2024-2027 Year-Two Strategies

Leads responsible for implementation:

• Andrew Feldstein, Assistant Provost for Teaching Innovation and Learning Technologies
• Nicole Frank, Director of Professional Development

Implementation team members:

• Faculty Development Committee
• TILT staff

Action Steps:

• Coordinate with the Faculty Development Committee to create and promote multiple opportunities for faculty to engage in professional development activities through TILT and other appropriate institutional outlets throughout the fiscal year.
• Create essential workshops and support systems designed to meet diverse faculty professional development needs.
• Implement a process and system for tracking faculty development participation and engagement on an annual basis.
• Systematically assess—via survey—engagement and perceived relevance of faculty development programming

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks

% of Faculty Engaged

FY25 Budget: Monetary resources not required this year.

Lead responsible for implementation:

Director of University Assessment

Implementation team members:

• University Assessment Team and University Learning Assessment Committee

Action Steps:

Implementation team will have met with faculty of programs identified as not yet having full established effective, concrete, and measurable Program Learning Outcomes. Faculty in identified programs will engage the process of revising problematic PLOs with guidance from implementation team. By May 2026, seven more degree programs will have PLOs that are effective, concrete and measurable, achieving the 85% benchmark for the year.

Desired Outcomes Baseline and Benchmarks

FY26 Budget: Monetary resources not required this year.

Leads responsible for implementation:

• Angela Pool-Funai, Assistant Provost for Academic Programs
• College Deans
• Department Chairs

Action Steps:

• Program review template completed, plan for data distribution identified, and program review training session(s) conducted, by May 2025.                       

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks

FY25 Budget: Monetary resources not required this year.

Leads responsible for implementation:

• Kristin Herl
• Kristi Mills

Implementation team members:

• Kelsi Broadway
• Keith Bremer
• Kaley Klaus
• Haley Williams
• Jon Armstrong
• Kristi Mills
• Kristin Herl

The Enrollment Council will:

• Engage each enrollment council member to provide insights into annual targets and justification for how these targets align with market trends and academic capacities.
• Articulate clear strategies to achieve their unit’s respective targets. This plan should include actionable steps and expected outcomes at each stage.
• Implement quarterly reviews and updates on enrollment progress to ensure accountability and adapt strategies as necessary.

Action Steps

1. By the end of August 2025, the Enrollment Council to provide Fall, Spring, and Summer 2026 and Fall 2027 projections to ELT.
2. The Enrollment Council will provide updates on projections to ELT in early October, January, March, and July.
3. By the end of 2025, provide projections and justifications for the FHSU Enrollment Plan.
4. By May 2026, submit a formalized Strategic Enrollment Management Plan to ELT.

Strategic Enrollment Management Plan 2025-2028

FY26 budget:  Monetary resources not required this year.

Lead responsible for implementation:

Provost and Vice-President for Academic Affairs

Implementation team members:

• Provost and Vice-President for Academic Affairs
• College Deans
• Assistant Provost for Academic Programs and Dean of the Graduate School
• Assistant Provost for Internationalization and Strategic Initiatives

Action Steps:

Develop strategic academic program opportunities to be vetted through the Office of the Provost and Executive Leadership Team for resource allocation.

Process for Developing and Vetting Strategic Academic Program Opportunities

1. Identification of Strategic Opportunities:
   • Academic Affairs units initiate the identification of new academic program opportunities (i.e. majors, interdisciplinary programs, graduate programs) that align with institutional goals, industry demands, or emerging academic trends.
   • Faculty and department chairs collaborate to assess current gaps, strengths, and innovative potential within their academic offerings.  This process should include the following elements:  demand for and feasibility of the proposed program through data tools available (i.e. Hanover, Gray DI, regional employer input, etc.); resource requirements; and alignment with the institutional mission and goals.
2. Deans bring forth ideas to the Office of the Provost:
   • After internal review, the refined academic program idea is submitted to the Office of the Provost for further vetting. This submission includes:
     • Detailed program description, strategic alignment, and justification for the new program.
     • Financial projections and resource requirements.
     • Market analysis and competitive positioning.
3. Review by the Office of the Provost:
   • The Office of the Provost conducts a thorough evaluation of the proposed program, which could include:
     • Academic quality review and alignment with institutional goals.
     • Financial viability and long-term sustainability analysis.
     • Alignment with available or potential resources (faculty, staff, infrastructure).
     • Institutional impact on enrollment, reputation, business, industry and community engagement.

• The level of evaluation will depend on the type of program being proposed. A certificate or concentration will have a different type of vetting than a full degree program.  Any significant resource needs for new programs will be taken to Executive Leadership Team (ELT).  For new program opportunities that do not need significant new resource, those programs will go through the program approval cycles as outlined on the  curriculum  webpage.  

1. Consideration of the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) and President:
   • After the Office of the Provost’s evaluation, should the program warrant new resource allocations, the proposal will be presented to the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) for high-level consideration, prioritization, and strategic alignment with the institution’s overall goals.
   • The ELT discusses the resource allocation strategy, including funding, faculty hiring, technology investments, and any other necessary infrastructure.
   • President Mason makes a final decision about new resource allocation.
2. Formal Program Approval Process
   • If approved to move forward by the President, program proposal is vetted through the appropriate program approval cycles internally and externally.  See the  curriculum  webpage for those processes. 

Leads responsible for implementation: 

• Wesley Wintch, Vice President for Finance and Administration
• Nicole Frank, Director of Professional Development

Implementation team members: 

• Cameron Shoemaker
• Edie McCracken
• Johnae Robles
• Nicole Frank

Action Steps:

3 staff trainings planned and conducted in year 2 that are targeted in areas of interest and need from the survey conducted.  These may target a select group of staff based on role or assignment. Promote usage of Staff Development funds

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks (e.g. by 2027 at least 45% of all staff will engage in annual professional development activities supporting best practices)

FY26 budget: $30,000 for Staff Development funding. 

Leads responsible for implementation: 

• Wesley Wintch
• Mark Griffin

Implementation team members: 

• Wesley Wintch, Vice President for Finance and Administration
• Mark Griffin, Assistant VP for Technology Services and CIO

Action Steps:

• Using the NIST survey data, create a prioritized action list.  We will systematically work to implement these recommendations using the list.

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks:  

• By 2027, FHSU will have fully implemented at least 85% of all the NIST assessment recommendation.

Leads responsible for implementation: 

• Wesley Wintch
• Dana Cunningham

Implementation team members:

• Wesley Wintch
• Dana Cunningham
• Matt Cook
• Keith Bremer
• Matt Zimmerman
• Blake Weigel
• Kristin Wolf
• Kristal Boxberger
• David Bollig
• Marnie Kohl

Action Steps:

• Develop method/tool for capturing cost and time savings  - July-August 2025
• Implement plan to gather efficiency ideas – Sept 2025
• Review efficiency ideas received, vet, and prioritize – Oct 2025
• Rollout implementation plan and begin adoption of ideas – Nov 25 – May 26
• Measure cost savings and time savings gained from implementation of efficiency initiatives – Nov 25 – May 26

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks: 

• By 2027, FHSU will have gathered efficiency ideas and implemented them to create cost and time savings for the University.

Leads responsible for Implementation: 

• Jeni McRay
• Kaley Klaus
• PCE Steering Group

Implementation team members: 

• Kaley Klaus
• PCE Staff
• AIT’s
• Internal Partner Units (e.g. academic departments, TILT, etc.)
• VP Workforce/Econ Development

Action Steps:

1. Continue implementing a sustainable business model for Professional and Continuing Education that:
   • aligns with the goals of the Strategic Affiliation,
   • leverages the work of the FORGE grant-supported position and Consortium,
   • supports workforce development needs in all areas where FHSU delivers educational programming,
   • creates innovative learning pathways and alternative credentials, and
   • meets the needs of existing corporate and industry clients and expands offerings in new modalities and with updated content.
2. Develop a 2-year unit level
3. Develop a long-term strategy for workforce-forward
4. Research the international market (particularly Southeast Asia, China, and Brazil) for offering and scaling microcredentials in an international market.
5. Begin phases 1 and 2 of HLC’s Analysis and Planning Tool for Employer and Community- Based Partnerships for an Institution’s Microcredential Strategy, in concert with CLE, Career Services, Affiliations, and Workforce Development partners.

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks:

By the end of 2027 we will offer an array of alternative credentials and stackable skills-based applied learning pathways to alumni, current, and prospective students that align with workforce and professional development needs of our stakeholders, internal and external, including our affiliated partner institutions and at select international partner locations.

FY25 budget: Monetary resources not required this year.

Leads responsible for implementation:

• Lori Kniffin
• Experiential Learning Committee
• Andy Cutright
• Jeni McRay

Implementation team members:  Academic Council Strategy Group

Action Steps:

• Director of CLE to visit with key stakeholders, guiding them in assessing targeted areas of the rubric including a score and description of the component.
• Director of CLE will compile the rubric scores and descriptions across stakeholders and the Year 1 gap analysis and recommendations and select a final benchmark score for each component of all 5 dimensions accompanied with a rationale from stakeholder discussions.
• Civic Learning & Engagement will select 5 components to increase by one stage on the rubric in collaboration with the appropriate partners (students, faculty, administrators, and/or community partners).

Review the improvement plan, select targeted interventions to prioritize, and identify what collaborators need to be involved.

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks: Establish benchmark scores across the 5 dimensions of the rubric as determined through a co- creative process with key stakeholders led by CLE.

FY25 budget: $5,000 for 0.5 FTE Graduate Assistant in Civic Learning and Engagement

Leads responsible for implementation:

• Jeni McRay
• GAISS Directors

Implementation team members: 

• GAISS Staff
• Deans having IP Programs
• CAHSS Internationalization Coordinator
• Academic Departments
• Student Engagement
• Student Success

1. Identify and grow new programs/partnerships in South America, Africa, and Southeast
2. Increase faculty, staff, and student travel/exchanges to and from American University of Phnom Penh and Dakar University of International Studies.
3. Study Abroad programs at Alnwick
4. Increase the number of students participating in the Global Citizen Leader Program by 25%.
5. Reimagine and strengthen co-curricular and global engagement opportunities across campus, which can include: increasing participation rates in ISU; increasing integrated participation in campus events; strengthening career resources for international students and the number of students who participate in OPT and CPT; and collaborating with academic departments and student engagement professionals to incorporate UNSDG content into the curriculum.

All action steps will be driven by a unit-level GAISS Strategic Plan for AY25-26 and AY26-27.

Desired Outcome Baseline and Benchmarks: By 2027, we will increase the number of diversified degree programs offered at international partnership locations and include robust co-curricular opportunities, including student, faculty and staff travel/exchanges and student engagement efforts.

FY26 budget: $10,000 for a 1.0 Graduate Assistant to help develop and enhance co-curricular activities