5) business days.

CCIS Washington will e-mail the membership at large announcing the reviewers selected, thanking those who submitted for consideration and asking the membership to consider submitting for a reviewer position next cycle.

All communication must be copied to CCIS Washington at todianna@ccisabroad.org.


LATE MAY

6. The site and paper reviewer will have informed CCIS Washington that they have contacted each other.

The sponsor(s) will have forwarded copies of the Program Review Portfolio to:

  1. the site reviewer;
  2. the paper reviewer;
  3. CCIS Washington


JUNE

7. The program reviewers will:

  1. read the portfolio, and
  2. plan their review

8. The site reviewer and the program sponsor(s), will plan the schedule and logistics of the actual site review. The sponsor(s) will include the host institution in preparing the plans.

9. The financial responsibility for the site review rests fully with the sponsor(s). Once the site review is set, the sponsor(s) will provide the site reviewer with financial guidelines. The sponsor(s), in agreement with the site reviewer, may choose one of several options for the site review. The sponsor(s) may elect to:

  1. purchase and/or arrange for the provision of all transport, meals and lodging, or;
  2. provide the site reviewer with funds to purchase all transport, meals and lodging, or;
  3. combine aspects of A) and B).

Regardless of the method of provision of transport, meals and lodging, all sponsor(s) are required to provide an 'incidentals' allowance to the site reviewer that is sufficient to cover incidentals connected with the site visit. All parties must be reasonable in their expectations regarding site visit financial arrangements.


AUGUST - DECEMBER

10. The site review takes place.

11. The site reviewer and the sponsor(s) conclude financial issues.

12. The site reviewer then organizes information gathered during the site review and forwards it to the paper reviewer, with a copy to CCIS Washington.

(The site and paper reviewers should maintain contact throughout the process in order to facilitate agreement and efficiency during the final phases of the review process.

13. Upon receipt of the information from the site reviewer, the paper reviewer begins to finalize the review document.

The paper reviewer utilizes the portfolio with the site visit information. The two reviewers should cooperate to finalize the program review assessment into a professional quality document, incorporating commentary on aspects of the program as outlined in the full Program Review Guidelines. This document must be useful to the PRS in making an evaluation of the program under review.


DECEMBER - JANUARY

14. The paper reviewer shall submit the document to the PRS through CCIS Washington. The paper reviewer submits the document electronically and in hardcopy. The paper reviewer will also submit copies of all relevant supporting documentation to CCIS Washington.

15. CCIS Washington will receive the final review document and forward copies to members of the PRS.

16. The PRS members will review the document and come to consensus on a final recommendation to be communicated to the chair APC and copied to CCIS Washington.


SPRING GOVERNANCE MEETINGS/ANNUAL CONFERENCE (MARCH-APRIL)

17. For final PRS recommendations other than 'RECOMMEND', the APC will be required to discuss and vote on appropriate action to take.