Chapter 6: Missouri State University as a Distinctive Organization

Being Accountable

A distinctive organization finds ways to document how it achieves the goals embedded in its mission. This documentation must be understandable and credible to internal and external constituents. This reporting to constituents is one form of accountability that also reflects the institution’s integrity. Within this section the report illustrates how Missouri State ensures fulfillment of its mission first by providing clearly stated goals for student learning; second, by providing assessment methods that are effective; and third, by documenting the assessment. Through structures and processes that involve the board, administration, faculty, staff, students, and external constituencies, the University documents for the public how the institution meets its goals. These methods of assessing and reporting institutional performance also ensure that the University operates with integrity.

As described earlier in this chapter’s section, “Having an Unambiguous Mission,” and in Chapter Three, “Missouri State as a Future-Oriented Organization,” the University’s mission has been clearly articulated through various venues, both inside and outside the campus community. The mission has appeared during the last ten years, for example, in the University’s long-range plans, as well as in unit plans, and in documents such as catalogs and admissions materials. The University makes its mission documents available to the public, particularly to prospective and enrolled students, and presents itself accurately and honestly.

Missouri State assesses its effectiveness at meeting its clearly stated goals through several means. At an institutional level, each long-range plan includes performances measures. Published each year in hard copy and on the University’s Web site, performance measures document the effectiveness of Missouri State in implementing its long-range plan. Each report is intended to allow university stakeholders to determine if sufficient progress is being made. The performance measures meet both the short-term needs of quality and accountability and the long-term needs for planning, priority setting, and budgeting. Section I of each annual report documents progress being made by the university in implementing elements of the long-range plan not covered by specific performance measures. Section II of each annual report documents numerous performance measures identified by number that are tracked on an annual basis.

Many performance measures, for example, monitor implementation of the public affairs mission. Performance Measure 59 documents the number of courses offering service-learning components, the number of students selecting service-learning opportunities, and the number of hours of community service volunteered by students. Performance Measures 60 and 61 monitor the relationship between specific university courses and student citizenship; and, Performance Measure 62 documents the number of attendees of programs sponsored by the Public Affairs Convocation Program.

At the level of academic programs, the University is accountable through systematic review and revision of undergraduate and graduate programs, as described in Chapter 4, “Assessing Student Learning.” Formal assessment processes help to ensure academic program accountability and quality (Chart Q, p. 79 and Chart R, pp. 84-86). Academic departments, the Honors College, the Committee on General Education and Interdisciplinary Programs, the Professional Education Committee, the Faculty Senate, and the Academic Program Review Committee are among the internal constituents involved in this aspect of the University’s accountability.

In addition, Missouri State is accountable to the public through assessment of the quality of academic programs via accreditations  from the Higher Learning Commission and 23 other professional accrediting organizations.  

The University documents the results of the various assessment processes and utilizes these results to revise its programs and processes. As noted in Chapter Three, the results of the performance measures as well as environmental scanning efforts of groups such as the Process Improvement Committee have led to revisions of the University’s mission and changes in some fundamental processes. Another example, Performance Measure 37, documents the linkage between planning and resources focused on increasing minority enrollment at the Missouri State-Springfield campus. Another example of the University documenting and reacting to the ways in which external constituencies value the services the University provides appears in the records of the Citizenship and Service-Learning Program. Students, faculty, and community partners submit evaluations of their service-learning experiences at the end of each semester. In the evaluation forms filled out by community partners, they report that they receive important assistance from service-learning students. For example, Philip Masaoay of Legal Services of Southern Missouri described the work of Lyndsey Dougherty:

“Lyndsey initially assisted us at our Family Violence Center office. However, when domestic violence is, thankfully, experiencing a lull—there is not a lot of activity in that office. Lyndsey then took on the painstaking task of researching, compiling, and collating the requisite information on family law cases for four counties …  We are glad she chose Legal Services of Southern Missouri.”

One example of changes in programs as a result of external review and internal documentation appears in the University’s intercollegiate athletic programs. The University is accountable to external organizations such as the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) that accredit individual programs. For example, the University’s intercollegiate athletic programs have been certified as meeting standards set by the NCAA, including compliance with Title IX (Self-Study Report for Certification by the National Collegiate Athletic Association).

The NCAA certification marks a change from the concern of the 1995 NCA Site Team report, which stated the following:

  “While the university is developing its plans to achieve gender equity in intercollegiate athletic programs, it nonetheless is not in compliance as defined by Title IX, a federal mandate.”

   Gender equity goals and a gender equity management plan were adopted by the University in 1996 as a result of the 1994-1995 NCAA athletics certification self-study. New gender equity goals were established as a part of a second self-study completed in 2002. As a result of these goals and plans, the Equal Opportunity Officer now serves as the Title IX Compliance Officer for the institution, and the Office of Equal Opportunity engages in period audits of Title IX compliance in athletics. More specifically, the University has established additional opportunities for female student-athletes. These include two additional sports teams; an increase in the number of scholarships awarded to female student-athletes parallel to the increased participation rate; an increased operations budget for female sports teams in proportion to the number of participants; locker and shower facilities for student-athletes in sports programs that did not have these facilities previously; an academic support center for all student-athletes; and improved marketing and promotional efforts for non-revenue sports programs, including volleyball, softball, and women’s soccer. Based on a survey of full-time students, the Office of Equal Opportunity has determined that the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interest and abilities of male and female athletes.

Actions to address this concern continue to be implemented, as Countdown to the Centennial forecast, “The University will continue to strive to meet goals developed in [the NCAA self-study] plan and will present an annual progress report to the SMSU Board of Governors.” The Department of Intercollegiate Athletics reports annually to the Board of Governors at meetings open and announced to the public. Reports include progress in meeting goals in such areas as academic success of athletes, coaches’ salaries, operating budgets for men’s and women’s athletic teams, gender equity, and diversity. (See Intercollegiate Athletics Committee Report and the Missouri State Compliance Web page.) At the time of writing this report, the Office of Equal Opportunity was working with an outside consulting firm to complete a comprehensive audit of the University’s Title IX compliance with all thirteen program components.

• Based on an unduplicated count of student-athletes, in FY1995 there were 121 (34%) female and 235 (66%) male student-athletes on University sports teams. In FY2004 there were 189 (44%) female and 242 (56%) male student-athletes. The Missouri State full-time, baccalaureate, degree-seeking undergraduate student body is 55% female and 45% male.

Since 1995, two sports programs were added for female student-athletes, bringing the total to eleven. Ten sports programs are provided for male student-athletes.

• Since the conclusion of the first Self-Study in 1995, two sports programs (soccer in 1997 and swimming in 1999) were added for female student-athletes, bringing the total to 11. Ten sports programs are provided for male student athletes.
• In FY 2004, female student-athletes were awarded 98.5 (45%) scholarships while male student-athletes were awarded 122.6 (55%) scholarships. Thus, the number of scholarships was proportional to the participation rate. Although only 98.5 scholarships were awarded to female student-athletes in FY2004, the University provided funding for the maximum permissible NCAA scholarship limit (109) for the 11 sports teams.
• Operational dollars for female sports teams have increased steadily since FY1995 and has been in proportion to the participation rate. In FY2004, total operating expenses were $3,703,413 (41%) for female and $5,393,685 (59%) for male sports teams. Athletic administrators and the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee continue to monitor transportation, meals, and motel accommodations among sports to ensure equitable treatment.
• With the remodeling of the first floor of the Forsythe Athletics Center in 2003, new locker and shower facilities were provided for women’s tennis, women’s soccer, field hockey, women’s track and field, and women’s cross-country teams. All student-athletes now have shower and locker facilities.
• In 1996, the academic support programs for female and male sports teams were combined into a single Academic Athletics Assistance Program. Following renovation of the second floor of the Forsythe Athletics Center in 1998, The Achievement Center for Intercollegiate Athletics was relocated into new and expanded quarters.
• An additional graduate assistant was employed in Athletics Development/Marketing in FY2003 to specifically focus on the promotion and marketing of non-revenue sports including women’s volleyball, softball, and women’s soccer.
• Additional facility improvements presently underway include the renovation and construction of locker room facilities for women’s softball and volleyball teams as well as the addition of lights to the softball field.

Being Accountable with Financial Resources

To ensure constituencies value services the University provides, the institution must use its financial resources effectively and be accountable for their management.

Missouri State’s financial goals are clarified through the operating budget and other budget documents and presentations prepared by the Budget Office. These budgeting goals often include anticipated external funding. With regard to these types of grants and contracts, Financial Services is responsible for ensuring that funds received from external sponsors are spent in compliance with funding agency regulations as well as University policies.

Assessment of performance in meeting these financial goals occurs through the Office of Internal Audit, which assists in responsible management of the University by furnishing independent appraisals, evaluations, and recommendations concerning University activities and operations. The Internal Auditor reports directly to the Board of Governors and indirectly to the President.

The results of these fiscal performances are documented and made public through financial reports and monthly financial statements readily available to all constituencies. Grants and Contract Accounting is the University’s official preparer of financial reports for externally funded sponsored research and programs.

Throughout these processes, the University maintains ethical standards. The University’s Fiscal Responsibility Policy is available online.

• Chapter 1: SMSU: A Mission-Focused, Evolving Institution
• Chapter 2: The 2005 Self-Study: An Overview of the Process
• Chapter 3: SMSU as a Future-Oriented Organization
• Chapter 4: SMSU as a Learning-Focused Organization
• Chapter 5: SMSU as a Connected Organization
• Chapter 6: SMSU as a Distinctive Organization
  • Having an Unambiguous Mission
  • Appreciating Diversity
  • Being Accountable
  • Being Self-Reflective
  • Being Committed to Improvement
  • Strengths, Challenges, and Recommendations
• Summary