- Purpose
These procedures outline the process for assessing community engagement and civic impact initiatives undertaken by staff and students at the Institution. They enact the Civic Leadership Policy. The assessment utilises a standardised matrix to ensure consistency and transparency. The Civic Leadership Strategic Framework and the ICMS Engagement and Social Responsibility Plan determine the types of activities considered for assessment.
- Scope
All engagement activities undertaken by all current staff at the Institution, including sessional staff and casual academic staff, and engagement activities undertaken by students under staff supervision.
- Definitions
See Glossary of Terms.
- Procedures
4.1 Documenting Community Engagement
A central repository has been established to record all data and evidence of community engagement activities. This repository allows for easy access and analysis of data to provide a comprehensive overview of the Institution’s civic leadership efforts. Staff are required to complete the standardised form to submit information about their community engagement activities. The form captures details aligned to the assessment criteria, with evidence of impact to be attached in the submission.
4.2 Assessing Civic Leadership Impact and Outcomes
To ensure consistency in assessing various community engagement initiatives, all engagement activities recorded are assessed to determine the level of civic leadership impact for the Institution. The below assessment matrix is developed to provide a clear understanding of the criteria used to evaluate impact.
The table below, as developed for the Civic Leadership Strategic Framework, describe the specific goals or outcomes that a community engagement initiative might aim to achieve. The engagement activity must achieve one of the below impacts to be accessed for civic leadership eligibility.
| Enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity | Focuses on mutually beneficial partnerships with the community to generate new knowledge, inform solutions to community problems, and enrich scholarly pursuits. |
| Enhance curriculum, learning and teaching, and student outcomes | Integrates community perspectives and experiences into courses, providing service-learning opportunities for students and enhancing their civic skills. |
| Prepare educated and engaged citizens | Creates pathways for students to gain civic knowledge and skills through active participation in the community, preparing them for responsible citizenship. |
| Strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility | Promotes democratic values and civic responsibility through public forums, dialogues, and collaborative initiatives with the community. |
| Address critical societal issues | Engages in research, public discourse, and action to address critical social problems in collaboration with community partners. |
| Contribute to public good | Contributes to the overall well-being and advancement of the public good through various partnerships and initiatives. |
The assessment matrix below outlines a scoring system to assess the level of impact of a community engagement initiative. The assessment considers the following criteria:
| Criteria | Emerging (1 Point) | Developing (2 Points) | Established (3 Points) | Leading (4 Points) |
| Depth of Engagement | One-time activity or limited interaction with the community. | Short-term project with some ongoing communication. | Multi-year partnership with sustained interaction and collaboration. | Deeply embedded, long-term collaboration with mutual benefit and shared decision-making. |
| Diversity of Stakeholders | Limited engagement with a narrow range of community voices. | Some efforts made to include diverse stakeholders, but representation could be improved. | Project actively seeks and integrates diverse perspectives from the community. | Strong partnerships with a wide range of community stakeholders (e.g., residents, businesses, non-profits, Indigenous communities). |
| Sustainability | One off with no plan for ongoing engagement or lasting impact. | Some consideration of sustainability | Project demonstrates a clear plan for continued engagement and long-term impact. | Project actively supports the development of community capacity and fosters ongoing civic leadership. |
| Evidence of Outcomes | Limited evidence of impact on civic leadership. | Some evidence of impact, but data may be anecdotal. | Project demonstrates measurable outcomes contributing to civic leadership (e.g., generated new knowledge, policy changes). | Compelling evidence of significant civic leadership impact that benefits the community and promotes positive societal change. |
By using this assessment matrix, reviewers systematically evaluate the impact of community engagement initiatives across different areas and levels. A scoring system is applied to determine an accurate assessment of the level of impact of each activity.
| Low Score (1-4 points): The initiative demonstrates limited engagement and impact on civic leadership. |
| Moderate Score (5-8 points): The initiative shows some positive aspects but could be improved in terms of depth, stakeholder involvement, or sustainability. |
| High Score (9-12 points): The initiative demonstrates a well-developed approach to community engagement and contributes to civic leadership development. |
| Top Score (13-16 points): The initiative exemplifies strong civic leadership through deep, diverse, and sustainable engagement |
A low or moderate score would identify the engagement activity as engagement only, while a high or top score would demonstrate civic leadership impact and outcomes.
- Roles and Responsibilities
5.1 The President is responsible for overseeing the implementation of these procedures, approval of community engagement activity, and ensuring appropriate funding support and resources are provided to staff.
5.2 The Executive Officer is responsible for providing systematic support for community engagement, approval of community engagement activity, assessment* of community engagement and civic impact, and for reporting on community engagement activities across the Institution.
5.3 The Chief Quality Officer provides advice to the DVC (Learning and Teaching) and Associate Dean (Scholarship and Civic Leadership) on issues pertaining to compliance with the Higher Education Standards Framework and TEQSA expectations.
5.4 All staff need to report and evidence any engagement activities undertaken within their scope of work. The quantum and quality targets are set at their annual performance review, and outputs subsequently assessed as part of the performance appraisals.
*An automation of assessment can be built into PowerBI to allow for reports to be generated at any moment in time.
Related documents
Civic Leadership Strategic Framework
Civic Leadership Policy
Approved by the Board of Directors on 3 December 2024