Registrar Risk Assessment Q3 Q4 2011

Ashford University

Registrar Assessment Initial Review

Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 2011

First Assessment measuring departmental outcomes

Created by the Quality Assurance Department: Emiko Abe, Daimler Francisco, Guenevere Garrido, Courtney Nisay, Xuan Nguyen, Lisa Medina, Marla Trevor

11/14/2011

Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3

Transfer Records ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Audit Scores Overall ............................................................................................................................................................ 5

Findings by Audit Category: ................................................................................................................................................ 5

Transfer Records Appendices ............................................................................................................................................. 7

Appendix A ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Appendix B (Transfer Records Teams) .......................................................................................................................... 11

Student Records .................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Audit Scores Overall .......................................................................................................................................................... 26

Student Forms ................................................................................................................................................................... 26

Student Records Appendix ................................................................................................................................................ 29

Matriculation ........................................................................................................................................................................ 32


Matriculation Appendices ................................................................................................................................................. 34

Appendix A: ................................................................................................................................................................... 34

Appendix B (Matriculation Teams) ............................................................................................................................... 38

Articulation ........................................................................................................................................................................... 48


Articulation Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................... 50

Introduction

The Quality Assurance department, in collaboration with each sub-department in the Registrar’s Office, has implemented a new cycle of assessment, based upon a model of institutional effectiveness. The cycle will last 6 months and will include the steps of data collection, analysis, as well as improvement planning and implementation – and then the cycle will begin again. This document represents the first steps taken by the Quality Assurance department to measure and analyze the outcomes established by each sub-department. The next steps will include the design and completion of improvement plans for further improvement.

This document includes an assessment of one outcome for each sub-department. Future assessments may include an assessment of multiple measures per sub-department. In addition, the document is organized by sub-department with appropriate appendices and graphical representations attached.

Transfer Records

Audit Scores Overall Outcome Measured: Transfer records team will meet the quality expectation of 98% on average.

- Summary of Process and Audit Description

o Transfer Records Coordinators (TRCs) are evaluated on their current processes on a weekly basis by QA Lead. The scores are based on the previous week’s accuracy in the areas of follow up, first request, requesting, and receiving. Coordinators are expected to meet an overall benchmark of 98% quality weekly.

o Audit scores for Quarter 3 of 2011 were reviewed. - Strengths

o QA Leads possess a complete understanding of the current TRC processes for purposes of auditing. o The current quarter shows that the individual teams and the transfer records department are

exceeding the current bench mark for quality with the transfer records department as a whole at or above a 99% quality weekly and monthly for the entire quarter (Appendix A, Figure 1).

- Opportunities o An increase in the amount of applications is correlated with a decrease in quality (a factor of -0.37).

It would appear that the more work the TRC completes, the more room there is for error (Appendix A, Figure 2). In the month of September an increase in application volume was accompanied by a decrease in quality scores (Appendix A, Figure 3).

o TRCs with larger populations perform more follow up daily, which increases time to completion. Two of the five most missed categories are related to time to completion for follow up and requesting; for Follow Up, the second-most missed category was “Follow-up within SOP time frames”, and for Requesting it was “48 hours: request complete, TN Doc flipped, 1st request activity closed in CVue”.

o During the quarter, the Transfer Records Department experienced several staffing changes: three veteran TRCs left the company, two new TRCs were hired, and three TRCs took extended vacations. During those times, the populations of the active TRCs fluctuated to accommodate for the absences.

Findings by Audit Category:

Follow-Up

- Summary of Process and Audit Description - 20% of the Follow-Up of Transfer Records Coordinators (TRC) is audited. In Q3, 4687 follow-up records

were audited. - Strengths

o Of the student files audited in this category, a total of 243 errors were discovered, a 5% error rate (Appendix A, Figure 4).

- Opportunities o The most common errors and the most missed category was, “All notes in CVue” with a total of 99

errors.

Requesting

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o 10 transcript requests per TRC are audited each week. In Q3, an estimated 4560 requests were

audited. - Strengths

o Of the student files audited in this category, a total of 80 errors were discovered, a 2% error rate (Appendix A, Figure 5).

- Opportunities

The most common category was “48 hours; request complete, TN Doc flipped, 1st request activity closed in CVue”. This scope of this audit category does not allow careful analysis of the errors (i.e. the audit data does not reveal the exact nature of the errors because multiple errors are included in the category). Completed Files

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o 8 completed files per TRC are audited each week. In Q3, an estimated 3648 completed files were

audited. - Strengths

o Of the files audited in this category, a total of 166 errors were discovered, a total error rate of 4.5% (Figure 6).

- Opportunities

The most commonly missed category was “All documents clear and complete,” which includes flipping the file to “closed” status in TMS. A review of a sample of TRC audit sheets revealed this to be the most common error in this category.

Receiving

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o The receipt of 8 transcripts per TRC is audited each week. In Q3, an estimated 3648 transcript

receipts were audited. - Strengths

o Of the files audited in this category, a total of 75 errors were discovered, a total error rate of 2% (Figure 7).

- Opportunities o The most commonly missed category was, “Name of the school received and documented in the

correct document and document status was flipped” with a total of 30 errors.

Transfer Records Appendices

Appendix A Figure 1

Figure 2

Correlation factor: -0.3699

Figure 3

Figure 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

99

14

96

5 4 21

4

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Q3 Total Errors for Follow-Up

Figure 5

Figure 6

05

101520253035404550

48 hours: requestcomplete, TN Doc

flipped, 1strequest activityclosed in Cvue

All TRPs attachedand legible (both

Mil and Reg)

NTP email sentwith the

first/initialrequest/phone

call

46

6

28

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Q3 Total Errors for Requesting

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 13 10 7 11

78

1 2 7 1

35

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Q3 Total Errors for Completed Files

Figure 7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Thetranscript islinked to the

correctstudent/the

transcriptreceived

under theright

school/AllIdentifiersare correct

The finaltranscript

received andmarked in

TMS, notedon the post-it note and

routed to thecorrect AC.

Transfercredits

noted/BADegreeposted.

Name of theschool

received anddocumented

in thecorrect

documentand

documentstatus was

flipped.

Transcriptreceived for

areevaluation

Transcriptreceivedwithin 24

hours uponreceipt inwork flow

queue

7

20

12

30

4 2

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Q3 Total Errors for Receiving

Appendix B (Transfer Records Teams) Department Comparison

The following graphs include the department error average compared to each team. They are divided according to audited processes.

Figure 1

Figure 2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Frances Jason Kate T. Katherine Kelly Tracy

Follow-Up Errors by Team

Team Total

Department Average (40.5)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Frances Jason Kate T. Katherine Kelly Tracy

Requesting Errors by Team

Team Total


Figure 3

Figure 4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Completed Files Errors by Team

Team Total


0

5

10

15

20

25

Receiving Errors by Team

Team Total


Individual Team Results

Frances Almario

05

10152025303540

All notes inCVue.

All notes inTMS

Follow-upwithin SOP time

frames.

Was theRegistrarcontactedcorrectly.

Used follow-upguidelines andapprop use of

3rd/4th coursefollow up

18 1 11 1 3

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Follow-Up Q3 Frances

9 1

8 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

48 hours: request complete, TNDoc flipped, 1st request activity

closed in Cvue

All TRPs attached and legible(both Mil and Reg)

NTP email sent with thefirst/initial request/phone call

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Requesting Q3 Frances

2 1 1 2

25

14

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The file closedwithin twenty-

four hours

All thestudent's

transcriptslocated in file

Transcriptschecked for

transfercredits/BA

degree

Clearinghousechecked/ all

schoolsaccounted for.

All documentsclear andcomplete.

Activity set topriority

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Completed Files Q3 Frances

6 2

7 1 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The final transcriptreceived and marked in

TMS, noted on thepost-it note and routed

to the correct AC.

Transfer creditsnoted/BA Degree

posted.

Name of the schoolreceived and

documented in thecorrect document anddocument status was

flipped.

Transcript received fora reevaluation

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Receiving - Q3 Frances

Jason Hook

05

10152025303540

6 4

25

1 5 2 Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Follow-Up Q3 Jason

15

2 05

10152025303540

48 hours: request complete, TN Doc flipped, 1strequest activity closed in Cvue

NTP email sent with the first/initialrequest/phone call

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Requesting Q3 Jason

1 2 3 2 10

1 1 1 2 05

10152025303540

The file wasclosed underthe correct

AC

The fileclosedwithin

twenty-fourhours

All thestudent's

transcriptslocated in

file


transfercredits/BA

degree

Alldocumentsclear andcomplete.

The studentunscheduled

when filewas closed

Unscheduleactivity setup for the

AA forincomplete

file

The CertifiedLetter

mailed andpasted in

Cvue

Activity setto priority

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Completed Files Q3 Jason

2 2 1 1 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The transcript is linked tothe correct student/the

transcript received underthe right school/All

Identifiers are correct

The final transcript receivedand marked in TMS, noted

on the post-it note androuted to the correct AC.

Transfer credits noted/BADegree posted.

Name of the schoolreceived and documentedin the correct document

and document status wasflipped.

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Receiving Q3 Jason

Kate Tayag

05

10152025303540

24

1

38

2 5 1

Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Total Errors for Follow-Up Q3 Kate

6 1 4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

48 hours: request complete, TN Docflipped, 1st request activity closed in

Cvue

All TRPs attached and legible (bothMil and Reg)

NTP email sent with the first/initialrequest/phone call

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Requesting Q3 Kate

4 1 1 9

1 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The file closedwithin twenty-four

hours

All the student'stranscripts located

in file

Clearinghousechecked/ all schools

accounted for.

All documents clearand complete.

The Certified Lettermailed and pasted

in Cvue

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Completed Files Q3 Kate

2 8

2 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The final transcript received andmarked in TMS, noted on thepost-it note and routed to the

correct AC.

Name of the school received anddocumented in the correct

document and document statuswas flipped.

Transcript received for areevaluation

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Receiving Q3 Kate

Katherine Briggs

05

10152025303540

29

5

15

2 2 5 1

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Follow-Up Q3 Katherine

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

48 hours: requestcomplete, TN Doc flipped,1st request activity closed

in Cvue

All TRPs attached andlegible (both Mil and Reg)

NTP email sent with thefirst/initial request/phone

call

5 3 5

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Requesting - Q3 Katherine

2 1 2

18

1 2 10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40


four hours

All thestudent's

transcriptslocated in file




Unscheduleactivity set upfor the AA for

incomplete file

The CertifiedLetter mailedand pasted in

Cvue


Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Completed Files Q3 Katherine

2 5 5 6 1 2 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The transcript islinked to the

correctstudent/the

transcript receivedunder the right

school/AllIdentifiers are

correct

The final transcriptreceived and

marked in TMS,noted on the post-it note and routedto the correct AC.

Transfer creditsnoted/BA Degree

posted.

Name of theschool received

and documentedin the correctdocument and

document statuswas flipped.

Transcriptreceived for areevaluation

Transcriptreceived within 24

hours uponreceipt in work

flow queue

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Receiving Q3 Katherine

Kelly Sexton-Caudillo

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

All notes in CVue. All notes in TMS Follow-up withinSOP time frames.

Was the Registrarcontactedcorrectly.

14 2 6 1

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Total Errors for Follow-Up Q3 Kelly

5 1

8 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

48 hours: request complete, TNDoc flipped, 1st request activity

closed in Cvue

All TRPs attached and legible(both Mil and Reg)

NTP email sent with thefirst/initial request/phone call

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Requesting Q3 Kelly

2 3 1 2 12

3 2 05

10152025303540


four hours

All the student'stranscripts

located in file


transfercredits/BA

degree




The CertifiedLetter mailedand pasted in

Cvue


Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Completed Files Q3 Kelly

1 4 3 5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The transcript is linked tothe correct student/the

transcript received underthe right school/All

Identifiers are correct




Name of the schoolreceived and documentedin the correct document

and document status wasflipped.

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Receiving Q3 Kelly

Tracy Zink

05

10152025303540

All notes in CVue. All notes in TMS Follow-up withinSOP time frames.

Used follow-upguidelines andapprop use of

3rd/4th coursefollow up

8 1 1 3

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Follow-Up Q3 Tracy

6 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

48 hours: request complete, TN Doc flipped, 1strequest activity closed in Cvue

NTP email sent with the first/initial request/phone call

Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Category

Total Errors for Requesting Q3 Tracy

1 1 3 4 4 1 7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The file closedwithin twenty-four

hours

All the student'stranscripts located

in file


transfer credits/BAdegree


schools accountedfor.


Unscheduled emailsent

Activity prio

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Completed Files Q3 Tracy

2 1 1 3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The transcript is linked to thecorrect student/the

transcript received under theright school/All Identifiers

are correct




Name of the school receivedand documented in thecorrect document and

document status was flipped.

Amou

nt o

f Err

ors

Category

Total Errors for Receiving Q3 Tracy

Student Records

Audit Scores Overall Outcome measured:

Quality of forms processed is within a 5-10% margin of error.

Note: Both forms and graduation and pre-graduation audits are included in this assessment.

Pre-Graduation

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o The Associate University Registrar and Student Records Managers set guidelines for quality in which active

Student Records Coordinator (SRC) are expected to meet a 98.5% on pre-graduation audits on a weekly basis.

o The QA department reviewed data from the month of July for both undergraduate and graduate students. Undergraduate Errors: The following categories were missed once:

• Previous Education Field on Student Master Screen Correct • Notes Correct in 58 SR Pre Grad Audit activity • Notes Correct in 28 AA Pre Grad Call activity

Graduate Errors: The following categories were missed: • Monitor GPA Notes • Correct Date set for 58 SR Graduation activity • Correct graduation date on enrollment screen.

- Strengths o For the month of July, the Student Records department exceeded their benchmark.

Aimee Slade’s team received a 99.6% quality score. Emiko Rasmussen’s team received a 99.2% quality score.

Graduation

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o The Associate University Registrar and Student Records Managers set guidelines for quality in which active

SRCs are expected to meet a 99% on graduation audits on a weekly basis. o The QA department reviewed data from the month of July for both undergraduate and graduate students.

Undergraduate Errors: One category was missed once: • Notes correct in 58 SR Graduation activity.

Graduate Errors: No errors - Strengths

o For the month of July, the Student Records department had an error rate of .1%. Aimee Slade’s team received a 100% quality score. Emiko Rasmussen’s team received a 99.9 % quality score.

Student Forms Grade Change Process

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o Student Records Coordinators (SRC) evaluate Grade Change forms for students and approve them based on

specific criteria. o The Quality Assurance Department monitors 20% of grade change forms completed by SRCs not in training. o The Student Records department has set a goal of a 5-10% margin of error. o The following data was collected for Quarter 3 of 2011.

- Strengths o The department is currently below the error rate goal of 5-10% errors (Figure 1). o Error rate per category per month is below 5% in each category.

- Opportunities o Most of the errors made were “other errors” (55.6%) related to documents not uploaded to CampusVue.

FERPA Forms

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o Four different forms are audited by Quality Assurance on a weekly basis: Authorization to Release Student

Records (100% audited), FERPA Non-Disclosure (100% audited), Power of Attorney (100% audited), and Education Tuition Program (20% audited).

o For Quarter 3 of 2011, 260 FERPA forms were audited and errors were identified on 35 forms. Overall, the department demonstrated a 13.4% error rate (Figure 2).

Authorization to Release Student Records Form

- Opportunities o Of the student forms audited, 23 had an activity error, and 16 had a document error (Figures 3 and 4). o Overall, the department demonstrated a 13% error rate on this form.

Education Tuition Program Forms

- Strengths o There were 14 Education Tuition Program Forms audited and 1 had an error. Overall, the department

demonstrated a 7% error rate for Q3.

FERPA Non-Disclosure Forms

- Opportunities o Of the 4 FERPA Non-Disclosure Forms audited, 2 were identified with errors related to the activity and the

document. The error rate for each Student Records team is 50%.

Power of Attorney

- Opportunities o Of the 4 Power of Attorney forms that were audited, 2 were identified with errors.

Enrollment Verification Forms

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o 20% of Enrollment Verification forms (EV) are audited by the Quality Assurance Department. o QA reviewed data from Quarter 3 of 2011.

- Opportunities

o The error rate for the EV process is 21%, which is relatively high compared to other forms audited (Figure 5). Note: errors approved by managers were removed.

o The majority of errors were document errors, 38% of total errors identified (Figures 6 and 7). Most of the document errors identified were due to a missing EV form or letter in ImageNow, which may be the result of the document not being provided to Doc Imaging, being mislinked or misclassified, or simply not having been processed by Doc Imaging at the time of audit.

Student Records Appendix Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

0% 1% 1% 1%

4%

2%

3% 2%

4% 4%

7% 7%

0%1%2%3%4%5%6%7%8%

July 2011 August 2011 September 2011

Grade Change Report

Change Incorrect

Activity Error

Other Error

Total Error rate by Month

87%

13%

FERPA Report Q3

No Errors Errors

8

5 3

0

4

8

12

16

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Missed Error per Category

Total Type of Doc Errors: Authorization to Release Student Records Form

Incorrect Document Status

Incorrect Notes

Missing Notes

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

16

7

0

5

10

15

20

Tota

l Am

ount

of E

rror

s

Missed Error per Category

Total Type of Activity Errors: Authorization to Release Student Records Form

Activity closedincorrectly.

Incorrect Notes

7, 2% 13, 4%

19, 7%

24, 8%

234, 79%

Enrollment Verification Errors

Program Errors

Date Errors

Activity Errors

Doc Errors

Correct

11%

21%

30%

38%

Enrollment Verification Error Types

Program Errors

Date Errors

Activity Errors

Doc Errors

Figure 7

10

3

8

12

9

4 5

12

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Activity Errors ProgramErrors

Date Errors Doc Errors

Enrollment Verification Errors by Team

Aimee Slade

Emiko Rasmussen

Matriculation


Using all SOPs, Job Aids & other resources to complete the most thorough evaluation of all transfer credit for the student. Note: The use of resources was not measured, rather the results of the evaluations.

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o Between 20 to 100% of Degree Pathways completed by Matriculation Coordinators are audited, with

feedback delivered throughout the week on any errors made. Performance is measured on a weekly basis, with a minimum quality expectation ranging from 97%-99%. The department goal is a quality score of 98% or above.

o Data from June of 2011 was reviewed for this assessment. This month was chosen because it could be used as a benchmark; many changes were implemented in July which would not have provided an accurate average error rate and there was a pilot of auditing software in August which made it difficult to gather data. However, overall departmental performance data was gathered for June and July to demonstrate the challenge of adapting to significant policy and process changes, while maintaining high quality (Appendix A, Figure 1).

- Strengths o The department consistently meets or exceeds the minimum 98% quality score on average and individual

MC teams rarely fall below this benchmark (e.g. all teams earned an average score of at least 98.5% in the month of June).

o The overall quality score increased throughout the month of June. - Opportunities

o Five categories on the MC audit sheet were identified as having a significantly high rate of error (Appendix A, Figure 2). Some of these categories are documented but may be explained more clearly in Standard Operating Procedures, while other categories are difficult to document or provide training on (e.g., data entry). The categories include:

All possible general studies/direct transfer courses applied to appropriate area Data Entry Error (Course Code or Title, Credit Amount, Grade) No courses transferred that should not have been All possible courses transferred correctly (no missed coursework) File Reviewed/DP complete notes correct (institutions, lower for upper, accreditations, degree

conferred date/GPA for MA students) o Performance in each audit sheet category is generally consistent across all teams, with only a few exceptions

(Appendix B, Figure 1-6) indicating a department-wide struggle with the related processes.

Matriculation Appendices

Appendix A: Figure 1

Figure 2

98.00%

98.50%

99.00%

99.50%

100.00%

June Week 1 June Week 3 June Week 5 July Week 2 July Week 4

Department Quality June-July 2011

12%

9%

7%

6%

5%

4% 4% 3% 3% 3%

3% 3%

3% 2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2% 2%

2% 2%

2%

1% 1%

1%

1% 1% 1%

1%

1% 1%

1%

1%

1%

0%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Errors by Category in June 2011

All possible general studies/directtransfer courses applied toappropriate areas

Data Entry Error (Course Code or Title,Credit Amount, Grade)

No courses transferred that shouldnot have been

All possible courses transferredcorrectly (no missed coursework)

File Reviewed/DP complete notescorrect (institutions, lower for upper,accreditations, degree conferreddate/GPA for MA students)

Figure 3

Figure 4

49%

15%

11%

9%

8%

5%

1% 1% 1% 0%

Errors by Area in June 2011

Transcript Evaluation

Full Admission

Student Master

HS Verification/DP Complete Notes

Qualifying Student

English Proficiency

Activities Accuracy

Student Communication

Enrollment

MBA/MPA Trifecta

57 58 52

40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

6/3/2011 6/10/2011 6/17/2011 6/24/2011

Num

ber o

f Err

ors

Courses Applied to Incorrect Area

Figure 5

Figure 6

50

39 44

34

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

6/3/2011 6/10/2011 6/17/2011 6/24/2011

Num

ber o

f Err

ors

Data Entry Errors

39

26 29

18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

6/3/2011 6/10/2011 6/17/2011 6/24/2011

Num

ber o

f Err

ors

Courses Should Not Have Transferred

Figure 7

Figure 8

33

26 25 23

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

6/3/2011 6/10/2011 6/17/2011 6/24/2011

Num

ber o

f Err

ors

Transferrable Courses Missed

28 32

20 15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

6/3/2011 6/10/2011 6/17/2011 6/24/2011

Num

ber o

f Err

ors

DP Activity Note Errors

Appendix B (Matriculation Teams) Department Comparison

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

05

10152025303540

Courses Applied to Incorrect Area by Team

Team Total

Department Average(25.9)

10 7

17 23 24

27

36

23

05

10152025303540

Data Entry Errors by Team

Team Total


9 4

13 15 12

32

12 15

05

10152025303540

Courses Should Not Have Transferred by Team

Team Total

Department Average (14)

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

7 8 13 12

20 20

13 14

05

10152025303540

Transferrable Courses Missed by Team

Team Total


8

2

17

11 8

19 16 14

05

10152025303540

DP Activity Note Errors by Team

Team Total


197

115

262

170

264 267

205 204

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Errors (All Audit Sheet Categories)

Total Errors (AllCategories)

Department Average (AllCategories) - 210.5

Individual Teams

Andrew Beal

12%

5%

5%

5%

5%

5%

4%

4% 4% 4% 3%

3% 3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2% 2%

2% 2%

2% 1%

1%

1%

1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Andrew


Data Entry Error (Course Code orTitle, Credit Amount, Grade)

High School Entered (correctcity/state)/BA degree (corrrect gradyear)


Activity completed or reassigned tothe appropriate person

Abby Dolan

9%

9%

8%

7%

6%

6% 6% 5%

5%

5%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

2%

2% 2%

2% 2% 2% 2%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Abby


Correct GPA listed in the EducationFolder


Activity completed or reassignedto the appropriate person

EXP 105 waiver added/BUS 600waiver not added

HS Verification notes complete(Website, phone, age, etc.)

Buket Tabak

10%

6%

6%

5%

5%

5%

5% 4% 4% 4%

3% 3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2% 2%

2%

2%

1%

1% 1%

1% 1% 1%

1%

1%

1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Buket


File Reviewed/DP complete notescorrect (institutions, lower forupper, accreditations, degreeconferred date/GPA for MAstudents)Data Entry Error (Course Code orTitle, Credit Amount, Grade)

High School Entered (correctcity/state)/BA degree (corrrect gradyear)


Darwin Canseco

14%

10%

9%

7%

7% 7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

2% 2%

2%

2% 2% 2%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1% 1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Darwin





Agency Field/School Field updated

File Reviewed/DP complete notescorrect (institutions, lower forupper, accreditations, degreeconferred date/GPA for MAstudents)

Justin Wilson

13%

8%

7%

4%

4%

3% 3%

3% 3% 3% 3% 3%

3% 3%

3%

3%

3%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2% 2%

2% 2% 1%

1% 1%

1% 1%

1%

1% 1%

1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Categor: Justin






EXP 105 waiver added/BUS 600waiver not added

Ashley Tichler

11%

10%

9%

7%

6%

4% 3% 3% 3% 3%

3% 3%

3% 2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2% 2% 2%

1% 1%

1% 1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Ashley







Sarah Drey

18%

13%

8%

7% 6% 5%

5%

4%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3% 3%

2%

2% 2%

2% 2%

1% 1% 1%

1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Sarah



File Reviewed/DP complete notescorrect (institutions, lower forupper, accreditations, degreeconferred date/GPA for MAstudents)All possible courses transferredcorrectly (no missed coursework)

Jimmy Driscoll

15%

12%

8%

7%

7% 6%

6%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

2% 2%

2% 2%

2%

2% 2% 2%

1%

1% 1%

1% 1%

1%

1%

1% 1%

1%

Errors by Audit Sheet Category: Jimmy







Articulation


Evaluate college catalogs and ACE credit recommendations for each articulation agreement and partnership in a timely manner and above the department standard.

- Summary of Process and Audit Description o Articulation Specialists are required to maintain a quality score of 98% on average for each Course

Equivalency Guide (CEG) reviewed. o Data from quarters 1-3 of 2011 were reviewed for this assessment.

- Strengths o All Articulation Specialists exceeded the 98% benchmark for all three quarters (Figure 1). o In Figure 2, the stacked bar graph illustrates the errors per specialists as a percentage of the total number of

courses evaluated. Error rate percentage per specialist range between 0% and 3%. Note that vertical axis ranges from 90% to 100%.

- Opportunities o There is currently no category on the CEG audit sheet for failure to include a course in the CEG. Inclusion of

this error may change the quality scores. o The most common error is related to courses that are left off of CEGs (Figure 3 and 4).

Articulation Appendix Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

99.05 99.09 99.26 99.92

98.21

95

96

97

98

99

100

Bev Deya Joselyn Lisa Ronnie

Perc

enta

ge

Specialists

Quality Score

Quality Benchmark

Current Quality

8088 2068 2390 1864

2974

70 2 5 3

83

90%

91%

92%

93%

94%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

100%

Bev Deya Joselyn Lisa Ronnie

Error Rate Per Articulation Specialist

Sum of Error

Sum of No Error

Figure 4

46

1

0

1

53

0

0

3

0

18

7

0

0

0

2

4

0

2

0

8

12

1

0

2

1

1

0

0

0

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Bev

Deya

Joselyn

Lisa

Ronnie

Most Common Errors

Sum of Courses left off CEG Sum of INF 231

Sum of Inaccurate GE applicability for AU Direct Transfer Sum of Missing catalog Cross-Listing

Sum of Missing AU Cross-Listing Sum of Courses on CEG, not in catalog

101

2

16 14

21

9

05

101520253035404550556065707580859095

100105110

Total

Most Common Errors

Sum of Courses left off CEG Sum of Courses on CEG, not in catalog

Sum of Missing AU Cross-Listing Sum of Missing catalog Cross-Listing

Sum of INF 231 Sum of Inaccurate GE applicability for AU Direct Transfer

Documents

Registrar Risk Assessment Q3 Q4 2011