Probing Questions Answer/Discussion Evidence Gap (yes/no; if a gap (previous 5 years, qualitative/quantitative, and exist-explain) reliable) When was the current mission July 14, 2009 Board meeting minutes for no statement approved by the 7/14/09 board? IA.3 Using the institution’s governance and decision-making processes, the institution reviews its mission statement on a regular basis and revises it on a regular basis and revises it as necessary. Probing Questions Answer/Discussion Evidence Gap (yes/no; if a gap (previous 5 years, qualitative/quantitative, and exist-explain) reliable) How effective is the institution’s There is a process. Do we want a cycle for Fall Fling/follow-up process for periodic review of the Mission Review Task Force review of Mission (since email/yearly review mission statement? Does the meets as needed. Reports Board approval needed) process allow for incorporating back at Fall Fling annually. If yes, add to Moorpark’s evaluation + the interests for the institutions’ Making Decisions validation of stakeholders? Yes, stakeholder’s interests document. Strategic Objectives are incorporated. Incorporation of interests M/V/V task force gp of institution’s Board minutes stakeholders effective + Community evaluated? Data? Find a feedback/groups way of incorporating the Mission Review interests of external Taskforce stakeholders (in addition to the BOT) in the development and review of the mission statement
Probing Questions Answer/Discussion Evidence (previous 5 years, qualitative/quantitative, and reliable) Gap (yes/no; if a gap exist-explain) When was the current mission statement approved by the board? July 14, 2009 Board meeting minutes for 7/14/09 no IA.3 Using the institution’s governance and decision-making processes, the institution reviews its mission statement on a regular basis and revises it on a regular basis and revises it as necessary. Probing Questions Answer/Discussion Evidence (previous 5 years, qualitative/quantitative, and reliable) Gap (yes/no; if a gap exist-explain) How effective is the institution’s process for periodic review of the mission statement? Does the process allow for incorporating the interests for the institutions’ stakeholders? There is a process. Mission Review Task Force meets as needed. Reports back at Fall Fling annually. Yes, stakeholder’s interests are incorporated. Fall Fling/follow-up email/yearly review evaluation + validation of Strategic Objectives M/V/V task force gp Board minutes Community feedback/groups Mission Review Taskforce Do we want a cycle for review of Mission (since Board approval needed) If yes, add to Moorpark’s Making Decisions document. Incorporation of interests of institution’s stakeholders effective + evaluated? Data? Find a way of incorporating the interests of external stakeholders (in addition to the BOT) in the development and review of the mission statement
Gap_Analysis_All_Standards.docx