4R2 Strategic Planning Results

• Summary results of measures (include tables and figures when possible).
• Comparison of results with internal targets and external benchmarks
• Interpretation of results and insights gained

Summary Results of Measures and Interpretation of Results and Insights Gained 

Because Southeast Tech is currently implementing a new Strategic Plan and new targets, both a summarization of the previous Institutional Priority areas and a presentation of the new Strategic Plan is provided. For additional information on the previous priority and new strategic plan actions and completions, see Appendix A and Appendix B. 

Previous Priority Areas  Southeast Tech’s last formal Strategic Plan was completed in 2011.  From 2012-2014, the Institute used three Institutional Priority areas to guide Institute planning:  Student Success, Collaborative Relationships and Leverage Resources.  The established outcome measures included graduation rates, new student enrollments, and percentage of completed/continuing strategies. Table 4R2.1 summarizes these outcomes.  Graduation rates remained steady and within 90% of the target, and enrollment of new students declined over the three years.  While many strategies were implemented, with the Student Success strategies reaching 100% completion/continuation for two years and collaborative relationships for one year, the overall impact of the strategies did not directly impact either graduation rates or new student enrollment.

In 2015-2016 the Institutional Priority areas were revised and expanded to include: Branding Technical Education, Increasing Educational Opportunities, Building Excellence in Academics, Developing Governance and Organizational Structures, Optimizing Resources, and Valuing Stakeholders.  This move was precipitated by state-level changes (technical institute governance discussions) and local level changes (new Employee Satisfaction results, enrollment concerns, and the need to increase program opportunities for students through stacked and latticed programming).  The three previous priority areas did not encompass these emerging needs, and a new Strategic Plan would not be available in the near future; therefore, the decision was made to move to new priority areas. New student enrollment continued as one of the measures, but graduation rates was adjusted to fall-to-fall retention rates, providing more immediate feedback. From 2015 to 2016, the Institute experienced gains in retention, reaching the Institute’s target in 2016; however, the Institute continued to see a decline in new student enrollment.  As Table 4R2.2 indicates, a higher percentage of the priority strategies were completed or were continuing as compared to the 2012-2014 results.   

Because the Strategic Plan is new, outcome results are limited and full measures and targets are still being established for each of the plan’s four pillars.  Initial action plans, however, have been established and are being implemented (Appendix B), and initial measures and targets have been developed (Table 4R2.3). While most measures will not be available until FY18, Southeast Tech has seen rapid growth in its Career Connections memberships.  Brand new students to Southeast Tech’s programs has also improved, reaching 801 in 2016-2017. While Southeast Tech’s total population of Sioux Falls high school graduates makes up between 20% and 25% of the Institute’s total enrollment, the Institute believes it has the opportunity to increase the number of graduates coming directly into the Institute and is developing actions that will help the Institute reach its goal of 111 students by 2020-2021. Additional actions and action measures will be determined over the course of the Plan’s implementation.  As part of the Institute’s Annual and Strategic planning review processes, the Institute will update Strategic Plan progress in Summer 2017. 

Comparison of Results with Internal Targets and External Benchmarks

Soliciting Input Results

Employee involvement in the Strategic and Annual planning processes, and using employee suggestions for improvement, are both critical to the success of the Institute.  Southeast Tech uses the Noel-Levitz College Employee Satisfaction Survey to gauge employee satisfaction in these areas. Involvement in planning has improved from 2.72 in 2014 to 2.89 in 2016 as shown in Table 4R2.11; however, the rating is still below the target level of 2.89. Similarly, employee suggestions are used for improvement (Table 4R2.12) has improved from 2014 (2.67) to 2016 (2.73), but the result is still below 90% of the target (3.04).  

Summer 2016 Insights and Action Plan: 

Through increased employee involvement in Southeast Tech’s planning process and implementation (4P2), as well as employee-led teams and committees (6P1 and 6P2), Southeast Tech believes that the Institute will make even stronger gains in reaching its Strategic Plan targets than it did with the priority areas. The Institute expects this revised strategy will also improve employee satisfaction with planning and use of suggestions.  

Interpretation of Results and Insights Gained

Through the experiences of using the priority areas, Southeast Tech learned several things: 1. while valuable, priority areas do not provide the same opportunities and focus that can be achieved through the development of a formal strategic plan that has been vetted with Institutional stakeholders; and 2. strategies must directly relate to expected outcomes and measures.  While the priorities used in 2012-2014 were valuable to the Institute, they were unaligned with the expected outcomes and measures, and therefore did not lead to improvements in reaching the targets. The priorities and outcomes and measures for the 2015-2016 areas was more aligned with, and therefore impacted, the outcomes; however, Southeast Tech realized the importance of implementing a new Strategic Plan, which was approved in Fall 2016.