UH System Policies and Procedures
- Board of Regents Policies
- Current Policies
- Abolished Policies (Post Oct. 2014)
- + 1. General Provisions
- + 2. Administration
- + 3. Organization
- - 4. Planning
- + 5. Academic Affairs
- + 6. Tuition, Financial Assistance, and Fees
- + 7. Student Affairs
- + 8. Business and Finance
- + 9. Personnel
- + 10. Land and Physical Facilities
- + 11. Miscellaneous
- + 12. Research
- Archived EP
- Administrative Procedures
UH‐Related Laws and Rules
- Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS) 304A
- Hawaiʻi Administrative Rules (HAR) Title 20
Executive Policy 4.201 Executive Policy 4.201
Integrated Long-Range Planning Framework
Executive Policy Chapter 4, Planning
Executive Policy EP 4.201, Integrated Long-Range Planning Framework
Effective Date: October 2014
Prior Dates Amended: March 1997, July 1985 (est.)
Responsible Offices: Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs
Governing Board of Regents Policy RP 4.202, Strategic Planning ; RP 4.203, Unit Academic Plans; and RP 4.204, Long-Range Physical Development Plans
Review Date: August 2017
This revised executive policy is the successor to E4.201 dated July 1985. This policy provides guidance in the fulfillment of Chapter 4, Board of Regents Policies relating to (1) the purposes of university planning; (2) the planning concepts and processes that provide the foundation for University of Hawai’i planning; (3) the major components (outcomes/documents) of long-range planning at the University; (4) assessment and evaluation activities; (5) lead responsibility for planning implementation; and (6) the planning calendar.
As the lead for system-level strategic planning, the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall collaborate with Office of the Vice President for Administration and other system level offices in the implementation of this policy.
No policy specific or unique definitions apply.
III. Executive Policy
A. Purposes of University Planning
The University of Hawaii (UH) is committed to planning that addresses current and long-term educational needs and challenges of this institution, the state, and society at large. The purposes of University planning are to advance:
1. A shared direction and purpose among all segments of the University, consistent with the University's system mission, the missions of major Units1, the operative University system plan, and in support of formally stated priorities of the state; and
2. The integration of major Unit academic plans, subunit academic plans, program plans, facilities plans, capital and operating budget plans, accreditation reports, and related planning, assessment, and evaluation documents and processes.
B. Planning Concepts and Processes
University of Hawai’i planning links planning and budgeting, is responsive to its planning environment and diverse campus missions, involves collaborative processes, and is informed by relevant data and information.
1. Links Planning and Budgeting. A major objective of University planning is to ensure that planning results are considered and reflected as appropriate in budget priorities.
2. Responsive to the Planning Environment. Achieving shared directions and purposes that are responsive to significant local, regional, national, and global trends and needs is critical to the success of the University’s educational planning process.
3. Responsive to Diverse Campus Missions. Long- range planning within the University of Hawai’i is tailored to the needs of a heterogeneous system of campuses. Differences in mission, size, stage of development, etc., mean that system policies and guidelines must be flexible, recognizing that one planning process will not fit all.
4. Collaborative Processes. A central objective of UH planning is broad participation of faculty, staff, students, and managers resulting in decentralized implementation within common parameters. Universities are distinctive for their collegial, open, and participatory management style. Planning in this setting is characterized by consultation and review that combine the best of bottom-up and top-down approaches.
Executive leadership is ultimately responsible for developing, in consultation with University constituents, common planning parameters (system and campus mission and role statements, overall goals, planning principles and assumptions, and major policies). These parameters set the ground rules and provide the substantive framework within which plans at all levels are expected to fit. The common planning parameters are updated as needed and broadly disseminated across the University system. Executive leaders are also responsible for managing the overall planning process and, with appropriate consultation, for the preparation of plans for system wide functions and activities.
Collaborative planning requires decentralized planning by subunits and implementation by line, mid-level, and program managers who assume ultimate responsibility for the operation of their programs in concert with the common planning parameters.
This allocation of responsibility does not eliminate the need for review and approval of program plans by executive managers and the Board of Regents. Such reviews are needed to insure conformance with the basic assumptions and existing University policies as well as to identify gaps and overlaps among the various plans. In addition, subsequent reviews ensure that plans are realistic, setting forth appropriate and efficient use of limited resources.
5. Informed by Data and Information. University planning is supported and informed by a variety of management information and assessment reports that describes the University internal and external planning environment and provides information on how well the institution is achieving its overall goals. These reports are prepared in a timely and routine manner.
C. Major Planning Components
The University of Hawai’i planning system involves a core set of interrelated plans. Typically each document provides a guide to more detailed planning at one level and a mechanism for integrating that level into a coherent relationship with the broader objectives and policies that exist at more comprehensive levels of planning. The major University of Hawai’i planning documents are described below and summarized in Attachment 2, and their interrelationships are illustrated in Charts 1 and 2.
1. Mission Statement. The “University of Hawai’i Mission” articulates those qualities common to the system (the overall vision and purpose, values, governance structure, special emphasis on access, and the system’s distinctive Hawaiian/Asian/Pacific role). Within this overall mission, the separate and unique role and mission statements for UH Manoa, UH Hilo, UH-West O’ahu, and the UH Community Colleges are set forth.
2. System Plan. This document is typically called the University Strategic or Master Plan. The University’s current operative comprehensive system planning document is Focus on Quality: University of Hawai’i Strategic Plan, 1997- 2007. It sets forth common system goals and planning principles, and system and Unit- specific action strategies. Together these articulate the priorities of the University of Hawai’i system for the planning period.
3. Unit Academic Plans. Like the system plan, these plans are also typically called strategic plans2. The planning unit distinguishes these plans from the more comprehensive system plan. Unit academic plans are prepared for the four major Units of the UH system (Manoa, Hilo, West O’ahu, and the Community Colleges as one entity). Unit academic plans elaborate each Unit's special mission, unique internal and external circumstances, and strategies and priorities designed to implement the system plan. At Manoa, Hilo, and West O’ahu, these plans are the basis for physical facilities development. Guidelines for formatting Unit academic plans are provided as Attachment 3.
4. Subunit Academic Plans. These plans are typically referred to as Academic Development Plans or ADPs3. They are prepared for each UH Community College, the colleges, schools, and major institutes at UH Manoa, and other major campus and/or system academic entities or functions as deemed appropriate. These academic plans provide, at a finer level of detail, specific priorities and action strategies for implementing both the more comprehensive Unit and system plans. Academic plans guide the development of individual academic programs and are coordinated, as appropriate, with accreditation self studies. At the Community Colleges, they also guide the development of physical facilities. Guidelines for formatting subunit academic plans are provided as Attachment 4.
5. Program Plans. These documents reflect the priorities contained in subunit academic plans. They involve needs assessment and a summary of specific program priorities and resource requirements. The establishment of new academic programs and the review of existing programs are governed by separate Board of Regents Policy RP 5.201 and Executive Policies EP 5.201 and EP 5.202.
6. Facilities Development Plans. These plans are typically called Long-Range Development Plans (LRDPs). They are the basis for campus facilities “master planning”; they specify the detailed physical plant requirements and CIP projects needed to accommodate academic program development at each campus and, if appropriate, for major programs located off-campus.
7. Board and Executive Policies, Administrative Procedures, Contractual Language, and Federal Compliance Requirements. Official UH policies and procedures and all applicable external compliance requirements direct and guide decision making across the full spectrum of University activities. University plans must conform to these official promulgations and requirements.
8. Biennium Priorities. These priorities direct the preparation of the University's biennium budget and are based on biennium updates of Unit and subunit priorities. At the System level, biennium priorities typically are expressed as operating and CIP budget objectives or in some comparable format.
D. Assessment and Evaluation Activities
A variety of assessment and evaluation activities and documents supports the University's planning framework. Some of the more prominent are described here.
1. Budget Hearings. At an early stage of the biennium budget preparation process, budget hearings/meetings take place within the Units. The overall purpose of these sessions is to assess progress and to clarify and establish biennium planning assumptions and priorities. Outcomes must be consistent with priorities established in University system and Unit plans. Budget hearings are typically held for major subunits corresponding to the subunit academic plan requirement described above. For each biennium, the specific hearings to be held and their schedule and format are determined by the senior vice president and chancellor or executive vice chancellor. The President establishes a mechanism for integrating the Unit priorities that emerge from these budget hearings into biennium priorities for the University as a whole.
2. Benchmarks/Performance Indicators. These analyses and reports monitor institutional progress relative to measures that are typically linked to overall goals and objectives. Results provide useful insights on plan outcomes over time and/or relative to standards or peer performance. A system report is prepared on a biennium basis as an early component of the budget preparation process. At the Unit, subunit, and program levels, more detailed performance measures and/or health indicators are developed and used to support long-term and biennium priority setting.
3. Program Reviews. These are required in Board of Regents Policy RP 5.201 and Executive Policies EP 5.201 and EP 5.202. They are assessments of program status (needs, accomplishments, areas for improvement, etc.); they address the extent to which an established program has met stated objectives at levels of quality that justify its continuation. They also consider whether program objectives are still appropriate to the campus, Unit, and overall University missions. Program review results receive serious consideration in the academic planning process.
4. Accreditation Self-Studies. These are prepared in accordance with standards and review cycles dictated by accrediting associations. A self-study typically addresses the extent to which an institution or professional program is operating consistent with established standards. Self-studies and visiting team reports aid in determining whether an institution or program offers its students the educational opportunities implied in its objectives at a satisfactory level and is likely to continue to do so. Results of accreditation are incorporated into academic plans as appropriate.
5. Management and Planning Information Reports and Survey Results. These analyses typically translate data into information on enrollments, student characteristics, courses, curriculum, tuition, finances and expenditures, faculty and staff, institutional comparisons, etc. Reports are prepared routinely (e.g., semester or annual) or on an ad hoc basis. A variety of survey results are also available to support planning processes.
E. Implementation Responsibility
1. In summary, implementation of the University of Hawai’i’s integrated planning framework is based on the directions of updated system and Unit mission statements and the comprehensive system plan. Using the collaborative processes described earlier, responsibility for preparing these documents resides with the Office of the President and involves all senior executives.
2. Unit and subunit academic plans, consistent with established missions and designed to implement the comprehensive system plan, are developed under the overall leadership of the appropriate vice president and chancellor or vice chancellor. Again, utilizing the broad-based collaborative process described earlier, vice chancellors, deans, and senior directors have lead responsibility for the preparation of their subunit academic plans.
3. Lead responsibility for the development of comprehensive campus facilities plans (LRDPs) is a joint responsibility of the vice president for administration and the appropriate chancellor.
F. Planning Calendar
1. Generally, a review of mission is undertaken every 10 to 15 years or when major new units are added to the system or there is a significant change in the role and responsibility of existing units. The updated mission statement adopted by the Board of Regents in November 1996 replaced the prior 1982 mission statement.
2. The University's comprehensive system plan typically spans 10 years and is updated as needed during that time. The current system plan was approved by the Board in November 1996.
3. Unit Academic Plans and Subunit Academic Plans typically span the time frame of the University system plan. However, priorities are updated on a biennium basis as a first step in the preparation of the biennium budget.
4. Physical facilities development plans (LRDPs) are updated as called for in Board of Regents policy, Section 4-4.
5. Attachment 5 summarizes the status of academic and facilities plans.
1 UH Manoa, UH Community Colleges, UH Hilo, and UH-West O‘ahu are the four major Units of the University of Hawai‘i system.
2 Previously, these documents have been called Academic Development Plans (ADPs) at Manoa, Hilo, and West O‘ahu.
3 In the past, these plans have also been called Educational Development Plans.
IV. Delegation of Authority
There is no policy specific delegation of authority.
V. Contact Information
Office of the Vice President for Academic Planning and Policy
Telephone: (808) 956-6897
Office of the Vice President for Administration
Telephone: (808) 956-6405
A. Link to superseded Executive Policies in old format https://www.hawaii.edu/policy/archives/ep/
B. Link to Administrative Procedures in old format https://www.hawaii.edu/policy/archives/apm/sysap.php
VII. Exhibits and Appendices
No Exhibits and Appendices found
October 31, 2014
TopicsNo Topics found.