You are here

Prospectus Data Request and Timeline

Posted by Morgan White on March 10, 2016

Dear Partners,  We hope this finds you well. After several conversations with the Metrics Working Group (see below for previous email detailing this process), we’ve developed a list of metrics aimed at measuring sustainability’s contribution to identified executive leadership priorities. We have framed the data request below with the following in mind:

  • Time and resources are scarce: In every conversation regarding data collection, regardless of the forum (e.g., Metrics Working Group meetings, conversations with partner institutions, pre-AASHE meetings), we’ve heard concerns about the time and resources a data request might require. With this in mind, we’ve worked very hard to develop: 1) a request that is reasonable in size and customizable based on the unique context of each of our schools, and 2) a collection window that is reasonable given how busy the spring is for all of us.
  • Process is more important than products: This request reflects the same investment in process and experimentation that has characterized the Prospectus to date. We have framed the data request to help us collectively explore the feasibility of collecting new metrics, the availability of data, and our preferences when offered choice. Instead of mandating a common set of metrics, we have prioritized a process that can provide us with strong examples of how/what data might be collected.  We believe this approach will best prepare us for conversations with executive leadership about how to move forward together.

With these conditions in mind, we are asking each partner institution to do the following:

  • Based on the collection window (now-May 27, 2016), pick one metric for data collection within each priority area—six in total—from the attached spreadsheet. For each area, please choose between the following types of metrics:
    • Foundational quantitative: These are quantitative metrics most schools can reasonably collect in the window provided based on our estimates. These metrics may be new or they may rely on existing STARS data.
    • Aspirational quantitative: These are quantitative metrics we expect only a few schools will be able to collect in the window provided based on our estimates. We hope the innovators among us will already have started collecting (based on previous needs or projects), or will be willing to begin collecting data for these challenging, but potentially powerful metrics.
    • Create your own quantitative metric: Here we’re encouraging those of you who have not had the chance to provide input through the MWG or pre-AASHE meetings to develop or contribute innovative metrics for collection. We ask that you only use this option for strong, well-developed, outcome-oriented metrics.
    • Qualitative prompts: Here we have provided several prompts suggesting features or profiles on relevant figures, programs, or initiatives that help make an anecdotal case for sustainability’s contribution to mission level priorities. We encourage you to tell strong, bold, innovative stories here.
  • Ensure your overall metric set includes the following:
  • At least three quantitative metrics,
  • At least one quantitative metric developed during the Prospectus process (outlined in the spreadsheet), and
  • As many qualitative metrics as you like.
  • Define sustainability (i.e., sustainability-related) broadly and based on your best judgment. Use existing definitions (e.g., STARS) where they make sense or create new ones. For example, you may find it necessary to define sustainability-related disciplines differently than sustainability-related co-curricular activities.   .
  • Define your collection window for each metric based on your data availability. We’re not worried about comparability, so the period over which data was collected can vary from metric to metric.  
  • Document how and why you’ve made each collection decision.
  • Be creative and document your process:

Again, you will find the metrics options attached. (The second tab lists definitions of all important terms.) Tomorrow, we’ll be holding a call from 2-3 PM EST to field initial questions. RSVP here to join. Emilie will be reaching out to each institution individually beginning next week. You will also find a calendar below roughly outlining the remainder of the project.

We look forward to hearing your questions and feedback about this evolving process. And, please remember to RSVP for the Big Ten and Friends Sustainability Group Meet-up at the Smart and Sustainable Campuses Conference on April 3, 2016.

Best,

Denice, Michael, and Emilie

TIMELINE:

  • March 10: Data collection begins
  • March 16-27: First partner institution check-ins with Emilie
  • March 23: Optional: Begin preliminary conversations with executive leadership allies (more information to come)
  • April 3: Pre-SSCC Big Ten and Friends Sustainability Group semi-annual meeting
  • April 18-29: Second partner institution check-ins with Emilie, Denice, and Michael
  • May 20: Preliminary Prospectus draft from Planning Team due to partners for feedback on structure/format
  • May 27: Data request due
  • June 1-July 1: Collaborate with partners on plans to utilize Prospectus findings at each institution (more information to come)
  • June 17: Second Prospectus draft due to partners for feedback
  • July 8: Final Prospectus draft due to partners
  • (TBD): Convene Big Ten executive leadership gathering through CIC