Description of the Institution

History and Governance

The University of the South Pacific (USP) was established in 1968, and was enacted by a Royal Charter (Charter) granted by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in 1970.

The governance structure of the University is established by the Royal Charter and Statutes. The Royal Charter defines the purpose, objectives, and powers of USP, setting the foundation for its governance framework. It designates the Council as the University's governing body, the Senate as the academic authority, and outlines the roles of key Officers, including the Chancellor, the Pro-Chancellor and Chair of Council, the Vice-Chancellor and President, and the Deputy Vice-Chancellors and Vice-Presidents. The Statutes serve as a supplement to the Charter, detailing the specific powers and functions of the Council, Senate, and the Officers of the University.

USP has twelve member countries: the Cook Islands, the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Nauru, Niue, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tuvalu, the Kingdom of Tonga, the Republic of Vanuatu, Samoa, and the Republic of Fiji. Its primary objective is to advance and disseminate knowledge through teaching, consultancy, research, and innovation. USP’s primary mandate is to provide appropriate levels of education and training and to be responsive to the well-being and needs of the communities of the South Pacific [CFR 1.1].

The ceremonial head of the University is the Chancellor. USP’s Chancellors are Heads of State or Governments of member countries. The University is governed by its own Council, chaired by the Pro-Chancellor, and comprised of the Vice-Chancellor and President, Deputy Pro-Chancellor, representatives of the twelve member countries, Australia and New Zealand representatives, Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat Secretary-General, USP Senate representatives, staff and student representatives, and co-opted members [CFR 3.7 and 3.8]. The executive head of the University is the Vice-Chancellor and President.

The USP Convention is the agreement between the University as a legal corporate entity and its member countries recognising the continued operation and further development of USP in each member country. The Convention, and any ancillary domestic legislation, supports the Royal Charter under which the University operates and also serves to consolidate the legal basis of its operations with and for the member countries into the future.

Significant Changes Since the Last Accreditation Review

Changes in Leadership

Significant changes in leadership have occurred since the last accreditation review, including the appointment of new Vice-Chancellor & President (VC&P), Professor Pal Ahluwalia, in 2019, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice President (DVC&VP, Education) in 2020, the Chief Operating Officer (COO) in 2022, and the Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (DVC & VP, Research & Innovation) in 2023. Figure A.1 below shows the current organisational chart and the portfolios of the senior management [CFR 3.11].  

Fig A.1 Organisational Structure

Changes in the Vision, Mission and Values 

Since the last accreditation review, USP has revised its vision, mission, values and strategic plans to better align with the evolving educational landscape and regional needs. Under the leadership of Professor Pal Ahluwalia, USP formulated two strategic plans: the 2019-2021 Strategic Plan (SP) and the 2022-2024 SP. These plans emphasise quality education, research, regional engagement, and the enhancement of student experience and accessibility.

The current Vision emphasises empowering the University community to catalyse positive change and transform Pacific societies [CFR 1.1]. This represents an evolution from the previous focus on sustainable development through excellence and innovation. 

The refined Mission statement underscores the University's aim to influence Pacific Islanders through knowledge excellence, providing world-class education and research that yields tangible improvements in individual and community life [CFR 1.1]. This revision reflects a more targeted approach to educational impact. 

The Values have been condensed to capture the essence of Pacific culture, emphasising inclusive family, participatory engagement, and open dialogue. While more concise, this statement preserves the fundamental principles of inclusivity, collaboration, and respect for Pacific heritage that were present in the previous, more detailed articulation of values. 

In tandem with these revisions, USP recognised the need to update the Student Charter to ensure it accurately reflects the core values and aspirations of the University. The Student Charter, revised in 2020, now embodies these values under the acronym "PASIFIKA", as explained below.

Changes in the Academic Structure

In 2020 and 2021, USP underwent a significant organisational transformation, aimed at enhancing operational efficiency and improving the quality of academic programmes. This restructuring, as illustrated in our before and after diagram, represents a strategic shift in the University's academic organisation. Prior to the restructure, as shown in the 'before' section of our diagram, USP's academic structure consisted of 17 Schools housed within 3 Faculties. The 'after' section depicts the new, streamlined structure comprising 6 Schools that report directly to the Vice-Chancellor and President, assisted by the Deputy Vice-Chancellors and Vice-Presidents. 

The existing research institutes have been integrated into relevant Schools, fostering closer alignment between research and teaching activities. The Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development (PACE-SD), formerly with FSTE, is now reporting directly to the VC&P. 

The Pacific Technical and Further Education (Pacific TAFE) was streamlined from three colleges to two: the College of Foundation Studies and the College of Continuing Vocational Education and Training.  

In another major development, the VC&P announced on 6 August 2024 the launching of a new USP Centre for Sustainable Futures. It is a new research centre, supported and initially funded by the New Zealand Government for three years.  The Centre will consolidate four existing centres and programmes to strengthen, synthesise and scale USP’s overall institutional climate finance and resilience knowledge and research collaboration delivery and capabilities. These are  (1) the Pacific Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development (PaCE-SD); (2) the Institute of Marine Resources (IMR); (3) the Institute of Applied Sciences (IAS); and (4) the Norway-Pacific Ocean-Climate Scholarship programme (N-POC). The centre will consolidate and strengthen regional efforts in producing Pacific leaders who are equipped, empowered, and able to lead the transition to a sustainable future for the Pacific. 

Changes in Degree Programmes and Instructional Modalities

Since the last accreditation review, The University of the South Pacific has significantly expanded and diversified its academic offerings and instructional methods. Key changes include:

1. Approval of 39 new programmes across various levels, from certificates to doctorates, addressing regional needs and emerging fields.
2. Increased integration of digital tools and technologies, including greater use of the Moodle learning management system (refer to Standard 3, page 56 for details).
3. Expansion of Work-Integrated Learning components in 40% of the Bachelors' programmes.
4. Implementation of new quality assurance measures by the establishment of the Curriculum Review and Development Unit (CRDU) to ensure consistency across different delivery modes. See next page for the details of the CRDU. 

These changes reflect USP's efforts to adapt to evolving educational needs, embrace technological advancements, and improve accessibility for students across the Pacific region. 

Figure A.2 shows the distribution of our programmes, which currently totalled 307. 

Fig A.2 There are currently 307 programmes at USP.

In comparison to the Key Indicators (KI) report (June 2023) on Current Active Academic programmes (see graph on page 1 of the report), the above listing of academic programmes is inclusive of Pacific TAFE programmes at pre-degree and sub-degree levels and distinguishes a programme by its major discipline.

Establishment of the Curriculum Review and Development Unit (CRDU)

On 1 March 2023, the University established a centralised Curriculum Review and Development Unit (CRDU) within the Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice President (Education). This was a positive step towards ensuring that programmes are regularly reviewed and are up-to-date with the evolving needs of national, regional, and global communities. 

Background
Over the past 15 years, the University has taken on several curriculum transformation projects which, while being extremely beneficial to the institution were largely externally driven. It is imminent that there will be additional curriculum renewal projects in the future. It is common for higher education institutions to have a centrally run curriculum programme. This allows for continuity of initiatives, even with leadership and/or structural changes. Having a centrally managed curriculum section also ensures consistent and standardised application of policies and procedures, as well as ensuring that said policies and procedures are up-to-date. 

Purpose
The CRDU is tasked with the following key responsibilities:

1. Overseeing the development and implementation of the University's curriculum policies and guidelines, ensuring they align with the institution's mission and goals.
2. Coordinating the curriculum development process, including conducting needs assessments, gathering input from academic units and stakeholders, and overseeing the implementation of approved changes.
3. Monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the University's curriculum and programmes, making recommendations for improvement where necessary.
4. Maintaining a database of all courses and programmes offered by the University, ensuring that they are accurate and up-to-date.
5. Facilitating communication and collaboration among academic units, promoting a coordinated approach to curriculum development.
6. Providing training and professional development opportunities for staff on curriculum-related topics, including incentivising practices in learning and teaching (e.g., Learning & Teaching Forum).
7. Keeping abreast of changes and developments in the field of higher education and incorporating them into the University's curriculum policies and processes as appropriate.
8. Establishing a University research profile in the area of curriculum development, implementing and overseeing related research projects.
9. Providing regular reports and updates to senior management team (SMT) and the governing body on the status of the University's curriculum and programmes.

In 2023, the CRDU staff participated in a series of professional development workshops, focusing on diverse topics like the implementation of engaged learning and teaching models, the intersection of artificial intelligence with assessments, and quality assurance in educational program delivery. These sessions, conducted through both blended and face-to-face formats, were facilitated by internal and external experts.The workshops aimed at enhancing the team's competencies in addressing contemporary challenges in curriculum development and evaluation, particularly in critiquing assessment rubrics, managing micro qualifications, and aligning with the recommendations of external accreditation bodies.

Changes in Student Demographics

Decreasing Enrolment
USP has experienced fluctuations in student enrolment, with significant declines noted in recent years. Figure A.3 shows the EFTS trend since 2017.

Fig A.3 Decreasing EFTS trend since 2020. 

The decline in enrolment can be traced to several causes that reflect broader trends and specific regional challenges. A significant factor was the Fiji Government's withdrawal of scholarship support for pre-degree students in TVET and Foundation programmes between 2019 and 2023, which directly impacted students' ability to afford their education. Additionally, the migration of students and families to countries like Australia and New Zealand reduced the local pool of potential students. This migration has been further intensified by labor mobility schemes offered by Australia and New Zealand, which provide Pacific Islanders with attractive employment opportunities abroad, leading many to prioritise immediate work over higher education. Increased competition from new national universities (five USP member countries have now a total of seven national and private universities compared to four in 2018) and the rise of alternative education options, such as online courses and micro-credentials, also drew students away from USP. Technological challenges, particularly the digital divide in remote Pacific islands, hindered some students from participating in distance learning. The COVID-19 pandemic further disrupted enrolment by creating uncertainty, leading to deferrals or dropouts. Moreover, there were perceptions that some of USP’s programmes were not fully aligned with job market demands, and outdated curricula in certain areas may have made some programmes less attractive. Finally, reductions in government funding and financial support exacerbated these challenges, making education less accessible and contributing to the overall decline in enrolment at USP.

USP is addressing the enrolment decline through an 8-pronged tactical response framework. As outlined in the 2024 Annual Plan, page 27, this framework is designed to strategically reverse the declining trends by focusing on four key areas (see Figure A.4).

Consolidation involves optimising existing resources and systems to ensure efficiency and effectiveness. For example, by consolidating student support services and refining the recruitment process, USP can improve conversion rates from applications to enrolments, directly addressing the drop in student numbers. Additionally, consolidating space and optimising infrastructure will ensure that the University's physical and digital environments meet students' needs, thereby enhancing the overall student experience. 
Innovation is crucial for adapting to the changing educational landscape. USP plans to innovate in curriculum development, redesigning and revitalising courses to align with post-COVID market demands and emerging student needs. The introduction of new delivery models, such as a trimester system and stackable qualifications, will attract a broader range of students, including those seeking more flexible and modular learning options. This innovation extends to leveraging data analytics to better understand student behavior and tailor recruitment and retention strategies accordingly.
Transformation focuses on making significant changes to the University's operations and educational offerings to remain competitive and relevant. This includes the continued investment in digital infrastructure to support blended and online learning, which has become increasingly important. By transforming its service delivery model across regional campuses and enhancing the customer relationship management system, USP aims to improve student retention and satisfaction, which are critical for reversing the enrolment decline.
Sustainability ensures that these efforts are not just reactive but are part of a long-term strategy for financial and operational resilience. By managing finances prudently, reinvesting in critical areas, and addressing legacy issues such as student debt and infrastructure maintenance, USP is laying the groundwork for sustained growth. The framework also includes a focus on improving the financial sustainability of tuition revenue, which is vital for the University’s long-term viability. 

Fig A.4 Tactical Response Framework

Higher Enrolment in Distance Mode (Print, Internet, Blended mode, Video, Online 80+% offering (no F2F))
The enrolment trends from 2010 to 2024 (in headcount) reveal significant insights into the changing dynamics of student preferences across different modes of study: Distance (Print, Internet. Blended mode, Video, Online 80+% offereing (no F2F), In-Person (F2F and School-based courses), and Multimodal (combination of In-Person and Distance courses). As shown in Figure A.5, distance learning consistently grew over the years, starting with 9,353 students in 2010 and reaching its peak in 2019 with 18,468 students. This mode of study has shown a slight decrease in the following years with sharp declines in 2022 and 2023, but still remains a popular choice due to its flexibility and accessibility. In-person enrolment experienced continuous decline since 2010 with 6309 students and ending with 4644 in 2024. Multimodal learning experienced significant growth initially, starting with 4393 students in 2010 and peaking at 10,592 students in 2018. After 2018, there was a decline, particularly sharp in 2022 and 2023.

These trends suggest a shift in student preferences towards more flexible and accessible learning options, with distance learning becoming increasingly popular, while in-person and multimodal modes have seen varied levels of interest. Understanding these patterns allows USP to tailor its strategies to meet the evolving needs of its students. Figure A.5 shows that more and more students are opting to study at a distance rather than onsite face-to-face.

Fig A.5 More students opting for online and blended modes of study.

The University's retention and completion rates, however, show the need for a more systematic investigation of the barriers to completion, an enhanced student support services, a continuous monitoring and adaption to retention strategies, and a better engagement strategy with stakeholders for insights and feedback.

Declining Retention and Completion Rates
Figure A.6 shows the trends in completion and retention rates of USP students from 2015 to 2022. The completion rate in a particular year is measured within the first 6 years of enrolment, and the retention rate in a particular year is the percentage of first year students progressing to the second year. 

The overall retention rates at USP remained relatively high from 2018 to 2020, with a slight increase from 71% to 73%. However, a decline began in 2021, with retention rates dropping to 68% and further to 64% in 2022. This decline can be attributed to several factors, including migration and labour mobility schemes, and external influences such as the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted student engagement and continuity.  

From 2015 to 2018, completion rates showed a consistent upward trend, peaking at 45% in 2018. There is a noticeable decline from 2019 onwards, with rates dropping to 14% in 2022. While incomplete data for students within their 6-year completion period currently affects completion rates since 2019, it is anticipated that these rates will improve as students conclude their study programmes.

Fig A.6 Completion and Retention Rates 2015 - 2022. 

Rising Student Debt

The 2024 Annual Plan highlights significant concerns regarding student debt, which has become a pressing issue. During the COVID-19 years (2020 to 2022), student debt escalated significantly (see Figure A.7). The economic impact of the pandemic not only led to a decline in enrolments but also affected students' ability to pay for their education. As a result, debt accumulated during this period now represents over 50% of the current debt levels. As of the latest data, the total student debt stands at $31 million. Of this amount, $25 million is owed by private students, accounting for 81% of the total debt, while $6 million is due from sponsors, making up the remaining 19%. Among the private student debts, Fijian students owe the highest amount at 42%, which is approximately $10 million. This is followed by students from Kiribati, who owe 18% ($4.6 million), and Vanuatu students, who owe 15% ($3.7 million).  

Fig A.7 USP Student Debt (FJD) 2017 to 2013. 

Increased Accountability to Higher Education Regulations in the Pacific

One of the significant changes since the last accreditation review is the growing accountability of USP to higher education regulations across its 12 member countries. Previously, there were no higher education regulators in the Pacific, but this landscape has changed considerably. Now, USP is either undergoing or preparing to undergo audits by several national higher education commissions, including those in Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, Vanuatu, and Solomon Islands.The increase in regulatory demands from multiple higher education commissions poses significant challenges for USP. If all 12 member countries were to demand similar audits, the University could face substantial resource constraints. Conducting continual audits for each member country could strain USP’s administrative, financial, and operational capacities. This scenario underscores the need for strategic planning and resource allocation to manage compliance effectively without compromising the quality of education and institutional operations.USP is taking proactive measures to streamline its quality assurance processes and ensure compliance with national and international standards.  

Financial Health

The financial landscape at USP has been challenging, marked by a decline in tuition revenue due to lower student enrolments and reduced government grants. Figure A.8 illustrates that tuition fees, government grants, and financial assistance from traditional development partners (Australia and New Zealand) constitute the bulk of USP's revenue. The Fiji Government withheld its grants from 2019 to 2022, leading to recorded decreases in government grants during these years. The impact of lower student enrolments is noticeable in 2022 and 2023, reflected in decreased tuition fees.

Fig A.8 USP's income 2019 - 2023

The reinstatement of Fiji's government grant has significantly boosted financial stability. Despite enrolment fluctuations due to COVID-19, USP has adapted by expanding online learning, which poses both challenges and opportunities. Development grants remain crucial for funding regional cooperation, research and innovation, infrastructure development, scholarships, and staff capacity building at USP.

As reported in the 2023 Annual Report and 2024 Annual Plan, USP effectively manages operational costs and strategically invests in capital projects like the new Solomon Islands campus, enhancing infrastructure and capacity. The University maintains a balance between operational and capital expenditures to ensure quality education and future growth. Financial performance indicators are positive, with an operating surplus driven by extraordinary income and robust liquidity and cash reserves.

Favorable debt and liquidity ratios underscore USP's strong financial health and capacity to meet obligations. Challenges include enrolment declines affecting tuition revenue, addressed by strategies to attract students, enhance online learning, and optimise resources. USP focuses on risk management to ensure financial sustainability and operational efficiency. 

Future projections indicate stable revenue growth supported by increased grants and development funds, with continued strategic investments in infrastructure and digital transformation to enhance overall financial health and stability.

Changes in Research Outputs

Since its initial accreditation by WSCUC in 2018, USP has experienced remarkable progress in its research outputs, reflecting the institution’s commitment to advancing knowledge and contributing to the region's academic and socio-economic development. Notably, USP's research productivity has seen significant growth, culminating in its inclusion in the prestigious Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings for the first time in 2021. This achievement marks a pivotal moment in USP’s history, signifying its emergence as a leading research institution in the Pacific region.

The data highlights a sharp increase in research outputs, with the number of publications indexed in Scopus growing significantly. In 2020, USP reached an all-time high with 368 publications, up from just 104 in 2010 (see Figure A.9). This surge in research output is indicative of the institution's enhanced focus on research and innovation, bolstered by strategic initiatives aimed at fostering a robust research culture.

Fig A.9 USP's research publications, as indexed by Scopus, have increased over 300% in the last decade.

USP’s research has not only grown in volume but has also diversified across various disciplines, showcasing the institution's broad academic expertise. The research outputs by subject area illustrates that USP has made notable contributions across a range of fields: 

Social Sciences (16.9%)
This area has emerged as a significant contributor to USP’s research portfolio, reflecting the institution's engagement with issues pertinent to the Pacific region, such as social development, governance, and cultural studies. 
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (10.2%)
Research in this field underscores USP's commitment to addressing food security, sustainable agriculture, and biodiversity conservation in the Pacific, which are critical to the region's environmental and economic well-being. Engineering (10.0%) and Environmental Science (9.4%)
These fields reflect USP’s focus on addressing climate change, disaster resilience, and sustainable engineering solutions, aligning with the institution's strategic priorities and the needs of its member countries. 
Business, Management, and Economics (10.7%)
Research in these areas indicates USP’s dedication to fostering economic development and business innovation in the Pacific, providing valuable insights into regional economic challenges and opportunities. 

Changes in the Institutional KPIs 

The 2019-2021 Strategic Plan introduced a new set of institutional KPIs, which had to be re-adopted in the 2022-2024 Strategic Plan due the COVID-19 disruption. Listed in Table A:10 are the KPIs with available outcomes.  

Table A.10 Institutional KPIs

From 2021 to 2023, USP faced mixed results across key areas. Education saw improving student satisfaction but declining enrolment and fluctuating pass rates. Research experienced a significant drop in funding in 2022 with partial recovery in 2023. International student numbers fell sharply in 2023, likely due to COVID-19 impacts. Regional cooperation strengthened with increased partnership funding. There was a dramatic rise in operating surplus for 2023, mainly due to the payment of some of the arrears that the Fiji Government owed. 

External Challenges 

USP faces a series of significant external challenges shaped by the evolving landscape of higher education. These challenges span financial, infrastructural, technological, geographical, environmental, educational, and workforce dimensions, each presenting unique obstacles to the institution's mission and operations.

Financial Constraints
One of the foremost challenges is financial. Many of USP's member countries grapple with economic limitations, making it difficult to allocate the necessary funding to support the University's extensive operations. This has compelled USP to seek alternative revenue sources through development assistance and strategic partnerships, aimed at reducing its dependence on government contributions. The University has had to implement rigorous financial controls and savings measures, especially during uncertain times such as the COVID-19 pandemic, to ensure financial stability and mitigate potential income declines​​​​.

Infrastructural and Technological Challenges
Quality infrastructure and access to advanced technology are critical for effective teaching, learning, and research. However, some member countries face significant barriers in these areas. USP has responded by enhancing its infrastructure and technological capabilities through collaborations and funding for development projects. In some jurisdictions, Starlink is proving to be of significant help to the delivery of ICT services.

Geographical Dispersion and Logistical Issues
The geographical spread of USP's member countries adds another layer of complexity to its operations. Ensuring equitable access to educational resources and opportunities for all students, regardless of their location, is a significant challenge. To address this, USP has embraced distance and online learning modalities, facilitating remote access and fostering collaboration among students and faculty across various locations. Additionally, the Pacific region's vulnerability to natural disasters and the impacts of climate change pose ongoing risks to the continuity of operations and the safety of the University community​​.

Educational and Workforce Challenges 
Aligning USP’s programmes with industry needs and addressing gaps in student attributes and skills are critical educational challenges. Employers have highlighted the importance of revamping curricula and strengthening data definitions for student success indicators. Furthermore, recruiting competent staff, particularly at senior academic levels, remains difficult due to limited industry infrastructure, market demand, and the small economies of member countries. This issue is further exacerbated by brain drain and migration, which impact the availability of skilled personnel​​. 

Regional and Global Engagement 
USP is also focused on enhancing its international presence and improving its ranking in global University rankings. Achieving and maintaining international accreditation for its programmes requires substantial resources and unwavering commitment. Increasing strategic international research partnerships and student enrolments is crucial for maintaining USP's competitive edge. This includes introducing new research positions and increasing the number of adjunct appointments to bolster research output and innovation​​​​.

Process to Prepare Institutional Report

The preparation for the WSCUC reaffirmation of accreditation involved a structured and inclusive approach, designed to ensure a thorough self-assessment and comprehensive input from various stakeholders. Spearheaded by the Senior Management Team (SMT), the USP WSCUC Reaffirmation Team, led by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education), was established in November 2022 to coordinate the self-study and prepare the Institutional Report. The SMT also ensured that the entire process both began and concluded with its oversight, culminating in the final approval of the report, demonstrating the institution's strong commitment to the exercise

Steps Involved

1. Formation of Working Groups. The USP WSCUC Team created four working groups, each comprising personnel from different sections of the University. These groups were tasked with analysing specific components of the review, following the structure outlined in the WSCUC Handbook of Accreditation. Over a six-week period, these groups met virtually for two hours per week to discuss and deliberate on their respective components​​.
2. Data Collection. Three Accreditation Officers (AOs) supported the working groups by collecting data and evidence from the academic units. By the end of April 2023, a substantial amount of data and evidence had been gathered, providing a solid foundation for drafting the Institutional Report​​.
3. Drafting the Report. The USP WSCUC Team began drafting the first version of the Institutional Report at the end of April 2023. The initial draft was completed on June 27, 2023​​.
4. Review and Refinement. The draft report was reviewed and refined through three separate meetings involving the USP WSCUC Team and the working groups. This iterative process ensured that feedback was integrated, and the report was thoroughly vetted​​.
5. Finalisation and Approval. The final version of the Institutional Report was completed on July 16, 2023, and submitted to the Senior Management Team (SMT) for feedback on July 24, 2023. Following SMT's approval on July 31, 2023, the report was officially submitted to WSCUC on August 2, 2023​​.
6. Notification of Outcome of Submission and Need for Revision. The University received the outcome of its submission on September 15, 2023 (Fiji time). The WSCUC Review Team's feedback suggested improvements to ensure consistency and coherence in the report, incorporate detailed analytics and evaluations backed by evidence, utilise infographics for data representation, consistently reference relevant Criteria for Review (CFRs), and provide brief descriptions of attached evidence for clarity.
7. Revision Period. The USP WSCUC Team revised the document accordingly from November 2023 to August 2024. Additional data were gathered during this period to ensure that the requirements of the WSCUC Review Team were met. Further feedback from the SMT and the faculty were received.
8. Finalisation and Approval of the Revised Submission. The final version of the Institutional Report was completed on August 13, 2024, and submitted to the Senior Management Team (SMT) and faculty for feedback on August 14, 2024. Following SMT's approval on August 19, 2024, the report was officially submitted to WSCUC the next day.

Stakeholder Involvement

• Working Groups. Comprised members from various academic and administrative units, ensuring broad representation and engagement.
• Accreditation Officers. Played a critical role in data collection and analysis.
• Senior Management Team (SMT). Provided final feedback and approval, ensuring alignment with institutional priorities and strategic goals.
• School, Staff, and Students. Engaged through workshops, meetings, and feedback sessions to ensure their perspectives and insights were incorporated.

Response to Previous Commission Requirements

USP has diligently reviewed and responded to the recommendations provided in the most recent team report and Commission action letters. The initial Accreditation Commission Action Letter (CAL) in July 2018 made seven recommendations, four of which were addressed in the 2022 Interim Report. This section details the approach USP has taken to address each requirement and the progress made.

Addressing Initial Accreditation Recommendations

1. Reduce Vacancies in Key Leadership and Academic Staff Positions
   • Actions Taken. USP has filled several key leadership positions within the Senior Management Team (SMT), including Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (DVC&VP) Education, DVC&VP Research & Innovation, and Chief Operating Officer (COO). However, some Head of School (HoS) positions are still held by acting appointments due to challenges posed by the pandemic and funding issues caused by the non-payment of USP grants by the Fiji government from 2019 to 2022.
   • Progress. Despite these challenges, USP continues to recruit and fill vacant academic positions with full-time or part-time staff, including adjunct professors and fellows across various schools and campuses. The Recruitment and Appointments Policy has been reviewed to enhance the recruitment process for academic staff flexibly and promptly ​​.
2. Invest in Information Technology Resources and Connectivity
   • Actions Taken. USP has made significant investments in Information Communications Technology (ICT) infrastructure, software, and service licensing to improve learning, teaching, and research delivery. This includes enhancing institutional administration functions to support the planned expansion of distance education delivery.
   • Progress. These investments have been recognized in USP's Interim Report to WSCUC, which was commended for improving ICT resources ​​.

3. Enhance Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
   • Actions Taken. USP has developed and implemented comprehensive processes for assessing student learning outcomes, integrating these assessments into programme reviews and ensuring that feedback informs curriculum improvements..
   • Progress. The University has established robust mechanisms for continuous assessment and has enhanced the use of data in decision-making processes to ensure educational effectiveness ​​​.
4. Ensure Rigor in Degree programmes
   • Actions Taken. USP has undertaken extensive reviews of its degree programmes to ensure academic rigor and relevance. This includes updating curricula, aligning programmes with industry standards, and incorporating feedback from external reviewers and stakeholders.
   • Progress: These efforts have resulted in the approval of 37 new programmes from 2018 to 2023, demonstrating the University's ongoing commitment to maintaining high academic standards ​​.

5. Improve Institutional Research Capabilities
   • Actions Taken. The University has strengthened its institutional research capabilities by investing in data analytics and enhancing the capacity of its Institutional Research Office. This includes training staff and upgrading systems to better collect, analyse, and utilise data for strategic planning and decision-making.
   • Progress: Enhanced institutional research capabilities have enabled USP to effectively monitor and evaluate its performance, ensuring continuous improvement across all areas ​​.

Addressing Interim Report Recommendations

1. Further Develop Quality Assurance Processes
   • Actions Taken. USP has reviewed and refined its quality assurance processes, integrating best practices and ensuring alignment with WSCUC standards. This includes regular internal audits and external reviews to ensure compliance and continuous improvement.
   • Progress. The institution has established a culture of quality assurance, with ongoing training and development for staff to support these processes ​​​​.
2. Enhance Faculty Development
   • Actions Taken: USP has implemented comprehensive faculty development programmes to enhance teaching quality. These programmes focus on effective pedagogy, best practices in assessment, and the use of data for planning and decision-making.
   • Progress. Faculty participation in professional development activities has increased, contributing to improved teaching and learning outcomes across the University. 

Introduction

This chapter addresses Standard 1 of the WSCUC Standards of Accreditation, focusing on how The University of the South Pacific (USP) defines its mission and establishes educational and student success objectives aligned with that mission. 

Institutional Purposes

Vision, Mission and Values

USP's vision, mission and values are deeply rooted in the cultural, social, and geographic context of the Pacific Islands, making them distinctive (see Section A, page 3). The vision emphasises regional empowerment and sustainable community development, while the mission focuses on excellence in education and impactful research to improve Pacific Islanders' lives. These elements ensure USP's positive impact on society and the public good, enhancing the well-being and resilience of Pacific communities [CFR 1.1]. A list of poignant stories by Pacific islanders whose lives have been transformed by USP is posted on the University's website.

The institution’s vision, mission, and values are reviewed concurrently with each new Strategic Plan (SP). This review process is thorough and includes stakeholder consultations through various channels, such as face-to-face forums, campus visits, surveys, webinars, and online platforms [CFR 4.8]. Due to COVID-19, the 2022-2024 SP consultation shifted to an entirely online format. This involved an online survey with 372 responses, a webinar with 385 participants, and interactive engagement through Moodle, which recorded 3,705 views and 325 postings. 

Details are provided in the Strategic Plan Consultation Process Report 2021. This extensive engagement reflects broad stakeholder understanding and support of the mission. 

Moreover, the University has implemented strategic steps to ensure that its vision and mission are effectively communicated and understood by stakeholders:

1. The vision and mission statements are prominently stated in its strategic plans, annual reports, prospectuses, and website, which are readily accessible online [CFR 1.3].
2. The USP Open Day is a vital platform for showcasing the University's role in transforming lives and communities. By directly engaging stakeholders and highlighting achievements, the Open Day reinforces their understanding of the vision and mission.
3. Through brand campaigns like ‘Our People, Our Stories’, USP uses personal narratives and community connections to demonstrate the transformative impact of its education and research, making the vision and mission more relatable and tangible.
4. Social media platforms are utilised to share updates, achievements, and interactive content that reinforce the University’s core goals and values.
5. Outreach activities, including secondary school visits, roadshows, expos, and workshops with career teachers and principals, are conducted to enhance awareness and build connections, deepening their understanding of the University’s vision and mission.

An increased social media presence (Figure S1.1) and the results of the Marketing Campaign Survey (Figure S1.2) evidence the effectiveness of these strategic steps. Figure S1.3 provides some reasons why students chose USP.

Fig S1.1 Social media growth in 2023.

Fig S1.2 Methods of learning about USP and recommended marketing campaigns.

Fig S1.3 Some reasons why students chose USP. 

Priority Areas

The University’s programmes, activities and decisions are guided by its SP, which outlines key priority areas (PAs), objectives, and initiatives directly aligned with its vision and mission. The PA leaders oversee and work with their section directors, managers, and coordinators to plan and implement relevant activities aligned with the SP. The SP is integrated into the day-to-day activities of the University through some of the following strategies:

1. Co-strategy plans such as the Alumni Strategy Plan (PA3 Objective 4),
2. Frameworks like the Learning and Teaching Excellence Framework (PA1),
3. Policies, procedures and committees such as the Academic programme Prioritisation policy (PA1 Objective 1), Learning Pathways Policy and Committee (PA1 Objective 3),
4. Departmental/office work plans, for example, the Research Office Workplan (PA2) and Alumni Office Workplan (PA3 Objective 4).

This integrated approach, along with regular monitoring and reporting of SP progress and institutional KPIs (see Section A, page 16) at University Committee meetings—including the Senate, Finance and Resources Committee (FRC), Executive Committee, and Council—has been instrumental in driving the University toward its SP initiatives, objectives, and outcomes [CFR 3.10]. While some initiatives are still in progress, the University continues to fulfil its mission by delivering programmes, research, and engagement initiatives (Table S1.4) designed to meet the pressing social, economic, and environmental needs of the Pacific region. 

Table S1.4 A sample of USP programmes, research, and community engagement initiatives designed to meet the pressing social, economic, and environmental needs of the Pacific region.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) 

The University's commitment to DEI is driven by its Charter (see clauses 22 and 23(B)), upheld Values and Student Charter. This commitment is reinforced and operationalised through the various initiatives as shown in Figure S1.5. This figure illustrates the interconnections between the USP Charter, Values, and Student Charter, which underpin the broader DEI commitment and policy. It also outlines the roles of the DEI Committee and its working groups—Equity, Gender, and Disability—each responsible for specific policies and initiatives. 

Fig S1.5 DEI initiatives at USP.

The Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Policy is an overarching framework for promoting DEI across the University [CFR 1.2]. This DEI Policy articulates the University's commitment and legal obligation to provide a diverse, equitable, and inclusive learning and work environment free from discrimination and sexual harassment. It also defines the concepts of DEI within the University context.

The DEI Policy is operationalised by the DEI Committee (DEIC) and supported by related policies. The DEIC is structured into three working groups—Equity, Gender and Disability—each focused on addressing specific objectives and needs within their respective areas.

The Equity Working Group ensures fair treatment and opportunities for everyone at the University. Its goal is to promote an environment free from discrimination, assault, harassment, and bullying, ensuring everyone is respected and treated equally. The implemented policies are detailed in Table S1.6 and have been effective in meeting its purpose.

Table S1.6 Policies to promote equity and prevent discrimination and harassment at USP.

Gender Equality
The Gender Working Group within the DEI Committee (DEIC) is dedicated to advancing gender equality and inclusivity across the University, with a particular emphasis on increasing women's participation. This focus is critical given women's historical underrepresentation in academia and leadership roles, especially in the Pacific region. The University is actively working to address this disparity in academic and senior management/leadership roles through the following initiatives (see Figure S1.7):

• Reviewing and revising the Gender Policy (work in progress).
• Introduction of the VCP’s Strategic Fund to support female academics.
• Research collaboration
• The Gender and Equity working group will merge and engage with an external expert in gender to draw up an action plan to improve gender mainstreaming at USP.

Fig S1.7 USP gender distribution across staff categories. 

On International Women’s Day, 8 March 2024, the Vice-Chancellor and President (VC&P) launched a significant initiative to advance gender equity and support the professional growth of women within the academic community. A dedicated fund was established to specifically support female academics on the verge of promotion. This initiative provides them with the opportunity to take dedicated time away from teaching responsibilities to focus on enhancing their research and publication outputs, thereby strengthening their candidacy for academic advancement. The first Call for Interest, made in June 2024, attracted nine applicants, of whom three were successful.

Students with Disabilities
The Disability Working Group focuses on ensuring that the University environment is accessible and inclusive for students with disabilities The institution supports this commitment through a comprehensive Disability Inclusiveness policy and initiatives such as the Disability Resource Centre (DRC) and the Regional Disability Scholarship (RDS). The Disability Inclusiveness policy encourages students to disclose their disability to the University at the time of admission, ensuring they receive appropriate support through DRC to succeed in their academic journey. The support services provided by the DRC are stated on its webpage. DRC has supported 259 students in the last five years, of which 41 have graduated. See Figure S1.8 for completion and retention rates for students with disabilities. Additionally, a total of twenty-three students have been awarded the Regional Disability Scholarship from 2018 (inception) to 2023.

Fig S1.8 Completion and Retention Rates for students with disabilities.

To enhance accessibility and inclusiveness for students with disabilities, the University is revising its Disability Inclusiveness Policy and working with Estates and Infrastructure to address accessibility issues across USP campuses.

Furthermore, USP is committed to supporting non-traditional learners (those who have acquired knowledge and skills through life experiences, work experience, or informal education pathways, rather than through traditional formal educational routes), and students from financially disadvantaged backgrounds through its Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) Policy and Mature Student Admission criteria (refer to clause 11.3 of the Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programme Requirements and Admission Regulations), and Student Bursary Scheme. Under these initiatives, USP has enrolled 23 learners under the RPL Policy in its Pacific TAFE programmes from 2020 to date (Figure S1.9), and has granted admission to 2991 students from 2019 to 2024 under the Mature Student Admission criteria (Figure S1.10). The University has also provided financial assistance to over 2300 students through the Bursary Scheme since 2020 (Figure S1.11). 

Fig S1.9 Age and Gender of learners enrolled through the RPL policy since 2020.

Fig S1.10 Gender and Headcount of students enrolled under Mature Admission Criteria (2019-2024).

Fig S1.11 Student Bursary Scheme assistance by campus since 2020.

Integrity and Transparency

To uphold its values of integrity and transparency, the University uses various communication systems to keep its constituents well-informed about several critical areas (refer to Figure S1.12 where each communication mechanism is explained). These areas include programmes, policies and processes, student support services, financial information, research outcomes, achievements, and much more [CFR 1.3, 1.7, and 1.8].

Fig S1.12 Communication Systems at USP.

Policy Development and Implementation
The University maintains a robust set of policies and procedures that provide clear guidelines, standards, and expectations for processes, behaviour, and decision-making at USP (refer to the attached sample policies) These policies encompass various aspects of the University and are readily accessible to stakeholders through the policy library. All University policy developments are guided by the policy development framework that ensures USP's policies are well-developed, effectively communicated and implemented [CFR 1.4, 1.5 and 1.7].

Policy Reviews
USP is conscious of the need for timely reviews of its policies and has put in measures since 2021 to address this, following the directive of the USP Council for the University to urgently carry out the following tasks:  (i) Reviewing all USP policies (including practices) pertaining to remuneration, with the aim of aligning them with best practice; 
(ii) Evaluating the HR function to enhance efficiency and alignment with best practice; 
(iii) Conducting a thorough review of all HR policies to ensure their suitability and effectiveness; 
(iv) Reviewing the USP Governance arrangements to ensure alignment with best practice, while strengthening the Council's oversight of management decisions; and 
(v) Undertaking a forensic examination of non-salary remuneration payments.

Policy Compliance 
The University conducts regular internal (through its Assurance and Compliance Unit) and external audits to improve policy effectiveness and compliance. The Risk and Mitigation framework assesses the effectiveness and adherence to financial policies, academic standards, and ethical guidelines. Moreover, the University has comprehensive student and staff grievance frameworks that provide structured procedures for raising grievances on academic, administrative, and interpersonal issues [CFR 1.4 and 1.5].

The Student Administration Services (SAS) and Human Resources (HR) departments are responsible for processing and maintaining records of student and staff grievances and their resolutions. The grievances are handled in accordance with relevant policies and regulations. For instance, requests for late registrations are typically approved if made within the early weeks of the semester, allowing students sufficient time to manage their coursework. However, requests beyond the third week are generally disapproved, as students may struggle to keep up with the curriculum.

Academic Freedom
The Staff Code of Conduct Policy details the University’s commitment to academic freedom. This commitment supports USP's mission to provide world-class education and research by fostering open exchange, critical inquiry, and diverse perspectives. It aligns with USP's values of excellence and creativity by encouraging innovation, ethics, and accountability by promoting integrity in research, as well as respect and inclusivity by ensuring a diverse and open environment for dialogue and debate.

Evidence of this commitment includes numerous faculty publications across diverse research areas, demonstrating the institution's academic rigor and contribution to public discourse, thereby reinforcing USP's role as a thought leader in the Pacific region. The University also maintains transparent governance structures and feedback mechanisms, such as surveys and open forums, providing a platform for the community to express concerns and participate in policy discussions, ensuring that the academic freedom policy is actively practised [CFR 1.6].

Open and Transparent
Moreover, the University has demonstrated candor with WSCUC by maintaining open and transparent communication and reporting. All new programmes introduced at the University are reported to WSCUC through the Accreditation Management portal. The University annually submits its student demographics and financial information, including management letters and auditors' findings, as part of the annual reporting process. Additionally, significant events, such as the deportation of the USP Vice Chancellor in 2021 and financial constraints, and those significantly affecting the University's operations are openly communicated to WSCUC [CFR 1.7 and 1.8].

Introduction

This chapter addresses Standard 2 of the WSCUC Standards of Accreditation focusing on how The University of the South Pacific (USP) achieves its educational and student success objectives through the core functions of teaching and learning, and through support for student learning, scholarship, and creative activity.

As expounded in the University's Strategic Plan 2022-2024, USP aligns its educational and student success objectives with its vision and mission by employing the Learning and Teaching Excellence Framework, adapted from the UK Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework Specification 2017. This framework comprises three key components: Quality of Teaching, Learning Environment, and Student Outcomes and Learning Gains (see Figure S2.1). These components underpin teaching and learning excellence at USP, guiding essential educational activities in four key areas: degree programmes, faculty, student learning and performance, and student support. This alignment ensures that USP's commitment to delivering quality education and fostering student success is strategically integrated with its overarching goals and values.

Fig S2.1 Visual representation of USP’s Learning and Teaching Excellence Framework.

Degree programmes 

The University Charter outlines USP’s primary objectives: preservation, progression, and dissemination of knowledge through teaching, consultancy, research, and the provision of education that meets the needs of the Pacific communities [CFR 1.1]. The University's degree programmes, detailed in the University's Handbook and Calendar (pages 142-240) [CFR 2.1 and 2.2] are aligned with the Teaching Quality component of the Learning and Teaching Excellence Framework to ensure effective course design, assessment, and feedback (see Figure S2.2). The University has additional quality assurance processes which ensures and enhances the quality and rigor of its programme.

Fig S2.2 Key quality assurance processes at USP.

These programmes are benchmarked against appropriate international standards and qualifications by aligning with the Fiji Qualifications Framework (FQF), which corresponds to the Pacific Qualifications Frameworks (PQF), Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF), and New Zealand Qualifications Framework (NZQF).   

The University maintains registrations with National Agencies responsible for higher education quality assurance in the region. The University is currently registered with the Higher Education Commission Fiji (HECF) for seven years until May 2026 with all USP academic programmes recorded on the Fiji National Qualifications Framework (FNQF) Register.  It is also registered with the Tonga National Quality and Accreditation Board (TNQAB) until August 2024, the Samoa Qualifications Authority (SQA) until April 2025, and the Vanuatu Qualifications Authority (VQA) until December 2024; these registrations are renewed annually. Solomon Islands Tertiary Education Skills Authority (SITESA) is a relatively new regulator and the University is in communications regarding USP’s registration in Solomon Islands.

In accordance with Fiji's Higher Education (Qualifications) Regulations 2010, all USP academic qualifications are registered with the Higher Education Commission Fiji (HECF). This process requires that the University has an internal accreditation process for its qualifications which ensures the following:

• Qualifications are based on graduate profiles and learning outcomes
• They meet the industry, enterprise, education sector, regulator, professional, or community need.
• They are designed with learners in mind.

• Pathways and articulation opportunities are facilitated.
• They are developed in consultations with, and endorsed by appropriate industry, enterprise, education sector, regulator, professional or community group(s).
• Qualifications are referenced to external benchmarks.
• There is clear coherence and logic to the structure of the qualification.
• There is an accreditation period of not more than 5 years.

This process aligns with the University’s existing requirements of the University’s Academic Approval for Course and programmes (see Figure S2.3). Furthermore, the University also holds external accreditation for 26 programmes, further validating the quality and rigor of its academic offerings.

Fig S2.3 USP’s University’s Academic Approval for Course and programmes Flowchart.

Each academic programme undergoes a systematic and rigorous process of curriculum design and review, incorporating faculty expertise, industry perspectives, and stakeholder input [CFR 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3]. Content and assessments are aligned with expected outcomes corresponding to their respective levels and the overall University Undergraduate and Postgraduate Outcomes [CFR 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3]. Verification and approvals are sought from various regulatory and governing bodies, including the Discipline Boards of Studies, Academic Unit Standards and Quality Committees, the Academic Programme Committee, Senate, and Council (please refer to the sample case study outlining the internal QA process). This process ensures that programme and course development or revision meets the University’s internal quality assurance standards and those set by relevant accrediting bodies including HECF, VQA, SQA, TNQAB and WSCUC.

In order to maintain and enhance the relevance and effectiveness of its programmes and disciplines, the University has implemented an Academic programme Review (APR) Policy which mandates a seven-year review cycle by a panel of reviewers [CFR 2.4, 4.1 and 4.6]. The programme review evaluates a range of factors including programme structure, effectiveness of assessment processes, student success measures and resources for successful delivery of programmes.

With the APR Policy due for revision in 2024, the University carried out a review of the programme review process and its impact in 2022, and analysed 14 external academic programme reviews conducted between 2017 – 2021. This review brought to light two key findings:

1. The current rate of programme reviews using the existing approach is prolonged as only 48.5% of the total 202 programmes scheduled for review for the 2017 – 2021 period had been reviewed.
2. The current academic governance mechanisms are inadequate in closing the quality loop effectively.

To address these issues, a collaboration between the Planning and Quality Office (PQO) and the Curriculum Review and Development Unit (CRDU) (see Section A, page 7) is ongoing to strengthen the internal quality assurance process for academic programme reviews by streamlining the self-review process through the joint critical review of a consolidated set of academic indicators with learning and teaching partners. This approach will facilitate co-designed remediation strategies, differentiating between issues that can be resolved internally and those requiring external review (please see the working paper on Internal Review Approach). 

Faculty

The University faculty members play a crucial role in shaping and continually improving its academic programmes. The faculty initiate and provide quality assurance as summarised in Figure S2.4 [CFR 4.1]. 

Fig S2.4 Faculty contribution to curricular.

Curriculum Development
Faculty members are responsible for designing and developing the curriculum for degree programmes (refer to samples from the Academic Units). Faculty members draw on their expertise, research, and industry experience to create relevant and up-to-date curricula that meet the needs of students and align with industry trends [CFR 2.5 and 2.7]. Additionally, every academic unit has a school specific curriculum committee (BoS, ASQC) as a review body which sees that the faculty are reviewing the curricular proposals of its peers in order to ensure academic quality [CFR 2.6]. 

Course Design and Delivery
Faculty members are responsible for designing individual courses within the degree programme. They create syllabi, select textbooks and learning materials, develop assignments and assessments, and plan instructional activities (refer to sample course outlines). 

Faculty members have the flexibility to incorporate innovative teaching methods, use technology effectively, and adapt their teaching approaches based on student feedback and emerging educational research. The high student satisfaction rates (88.49% in Semester 1, 2024) recorded through Course Experience Surveys provide a measurement of the successful delivery of the courses [CFR 2.5, 2.7 and 4.3] 

Subject Matter Expertise
Faculty members bring their subject matter expertise to the table, ensuring that the degree programme is grounded in current knowledge and best practices. Currently, the University has 22% full-time academic staff members with strong subject matter expertise and qualifications in their respective disciplines (see Figure S2.5) (refer to Academic Position Classification Standards for the minimum qualification requirements at each academic level). They lead the design and improvement of degree programmes [CFR 2.6 and 3.1]. 

Fig S2.5 Key categories of University Staff.

Programme Evaluation and Assessment
Faculty members play a vital role in evaluating the effectiveness of degree programmes through regular assessments of student performance, and periodic internal and external reviews. Refer to the Academic Programme Review (APR) Policy and a recent sample of internal and external review) [CFR 2.4, 2.7, 2.9, 4.1 and 4.6]. 

Industry Engagement
Faculty members maintain connections with industry professionals and employers relevant to the degree programme. This enables them to understand industry needs, emerging trends, and changes in the job market. The University also places emphasis on integrating work experience into the curriculum, with 40% of the undergraduate degree programmes having a Work Integrated Learning component facilitated by the programme/course coordinators. Refer to samples of the programme Advisory Committee meeting minutes [CFR 1.7, 2.1, 2.2, 2.6 and 4.8].

The University has further planned to strengthen its academic staff in shaping and continually improving degree programmes. These include the following initiatives (refer to the CRDU Terms of Reference): 

1. Professional Development. Faculty members are provided with opportunities to participate in professional development activities such as online pedagogy and e-moderation through collaboration with the Centre for Flexible Learning (CFL) [CFR 3.3]. 

2. Institutional Support. The CRDU provides dedicated support in terms of facilitating discipline meetings, alignment and mapping exercises and administrative support to faculty who are working on course and/or programme revision. This initiative builds on the success of the Postgraduate Outcome Implementation project, which demonstrated the value of dedicated curriculum administrative support for academic staff.

Student Learning and Performance

To support USP's commitment to promoting student learning and performance as a core aspect of its educational activities, the institution places a strong emphasis on assessing student outcomes and learning gains. The goal is to ensure that students achieve the desired learning objectives and acquire the necessary skills and attributes for success.  To ascertain the achievement of the University Graduate Outcomes (UGOs) and programme Learning Outcomes (PLOs), USP utilises the following assessment methods: examinations, assignments, projects, presentations, portfolios, and practical assessments. By evaluating students' performance through these assessments, USP effectively gauges the degree to which students have fulfilled the intended learning outcomes. It is worth noting that each assessment within a programme is carefully aligned with the corresponding CLOs, PLOs and UPOs, ensuring that all learning outcomes are thoroughly assessed and addressed [CFR 2.9, 4.3].  While the University is satisfied with its current mechanisms of evaluating student performance and achievements, the CRDU is initiating the use of Assessment Plans to further strengthen data collection and use to measure student success in individual courses. This initiative will be implemented in select courses from Semester II 2024 with full implementation targeted over a two-year period.

To visualise clearly the alignment of learning outcomes, USP introduced a new alignment table and curriculum map template for all academic programmes. These tools provide a structured framework for mapping the relationship between the desired learning outcomes, the content and activities within the curriculum, and the assessments used to evaluate student performance. The alignment table and curriculum map serve as visual aids, making it easier for faculty and administrators to assess the coherence and effectiveness of the curriculum design, identify potential gaps or redundancies, and ensure incremental learning, as well as alignment between the learning outcomes, instructional strategies, and assessment methods [CFR 2.9 and 4.5]. 

In addition to subject-specific expertise, the institution emphasises the development of transferable skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, communication, teamwork, and information literacy. These skills are closely aligned with the University's Undergraduate and Postgraduate Outcomes. Student satisfaction with the development of these skills is tracked through the Total Experience Survey, with data from 2019 to 2023 indicating an overall satisfaction rate exceeding 85% (refer to Figure S2.6). Although there was a slight decline in 2021 due to the transition to fully online learning following the closure of the Fiji campuses during the COVID-19 pandemic, satisfaction rates have shown a positive upward trend in both 2022 and 2023. The Teaching Quality Committee, in collaboration with the Planning and Quality Office, closely monitors any significant drops in satisfaction below the 85% threshold, ensuring that appropriate stakeholders are engaged to address underlying issues.

Fig S2.6 Student Satisfaction Rate of Transferable Skills Development.

The overall retention rates remain relatively high from 2018-2020, with a slight increase from 71% to 73%. There is a decline in retention rates starting in 2021, with rates dropping to 68% and further to 64% in 2022. This decline could be attributed to several factors, including external influences such as the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have disrupted student engagement and continuity. The overall completion rates from 2015 to 2018 show a consistent upward trend, peaking at 45% in 2018. While incomplete data for students within their six-year completion period has affected completion rates since 2019, these rates are anticipated to improve as students conclude their study programmes (see Figure S2.7).

Fig S2.7 Completion and Retention Rates Over the Years.

The data shows consistent gender parity in retention rates across the past five years, with an average of 70% retention and 30% completion rates. However, a clear distinction emerges when examining these rates by study mode. Face-to-face learning demonstrably fosters higher engagement, achieving a 40% completion rate compared to 30% for Blended learning, 17% completion for Online learning, and 10% for Print-based learning. Similarly, the Face-to-Face mode leads the retention at 75%, followed by Blended learning at 68%, Online learning at 64% and Print-based learning at 61% (refer to the Retention and Completions Data for the full breakdown of these rates by relevant categories). The data highlights areas needing attention to improve student success, particularly in specific programmes, study modes, and among certain campuses or nationalities.

In order to improve the retention and completion rates, the University is placing a key focus on investments into student relationship management systems to improve student life cycle and student experience initiatives as part of its 8-pronged tactical response framework (see Figure S2.8) (refer to pages 27-28 of the 2024 Annual Plan for more details on the Tactical Response Framework). Also, see Section A, page 9. 

Fig S2.8 Tactical Response Framework

The initiatives currently underway are:

Data Warehouse
The University enhanced its data warehouse in early 2024 to harness diverse datasets and develop dashboards and more sophisticated reporting and predictive analytics so that critical and timely data-informed decisions can be made. This work is currently ongoing, although the inaugural suite of dashboards focused on student data has already alerted the University to significant shifts in student profiles, patterns and trends.

Retention
The University is currently working on developing a platform of data-led and informed suite of analytic tools to provide timely insights so that “just-in-time” wrap-around support and intervention initiatives and programmes can be provided to boost the retention of students within courses between years and across levels (e.g., undergraduate to postgraduate).

Student Experience
The consolidation of disparate contact points into a central portal supported by a comprehensive Student Services Centre is a key early initiative of this Tactical Response Framework. The Student Services Centre is currently handling all inbound and outbound contact with prospective and current students and is supported by existing technology and digital platforms. However, the plan is to invest in a fit-for-purpose Customer Relationship Management solution to support more robust end-to-end management of enquiries and support across the region so that prospective and current students only “tell their story once” [CFR 4.3]. The University will be able to assess the success of this initiative at the end of the 2025 academic year by comparing the 2024 and 2025 retention rates.

The evidence from the Graduate Destination Surveys (2018-2024) provides a comprehensive overview of the paths graduates take after completing their degrees (see Figure S2.9). A significant proportion of undergraduates pursue further education, with 19% to 23% enrolling in full-time study programmes immediately after graduation [CFR 2.11]. This trend indicates a strong inclination towards enhancing their academic qualifications and increasing their career prospects. Meanwhile, postgraduate students exhibit high full-time employment rates, consistently ranging from 80% to 100%. These statistics underscore the value of advanced degrees in securing stable and relevant employment.

Fig S2.9 Key indicators of graduates’ paths after completing their degrees.

Graduate success is multifaceted and varies widely based on the programme's nature and level. Employment rates serve as a primary measure of success, with overall employment rates (including full-time, part-time, and casual work) ranging from 63% to 78% over the years. Additionally, graduate satisfaction with programme quality remains high, with satisfaction rates hovering around 97%. The institution also considers the relevance of qualifications, with a significant proportion of graduates finding their education directly applicable to their workplaces. In terms of longer-term impact, many graduates secure permanent or long-term contract positions, and a growing percentage report earning more than FJD30,000 annually, indicating career growth and financial stability post-graduation (see Figure S2.9) [CFR 2.11]. A detailed breakdown of the GDS Institutional Reports for the years 2018 - 2023 can be viewed here.

Student Support

The University ensures that students understand the requirements of their academic programmes through comprehensive pre- and post-admission initiatives. These pre-admission initiatives and post-admission support are detailed in the CFR 2.12 Write-up as part of the University’s Compliance Worksheet Evidence.

Furthermore, the Course Experience Survey administered towards the end of each semester gauges student satisfaction of their courses, particularly their understanding of the course learning outcomes. The data for the period 2021 – 2023 indicates satisfactory results on student understanding of learning outcomes (see Figure S2.10). These initiatives and high survey ratings demonstrate that students receive timely, accurate, and complete information and advising about their academic requirements.

Fig S2.10 Satisfaction rates for student understanding of course learning outcomes.

The University has a comprehensive array of support services and co-curricular opportunities it provides to all students centrally (see Figure S2.11). The academic units also provide these services, although to targeted student groups.

Fig S2.11 Support Services and Co-curricular Opportunities Available at USP

Through the Centre for Flexible Learning, the University provides the Student Learning Support (SLS) programme which is designed to provide academic support to all students. The CFL also coordinates the Semester Zero initiative which commenced in 2022. This six-week programme equips students with essential skills and knowledge before they embark on their regular coursework. The Semester Zero programme aims to facilitate a smooth transition into University life, thereby increasing the likelihood of student success and completion [CFR 2.3, 2.12, 2.13 and 4.3]. 

The Campus Life office coordinates First Year Experience (FYE) programmes, Career and Entrepreneurial programmes, sports, and recreational activities. The Disability Resource Centre, apart from advocating for and ensuring an inclusive environment also provides Regional Disability Scholarships. The University also provides financial aid to students who may face financial constraints in continuing their studies through a number of scholarship opportunities (detailed information on these scholarships is provided in Standard 1). These scholarships alleviate financial burdens and ensure that deserving students have the opportunity to pursue their studies without financial constraints [CFR 2.13 and 4.3]. 

The University Library offers a range of Information Research Skills (IRS) programmes which caters to students at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels and across all campuses. The International Office at the University manages various mobility, research, short courses and exchange programmes and scholarships. It also facilitates the JENESYS programme which provides students with cultural exchange programme opportunities.

USP also celebrates excellence in the first year of studies through school-organised award functions (for example the SBM first year awards). This initiative acknowledges outstanding achievements by students and encourages a culture of excellence from the beginning of their academic journey. At the end of their journey, they are eligible for various awards during the graduation ceremony. 

While the University provides extensive support services and co-curricular programmes, there is a need for a more strategic evaluation framework. Currently, the effectiveness of these initiatives is not consistently assessed. Implementing a robust evaluation process would help optimise resources and enhance the impact of these services, leading to improved student outcomes and satisfaction.

Introduction

This chapter addresses Standard 3 of the WSCUC Standards of Accreditation, focusing on how The University of the South Pacific (USP) ensures it has the necessary resources and organisational structures to achieve its educational and student success objectives. The content is divided into three key subsections: Faculty, Staff, and Administrators; Fiscal, Physical, Technology, and Information Resources; and Organisational Structures and Decision-Making Processes. Each subsection highlights USP's strategic approaches, policies, and practices to maintain a robust and supportive environment for its community. In our current Strategic Plan 2022 - 2024, these issues are grouped under Priority Area 5. 

At the onset, it is important to note that decision-making processes are aided by Banner, USP's administrative software. Banner captures data from various departments, integrating it into a central database. This data undergoes processing for course management, student records, financial transactions, and HR management. Advanced business intelligence tools like Ellucian Analytics analyse the data, providing dashboards, reports, and predictive analytics for users. Faculty, staff, students, and alumni access relevant data through dedicated portals, facilitating course management, student advising, and engagement activities. Continuous feedback and regular audits ensure data accuracy and system efficiency, supporting USP's educational and administrative goals through robust data management and business intelligence solutions. Figure S3.1 shows the integrated nature of Banner at USP, highlighting how data flows from various departments into a central database, is processed and analysed, and is made accessible through various user portals, with continuous feedback and improvement mechanisms in place. 

Fig S3.1 A simple flowchart illustrating the Banner data flow at USP.

Faculty, Staff, and Administrators

USP ensures it has sufficient faculty, staff, and administrators through a combination of strategic models like the Internal Funding Model (IFM), periodic audits (internal and external reviews of sections), and robust policies for workload management, all governed by Council-appointed and Management-appointed committees (see Figure S3.2). The recruitment and staffing processes are guided by comprehensive policies guided by the Recruitment & Appointment Policy and Procedure and supported by data-driven approaches through the online recruitment portal. Continuous professional development (refer to attached Leave Policies) and performance evaluations further enhance the effectiveness of staffing strategies. This approach demonstrates a commitment to maintaining a qualified and sufficient workforce to achieve the institution’s educational and student success objectives. 

Fig S3.2 The first three committees are Council committees to recruit and evalaute the performance of the VC&P, DVCs and COO. The remaining committees ensure USP has sufficient and effective manpower.

Sufficiency of Faculty, Staff, and Administrators

The University extracts the enrolment data from Banner and employs the Internal Funding Model (IFM) to determine the necessary personnel resources for each school. This model considers student numbers and workload requirements of academic staff to effectively deliver designated programmes and courses. Each school determines appropriate staffing levels, ranging from teaching assistants to professorial positions, based on this resource pool. Furthermore, the institution has a staff classification policy that outlines minimum qualification requirements for each academic staff level, ensuring that all personnel are adequately qualified to meet educational and student success objectives. 

Through such a structured and data-driven approach, USP outlines specific staffing levels and ratios essential for meeting institutional needs. For example, for the year 2024, the 2024 Annual Plan (page 1) shows that USP has budgeted for 476 academic staff and 1,133 non-academic staff, maintaining an academic-to-non-academic staff ratio of 1:2.4 and a student-to-academic staff ratio of 1:28. This careful planning and allocation demonstrate the institution's commitment to maintaining adequate staffing levels to support its academic and operational goals.

Figure S3.3 shows an almost consistent Academinc to Non-Academic Staff ratio of 1:2.7 over the last seven years. This is also reflected in the associated cost to USP (see Figure S3.4). [CFR 3.1] 

Fig S3.3 Proportion of Academic and Non-Academic Staff, 2018 - 2024 

Fig S3.4 Proportion of Academic and Non-Academic Staff Costs, 2018 - 2024 

Note though that given the decline in student enrolments since 2018, USP recognises that these staffing levels and ratios are not sustainable; hence it has begun the implementation of its Tactical Response Framework in 2024, as explained in Section A, pages 8 and 9.

Formulation of School Requirements and Workload

Periodic independent audits are conducted to monitor programme quality and resource allocation (refer to the Academic programme Review (APR) Policy and a recent sample of internal and external review). These audits assess resource levels and provide valuable feedback, informing decisions on potential additional investments needed to support programme resourcing and facilitate student success. The institution also has an academic staff workload policy to ensure staff members have appropriate workloads that align with their roles and responsibilities. This policy, combined with the staff classification policy, helps maintain a balance and ensure staffing levels are sufficient and effective.  The table on the left gives an summary of the student and staff numbers in 2024. [CFR 3.1, 3.2 and 4.1].

In summary, the effectiveness of the school plan is continually evaluated through regular reviews of academic programmes, feedback from students, and performance metrics. The 2024 Annual Plan emphasises improving staff-to-student ratios and enhancing academic leadership, reflecting the institution's proactive approach to ensuring faculty effectiveness and meeting educational objectives.

Processes and Criteria for Hiring and Staffing

USP follows a comprehensive Recruitment and Appointment Policy and Procedure, ensuring alignment with the University's mission and strategic goals. In November 2022, the University introduced an online recruitment portal to streamline the hiring process. This portal includes a revamped careers website that provides comprehensive information on vacancies, locations, and featured jobs. It allows online application submissions and facilitates quicker shortlisting and interview processes. The portal also utilises Google Analytics to gauge the reach and engagement of the audience, ensuring effective monitoring and optimisation of the recruitment process [CFR 3.2 and 4.5].

Initial data analysis from the online recruitment portal reveals promising results. Between January 1, 2023, and June 23, 2023, the advertisements received a total of 86,461 views, with 16,858 active users engaging with the portal from 132 countries. For academic positions, the University received 170 applications in this period, averaging five applications per position, with a maximum of 15 applications for two positions. For administrative roles, the University received 2,884 applications, averaging 17 applications per position. This data helps in understanding the effectiveness of the recruitment strategy and informs further improvements [CFR 3.2 and 4.5].  

The 2024 Annual Plan prioritises filling academic vacancies to enhance research standing, post-graduate offerings, and academic leadership (see page 17)​​.

The University also periodically monitors staff retention, analysing average and median lengths of service, as well as staff exits. Figure S3.5 compares the lengths of service in 2021 and 2022. [CFR 3.2]  

Fig S3.5 Length of service 2021-2022.

Support for Employees

USP emphasises ongoing professional development and performance evaluation for its members. The institution has a comprehensive approach to professional development, including a three-tier staff review process involving individual staff members, supervisors, and staff review committees. This process is crucial for contract renewal decisions. Academic staff members are encouraged to apply for promotions, signifying their progression through academic ranks. The number of staff achieving higher academic levels through promotions serves as an indication of the University's commitment to the professional development of its academic personnel. In the 2022 academic promotions, 40 candidates applied, with 23 progressing to the next stage for reference checks.

The University provides professional development leave, allowing staff to engage in activities such as academic research, conferences, and training courses. Applications for professional development leave are considered and approved by respective Heads of Schools/Sections and, where applicable, the Staff Development Committee. In 2021, one staff member was granted training leave for PhD studies, and in 2022, two staff members were provided training leave for the same purpose

Fee concessions are also offered to all staff members to pursue part-time studies, with approved course units being tuition-free. The trend showing the number of staff members utilising fee concessions at USP since 2019 in shown in Figure S3.6 [CFR 3.3] 

Fig S3.6 Ongoing staff development. In this case, the figure shows staff members taking advantage of fee concessions to enrol in part-time studies at USP.

The effectiveness of HR-related practices described above is evaluated through climate surveys, turnover rates, internal promotions, and job satisfaction metrics.  However, the Employee Engagement Survey, which was last conducted in 2017, has not been resumed as initially planned for the end of 2023. This gap indicates a need for improvement in regularly assessing employee satisfaction and engagement. [CFR 3.2 and 3.3]

Equitable Access to Resources

USP's Strategic Plans and Annual Plans outline specific goals and strategies for advancing equity and inclusion in professional development. It includes objectives such as increasing the representation of women (refer to Standard 1, page 29) in leadership roles and expanding access to training resources. The Staff Development Committee plays a crucial role in overseeing these efforts. This committee reviews data on professional development participation, evaluates the effectiveness of initiatives, and provides recommendations for addressing any identified disparities. When disparities in access to resources are identified, USP addresses them through targeted policies and programmes. For instance, the Equal Employment Opportunities Policy ensures that all staff members have fair access to development opportunities and that recruitment and promotion practices are free from bias. The Disability Inclusiveness Policy mandates that all training facilities are accessible and that materials are available in formats suitable for employees with disabilities.

Fiscal, Physical, Technology, and Information Resources

USP’s resource planning and allocation strategies are meticulously aligned with its strategic goals. Financial stability is achieved through diverse revenue streams, proactive cost management, and consistent asset growth. The institution’s physical facilities and technological infrastructure are maintained and enhanced through strategic investments and regular upgrades. Comprehensive evaluations, stakeholder feedback, and continuous improvement processes ensure that resources are adequate, accessible, and equitably distributed to support the institution’s mission and objectives. 

Development and Integration of Plans 

USP effectively develops and integrates its strategic, enrolment, and other plans to ensure they align with the institutional mission and student needs. The 2024 Annual Plan serves as a comprehensive guide, highlighting the structured approach to monitoring progress against key performance indicators (KPIs) in areas such as student enrolment growth, research income, and commercial income. 

Projections and goals are informed by institutional data and feedback mechanisms, allowing for realistic and achievable targets. For instance, after experiencing a decline in student EFTS in 2022, the University adjusted its growth targets for 2023, showcasing its adaptability and responsiveness to past performance and current trends. The connection between enrolment plans and budgets is clear, with the 2024 budget assuming significant revenue from tuition fees and outlining specific targets for student enrolment. This direct linkage ensures that financial planning supports strategic enrolment goals effectively. 

In developing its plans, USP considers a range of internal and external factors, including financial sustainability, student satisfaction, and insights from external reviews such as the WSCUC compliance review and CFL external review. This comprehensive approach ensures that strategic planning is both informed and adaptable to changing circumstances.

Resource Planning and Allocation

USP employs a strategic approach to resource planning and allocation to support its educational and student success objectives. The institution’s resource planning includes realistic budgeting, enrolment management, and diversification of revenue sources. Annual budgets are developed and approved based on strategic priorities, ensuring that resources are allocated effectively to support institutional objectives, including investments in academic programmes, student support services, and infrastructure. [CFR 3.4]

USP's financial planning, governed by the Financial Planning, Monitoring and Control Policy, is integrated with its strategic goals, as evidenced by the development of three-year financial plans,namely, the University Grants Committee (UGC) Report and the Triennial Submission [CFR 4.1]. These plans undergo thorough review and approval processes involving multiple committees and stakeholders, ensuring that they are financially viable and support enrolment targets. These committees and stakeholders are listed in Figure S3.7. Various budget scenarios are developed to account for potential impacts on income and expenses, and sensitivity analyses are conducted to understand the financial implications of changes in enrolment and costs. [CFR 3.4] 

Fig S3.7 Nine Council committees oversee budget planning, allocation, and financial management.

Resource allocation is closely aligned with the institution’s mission to enhance student learning and success. Significant investments in digital infrastructure (refer to the Interim Report Action Summary, commendation 3)  and student services (refer to Standard 2, page 43) reflect this alignment, ensuring that resources are used effectively to support educational outcomes [CFR 4.1 and 4.3]. Financial policies at USP are designed to ensure transparency and accountability [CFR 1.3], with strict adherence to audit recommendations and consistent application of policies. This commitment to integrity in financial management is a cornerstone of the institution's operational effectiveness.

Financial Stability and Sustainability

The key financial insights summarised in this section are based on the publicly available USP publications, the 2023 Annual Report (from page 131) and the 2024 Annual Plan (from page 11).

Revenue

Fig S3.8 Incomes 2019 - 2023.  

USP has exhibited a resilient financial performance through its diverse revenue streams, which primarily include government grants, tuition fees, development grants, and other income sources such as interest from investments (see Figure S3.8). A significant boost to the University's financial health has been the reinstatement of Fiji's government grant, which has provided much-needed stability and confidence for the institution's ongoing operations. Despite the fluctuations in enrolment trends, particularly influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, the University has adapted to the shift towards online learning, which presents both challenges and opportunities for tuition revenue. Development grants remain a crucial component, enabling the University to fund specific projects and initiatives, with a stable inflow from international partners highlighting the continued support and trust in USP's mission.  

Expenditure 

Fig S3.9 Expenditures 2019 - 2023.

In terms of expenditure (see Figure S3.9), USP has effectively managed its operational costs amidst various challenges. The University has strategically allocated significant funds towards capital projects, such as the new Solomon Islands campus, which was made possible through funding from the Asian Development Bank. This investment not only enhances the University's infrastructure but also expands its capacity to serve the educational needs of the region. By maintaining a careful balance between operational and capital expenditures, USP ensures that it can continue to deliver quality education while investing in its future growth. 

Financial Performance Indicators 

The financial performance indicates that USP has a strong financial position to continue to provide excellent learning and teaching in the future [CFR 3.5]. The University reported an operating surplus in 2023, primarily driven by extraordinary income from insurance claims and government grant arrears. This surplus reflects the institution's ability to generate sufficient revenue to cover its expenses, thereby ensuring financial stability. Additionally, USP's liquidity and cash reserves remain robust, providing a safety net for unforeseen expenses and allowing for strategic investments in critical areas. 

Key Financial Ratios 

USP's financial health is further underscored by its favorable debt ratios and liquidity ratios. The debt to equity ratio is healthy, indicating that the University has not over-leveraged itself and retains a strong capacity to meet its financial obligations. High liquidity ratios demonstrate USP's ability to cover short-term liabilities, ensuring that the institution can maintain smooth operations and respond swiftly to any financial challenges that may arise. 

Challenges and Strategies 

Despite the positive financial outlook, USP faces challenges, particularly concerning enrolment declines that have impacted tuition revenue. To address this, the University has implemented strategies to attract more students, including enhancing online learning options and conducting targeted marketing campaigns. Effective cost management is also a priority, with ongoing efforts to rationalise the programmes and course offerings, optimise the workforce and consolidate space to ensure that resources are utilised efficiently. Recognising the importance of risk management, USP has identified financial sustainability and operational risks as key areas to address, with mitigation strategies being actively implemented. It has ring-fenced sufficient reserves to address its exposures to a number of financial risks such as natural disasters, debt repayments and addressing its deteriorating infrastructure.

Future Projections 

Looking ahead, USP is formulating a medium- to long-term strategy aimed at future-proofing its operating model. Central to this strategy are four key cross-cutting themes: Consolidation, Innovation, Transformation, and Sustainability—pillars of the Tactical Response Framework (refer to Section A, page 9). These themes reflect the University’s commitment to optimising costs in critical areas, while channeling investments into emerging and growing disciplines, workforce development, and essential projects that will secure long-term viability and sustainability.

Physical Facilities and Technological Infrastructure

USP ensures that its physical facilities and technological infrastructure are adequate to meet the needs of students, faculty, and staff. The institution utilises a Maintenance Policy and Procedure and Preventative Maintenance Plan (PMP) with a 10-year outlook, reviewed annually, to prioritise maintenance and capital investments. This ensures that the physical facilities are in good condition (determined by the A, B, C, D rating) and supports the institution's programmes and services. The Space Management Policy, executed by the Space Management Committee,  prioritises infrastructure resource allocation, focusing on occupational health, safety, and compliance certification, ensuring that physical spaces are optimally utilised (see E&I Services Annual Plan 2023).  The University, in addition, provides a range of ICT services and functions to support staff and student users, including computer labs, account management, training, high-speed internet access, network connectivity, and more. In 2023, Moodle, USP's LMS, was upgraded to Version 4.1x, resulting in better operating efficiency, a more user-friendly experience, and enhanced learning and teaching capabilities [CFR 3.6]. 

Evaluation and Enhancement of Resources

USP evaluates the sufficiency of its physical, technological, and information resources through regular scheduled inspections, stakeholder feedback, and technical inspection reports (see the Preventative Maintenance Plan). These evaluations inform maintenance priorities and capital investments. Workshops conducted by Estates and Infrastructure (E&I) Services engage key stakeholders, including students, staff, and school heads, to present their priorities, with outcomes distilled into annual plans guiding resource allocations and strategic initiatives. [CFR 3.6]

Continuous improvement processes, such as benchmarking and trend analysis, guide the Senior Management Team (SMT) during the annual budget review, ensuring that resource allocation aligns with the institution’s priorities and industry standards. Regular investments in internet/ISP connectivity, desktop equipment, and software licensing ensure that technology infrastructure is up-to-date and capable of supporting modern educational and administrative needs. [CFR 3.6 and 4.1]

Accessibility and Equity of Resources

USP ensures that resources are up-to-date and accessible through regular upgrades, comprehensive support services, and flexible learning platforms. The Disability Resource Centre (DRC) offers various services to students with disabilities, such as sign language interpreters, assistive technology, and physical accommodations, ensuring that students with disabilities can access resources equitably [CFR 1.2 and 1.5]. The institution provides flexible learning options, including online courses and distance education, allowing students from remote areas or with other commitments to access quality education. In October 2024, USP will open its newest facility in the Solomon Islands, built at the cost of US$15.4m, to host the University's public health academic programmes. [CFR 3.6]

The University offers a range of scholarships, grants, and financial aid programmes to support students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, ensuring equitable access to learning opportunities [CFR 1.2] (refer to Standard 1, pages 30 and 31). Surveys and feedback mechanisms, such as the Total Experience Survey (TES) and Course Experience Survey (CES), provide evidence of equitable access and the effectiveness of these resources in achieving their intended purposes [CFR 1.2, 1.5, 3.6, 4.1 and 4.3].

Organizational Structures and Decision-Making Processes

USP's organisational structures and decision-making processes are designed to support effective governance and leadership. The independent governing board ensures mission alignment, integrity, quality, financial stability, and sustainability. The leadership structure spans academic programmes, student support services, finances, and technology, promoting collaboration and strategic planning. Data-informed decision-making processes and regular evaluations enhance the institution’s ability to achieve its goals and support its mission. Transparent governance and accountability measures further ensure the effectiveness and integrity of the institution’s leadership and decision-making processes.

Governing Board Independence and Authority

USP operates with appropriate autonomy under the governance of an independent board, the USP Council (see Figure S3.10 on the next page) and the Statement of Roles and Responsibilities of the Council. The Council is the supreme governing body responsible for the institution’s mission, integrity, and oversight of planning, policies, performance, and sustainability. It ensures that the institution operates with the necessary independence and authority expected in higher education. The Council includes diverse members with a broad range of backgrounds, knowledge, and skills necessary to govern the institution effectively. [CFR 3.7, 3.8 and 4.7]

The governance structure is supported by several key committees, such as the Executive Committee, Finance and Resources Committee (FRC), Audit and Risk Committee (ARC), and Remuneration and People Committee (RPC). These committees provide specialised oversight in financial management, risk assessment, and human resource policies. The Council operates under a robust policy framework, including the Council Code of Conduct, Council Standing Orders, and specific Terms of Reference for Council committees, ensuring governance practices align with best practices and regulatory requirements. [CFR 3.7, 3.8 and 3.11]

Board Qualifications and Development

The USP Council members collectively possess the expertise needed to govern USP effectively. The Council webpage highlights the diverse backgrounds of Council members, including those in education, finance, law, and public administration. This diversity ensures a well-rounded governance body capable of addressing various challenges and opportunities. 

New board members undergo an orientation process that includes detailed briefings on institutional policies, strategic priorities, and governance responsibilities. Continuous development opportunities are provided to ensure members stay informed about higher education trends and governance best practices. This commitment to ongoing development enhances the board's capacity to govern effectively.[CFR 3.9 and 3.11]

Fig S3.10 USP's organisational and leadership structure.

Board Functions and Mission Alignment

The USP Council is actively engaged in ensuring the institution's mission alignment and overseeing integrity, quality, finances, and sustainability. Regular reviews and updates of the University’s mission and strategic goals are conducted, with specific KPIs and performance metrics ensuring alignment with institutional objectives (refer to Section A, pages 3 and 16). The Council's oversight functions include financial audits, strategic planning processes, and quality assurance reviews, maintaining high standards of integrity and quality across the institution (refer USP Council committees listed on page 55).

Leadership Structure and Effectiveness

Leadership at USP spans academic programmes, student support services, finances, and technology, with a clear hierarchy and defined roles for senior management. The Senior Management Team (SMT), which includes the Vice-Chancellor, Deputy Vice-Chancellors, and Heads of academic units, works collaboratively to further institutional goals and support students. 

Leadership performance is evaluated through regular reviews, and leaders are held accountable for their decisions and actions. The 2024 budget includes provisions for leadership training and development, reflecting the institution's commitment to enhancing management skills and ensuring effective leadership.

Data for Decision Making

USP employs a systematic approach to data collection, analysis, and dissemination to inform decision-making processes. Data are regularly and systematically disseminated internally and externally, analysed, interpreted, and applied in institutional decision-making. Key performance indicators (KPIs), financial reports, and strategic planning data ensure that decisions are based on comprehensive and accurate information. The Planning and Quality Office (PQO) enhances data integrity and integrated reporting dashboards, providing detailed and disaggregated data on student performance, human resources, and financial metrics to support decision-making across the institution. [CFR 3.10 and 3.11]

Institutional surveys, such as the Total Experience Survey (TES), Course Experience Survey (CES), Graduate Destination Survey (GDS), and Employer Satisfaction Survey (ESS), are conducted regularly. These surveys measure student satisfaction, course effectiveness, graduate employment outcomes, and employer feedback, providing comprehensive insights into various aspects of the student experience and employment market. [CFR 3.10]

Decision-Making Processes and Organisational Climate

Decision-making processes at USP are clearly understood by constituents and effectively followed. Timely studies gauge organisational climate and decision-making effectiveness, informing process improvements and fostering a culture of continuous enhancement. One such recent comprehensive and impactful study was commissioned by the USP Council In Novemeber 2019 and completed January 15, 2021. Titled Towards a Stronger USP, the report outlined a series of comprehensive recommendations for enhancing the processes governing Human Resources (HR), Finance, Governance and Management.

Since 2021, the University has diligently undertaken the implementation of the Commission's recommendations, which encompass the following key areas:

• Reviewing all USP policies (including practices) pertaining to remuneration, with the aim of aligning them with best practice;
• Evaluating the HR function to enhance efficiency and alignment with best practice;
• Conducting a thorough review of all HR policies to ensure their suitability and effectiveness;

• Reviewing the USP Governance arrangements to ensure alignment with best practice, while strengthening the Council's oversight of management decisions; and
• Undertaking a forensic examination of non-salary remuneration payments.

A recent progress report was released by USP Council. 

Empowerment and Culture of Improvement

USP empowers leaders and staff to recommend and implement improvements, fostering a culture of continuous improvement. Established processes allow leaders and staff to propose and implement changes, with recent examples including the restructuring of academic programmes and the introduction of new digital learning platforms. 

Significant changes driven by leadership and staff include enhanced student support services, improved digital infrastructure, and targeted interventions to improve student retention and completion rates. These examples reflect the institution's commitment to continuous improvement and innovation in support of its mission and goals. 

USP has also cultivated a diverse and talented faculty and staff body that is pivotal to achieving its educational goals. The University's commitment to professional development is evident through targeted initiatives such as the Women's Leadership Initiative and the Emerging Leaders programme. These programmes aim to enhance leadership skills and promote diversity within the institution's leadership ranks​​​​.

Introduction 

This chapter addresses Standard 4 of the WSCUC Standards of Accreditation, focusing on how The University of the South Pacific (USP) engages in sustained, evidence-based, and participatory reflection about how effectively it is accomplishing its mission, achieving its educational and student success objectives, and realising its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Quality Assurance Processes

The University Quality Policy document provides a clear framework for quality assurance at USP emphasising the institution's commitment to high standards in teaching, learning, and research. It outlines the institution’s commitment to upholding high standards of teaching, learning, and research by implementing comprehensive quality assurance mechanisms across all its operations. The document emphasises the following key aspects of USP's quality assurance process (see Figure S4.1):

• Commitment to Continuous Improvement. The policy details the institution’s commitment to continuous improvement through regular monitoring, evaluation, and review of academic programs and administrative processes. This is closely aligned with both internal and external quality benchmarks.
• Clear Roles and Responsibilities. The policy assigns clear responsibilities to various stakeholders, including faculty, administrative staff, and quality assurance committees, to ensure the effective implementation of quality standards across all levels of the institution.
• Alignment with External Standards. The quality assurance processes are designed to comply with national and international accreditation standards, ensuring that USP’s programs meet the expectations of both local and global educational frameworks. For example, USP regularly undergoes external reviews and follows guidelines like those from WSCUC and VQA as evidenced in other related documents​​.
• Student-Centered Approach. The policy highlights the importance of gathering and acting on student feedback, as well as ensuring student success through high-quality teaching, learning environments, and support services​​.

Figure S4.1 gives a graphical representation of USP's Quality Assurance Process. The flowchart captures the key steps involved, starting from the formulation of policy and standards, moving through implementation, data collection, and internal/external reviews, and concluding with continuous monitoring and improvement actions. Each step is interconnected to ensure a cycle of continuous improvement and alignment with both internal and external standards. ​ 

Fig S4.1 The diagram demonstrates how the USP QA process is continuous, starting from policy formulation, implementation, and monitoring, moving through reviews, adjustments, and back to policy revision based on the outcomes, thereby ensuring continuous improvement.

Programme Reviews and Accreditation

The University ensures a thorough approach to course design, development, and review. Key policies and procedures, such as the Approval of programme and Course Proposal, and various committee structures, align with national guidelines (refer to Standard 2, page 35) [CFR 4.1]. USP's meticulous course design process involves multiple approvals to meet outcome requirements. The institution conducts comprehensive programme reviews every seven years as part of its commitment to continuous improvement, actively contributing to the enhancement of its programmes.

Additionally, annual contributions from the respective Programme Advisory Committee (PAC) meetings ensure a timely evolution of courses and programmes to align with market demand [CFR4.1]. To-date, 26 programmes are internationally accredited. The primary purpose of accreditation at USP is to ensure that graduates from specific programmes are professionally qualified and competent. The University also recognises that external accreditation of its programmes by professional bodies is an important component of its quality assurance framework. It also increases employability of graduates.

Student Achievement and Data Analysis

To measure student achievement, the institution collects and analyses completion rates, retention rates, pass rates on exams, and student activity after graduation (refer to Standard 2, pages 41 to 43). 

The institution maintains commendable cumulative pass and retention rates averaging 77% throughout the review period [CFR 4.2]. Notably, female learners and those with disabilities achieve success rates on par with institutional averages, showcasing inclusive and equitable educational outcomes [CFR4.2].

However, institutional data has shown a general decline in USP student completion and retention rates (see Figure S4.2). Between 2016 and 2022, retention rates fell by 9%, decreasing from 77% in 2016 to 67% in 2022. The average retention rate during this period was 77%, which is lower than the peak of 79%. More concerning is the trend in completion rates, which dropped by 20% from 2015 to 2021, declining from 37% in 2015 to 18% in 2021. The average completion rate over this period was 33%, significantly lower than the peak of 42% [CFR4.2].

Fig S4.2 Completion Rate by Study Mode (7-year trend)

To address these concerning trends, USP is actively working on harnessing and analysing diverse datasets to enable critical and timely data-informed decisions, ensuring responses that meet students' needs [CFR4.2]. Over the past seven years, from 2017 to 2023, there has been a significant shift in how USP students approach their studies. Data indicates a 42% decrease in students using face-to-face learning modalities, with this mode of learning declining from 70% to 50% (see Figure S4.3).

Fig S4.3 Student Mode of Study (2017 – 2023)

While COVID-19 tested USP’s digital delivery platform, the institution had already begun investing in blended and online learning before the pandemic. Over the past seven years, these investments have increased by 39%, with digital delivery growing from 30% to 50% during the same period. The institution will continue to enhance access to and quality of digital connectivity at regional campuses and remote centres (refer to standard 3, page 57), and will focus on improving the quality of teaching in digital modalities (refer to Standard 2, page 41). This is particularly important given the adjustments to assessment methods during COVID-19. USP will also closely review the impact of technological investments on learning and teaching efficiency and operational delivery [CFR4.2, CFR4.5].

Institutional Research and Data Visualisation

The University has been actively enhancing its institutional research capabilities to provide evidence-based insights for strategic decision-making and policy development. Previously, an internally developed website, the Dashboard & Business Intelligence System (DIBS), was used by staff to access various student performance indicators [CFR4.4]. The University has now transitioned to Power BI, a leading analytics and visualisation tool. Dashboards for major reports, including EFTS, teaching workload, pass rates, and study modes, have already been established in Power BI. Additional key dashboards, such as those for student satisfaction and graduate employment, are currently in progress [CFR4.4]. 

Survey Framework and Feedback Loop

Recognising and acknowledging the importance of evidence-based decision making, USP administers a number of surveys in order to receive feedback from students, staff and external stakeholders of the University [CFR 4.3, CFR 4.5]. It has established a survey framework to inform all survey-related issues and matters. The University administers surveys to measure student experience in courses and programmes, as well as employment outcomes. These surveys include the Total Experience Survey (TES), Course Experience Survey (CES), and Graduate Destination Survey (GDS), and are conducted across all University campuses [CFR4.3]. The TES is an annual survey designed to assess undergraduate students' success in their programmes, covering student inclusion, engagement, learning, teaching, support services, and overall education experience. Administered online by the Planning and Quality Office, it helps inform improvements at the institutional level. The GDS is intended as a guide to the success rate of graduates in finding employment following completion of their degree. It provides an indicator whether or not University graduates are getting employed after completing their studies. Further, the information is helpful in understanding labour mobility especially on graduate intake by the different types of industries. 

The surveys align with Australia's national framework of Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT), with the TES and GDS being comparable to Australia's Student Experience Survey and Graduate Outcomes Survey.

The feedback from these surveys is used to make targeted improvements in course and programme delivery. In 2023, faculty were mandated to use the results of the CES to make necessary changes at the individual course level and provide regular updates to the Teaching Quality Committee (TQC) on actions taken to address the findings [CFR 4.5]. A standardised template for closing the loop on CES is in the process of being implemented. This process is being implemented to ensure that student feedback is effectively addressed to improve course quality [CFR4.3, CFR4.5].

Results from the CES show that undergraduate students have consistently been satisfied with the delivery of their courses from 2021 to 2024 (refer to Figure S4.4). However, to further enhance student success, Post-Graduate Student Experience (PGSE) and Post-Graduate Research Student Experience (PGRSE) surveys will be implemented in Semester 2, 2024, to gather comprehensive feedback. 

Figure S4.4 CES 2021 - 2024

Graduate Employment Outcomes

In 2023, USP graduates' overall employment rate (part-time and full-time) was 79%, with a full-time employment rate of 67% [CFR4.3]. These rates were relatively higher than those recorded in previous years. The overall employment rate for undergraduate Bachelor’s degree holders was 72%, while the full-time employment rate was 58%. The decreases in employment rates in 2020 and 2021 were expected due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which began around mid-2019 and subsequently led to weak labour market conditions. The lower employment rates indicated a low graduate recruitment drive from industries. A resurgence in employment was noticeable from 2022 onwards (see Figure S4.5). 

Fig S4.5 Graduate employment rates.

Continuous Improvement Initiatives

To help close the quality loop on institutional surveys, the University in 2022, synthesised the TES and CES learning resources and support services over a 4-year period from 2019 to 2022 [CFR 4.3 and 4.5]. These results suggested that while the University was providing adequate resources and support for students to succeed in their studies, there was scope for improvement in the areas of estates and infrastructure (teaching spaces, common areas), support services, technology and online learning tools [CFR 4.3]. The CES and TES thematic results corroborated with the findings from the University’s first Learning and Teaching Online Delivery Survey for teachers administered in December 2022.

The results indicated that the teachers needed greater training and support for using online learning tools. The University is working on addressing these issues through trainings provided by the USP Centre for Flexible Learning (see list of CFL workshops on the learning tools available to teaching staff).

Training on how to study online was also provided to students. Understanding the ongoing impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on learning and that students may find difficulty transitioning to higher education learning, USP introduced Semester Zero. The successful programme is self-paced which includes a range of fun activities and games embedded. Semester Zero allows students who missed the University scheduled Orientation week the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the University environment. 

Additionally, analysis of 5,000 data points for the CES survey was undertaken to improve the survey's free text question by categorising key areas to enhance root cause attribution and ease periodic analysis. The improved survey will be in effect from semester 2, 2024. Similar analyses of the TES are currently being undertaken to determine how the questions about support services might be further categorized for better root cause attribution. The GDS is an important survey that focuses on employment outcomes including employment rates of USP graduates. The University is currently working on implementation of the Employer Satisfaction Survey (ESS) to better understand the labor market in relation to employability of USP graduates. The ESS will complement the GDS to provide insights into regional labour market dynamics, helping to create improved educational and employment opportunities.

Institutional Improvement

The analysis of external reviewers' recommendations, regular engagement with stakeholders, and the need to "close the quality loop" have guided the USP’s continuous improvement initiatives.

Institutional Governance and Stakeholder Engagement

The governing board engages in self-evaluation and development, though recent disruptions have limited these activities. The last self-evaluation of the University Council as assessed by Council members was undertaken in November 2016 and the results presented to the May 2017 Council. The Council meetings in 2020 and 2021 were held virtually due to the challenges of Covid-19, which also presented challenges for self- evaluation. Recognising the need to identify the areas of improvement, the Council self-evaluation will be reinstated with revamped questionnaire in the second meeting of the USP Council in 2024. [CFR 4.8]

The University regularly reports on the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that measure the progress and success of its Strategic Plan to the University Council (refer to Section A, page 16). The monitoring of the Strategic Plan KPIs is undertaken by the USP Planning and Quality Office. Reports on USP Strategic Plan to the Council can be found here. Regular reporting and a Mid Term Review by the University Council ensure that progress is monitored and areas needing attention are addressed. Annual high-level consultations with development partners Australia and New Zealand allow reflection on partnership outcomes, evaluating relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, and future lessons based on the Strategic Plan’s priorities [CFR4.8].

USP engages stakeholders through student and staff forum meetings and meets regional campus staff and students during duty travels. The University of the South Pacific Students’ Association (USPSA) plays a very critical role in raising students’ issues and concerns on students’ matters relating to academic matters, campus life, facilities and student experience. Campus facilities quality is an issue highlighted by the student community and further amplified at the Student Council Meeting. The University, cognizant of student issues, addressed this for the Solomon Islands with the construction and completion of a new Solomon Island campus (refer to Standard 3, page 58). 

As a member of the Council of Regional Organisations of the Pacific (CROP) agency, USP engages with 18 Pacific Islands Forum Member Countries, participating in committee meetings, quarterly CROP Heads Meetings, and the annual Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting to discuss higher education, research, capacity building, and innovation in the Pacific. USP supports regional engagement through CROP Executives, Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS), and related meetings.

A significant contribution is the Pacific Regional Education Framework (PacREF), endorsed in 2018 by Forum Education Ministers, which focuses on developing the region’s capacity to deliver high-quality education and is supported by USP’s resources and personnel. The University is committed to promoting cooperation among partner agencies for effective PacREF implementation. Under PacREF initiatives, the Education programmes at USP have been reviewed and strengthened to meet the needs of the region. Under PacREF initiatives, the University, through its 3 implementing agencies (Discipline of Education, Pacific TAFE and the Institute of Education) collaborates with countries and other implementing agencies. Under the PacREF Policy Area 2, Learning Pathways, Pacific TAFE aims to develop and introduce a regionally relevant and sustainable intervention bridging programme for young people who are “out of school” to allow them to access further educational opportunities. The Institute of Education supports the following policy areas: Policy Area 1 on Quality and Relevance, Policy Area 3 On Student Outcomes and Well-being and Policy Area 4 on Teaching Profession. The Institute of Education hosts the Waka Moana Learning Hub, a regional learning platform for school teachers. In addition, the Institute also hosts the regional training mechanism for educational planners - the Pacific Educational Planners' Fono.

The establishment of the CRDU (refer to Section A, page 7) ensures continuity of curriculum transformation initiatives, even with leadership and or structural changes. The centralised curriculum unit will ensure a standardisation of curriculum, streamlined curriculum development and review which reduces duplication of efforts and increases efficiency, improved coordination and collaboration by facilitating collaboration and sharing best practices, effective responses to external stakeholders and accrediting agencies, and improved student learning outcomes and assessment plans. In 2022, the team collaborated with academic units to record postgraduate degrees (postgraduate certificate, postgraduate diploma, masters and doctor of philosophy) with the Fiji National Qualification register. The project requires the team to conduct workshops and programme alignment reviews with faculty members in order to standardise learning outcomes and assessments. All revisions to programme outcomes, alignments and assessments were presented in the relevant committees from board of studies through to senate. The project concluded in the recording of 100 Postgraduate programmes qualifications with Higher Education Commission Fiji.

Closing the Quality Loop

The University recognises the need to support the Academic Programme Review policy and procedures by formulating an internal academic programme review process. An internal academic programme review process will ensure ownership of internal monitoring of academic programmes and harness a culture of continuous improvement for student success.

To inform this internal review approach, the University is closing the quality loop by analysing consolidated recommendations from the external reviews for both academic programmes and support sections, undertaken from 2009 to 2022 in order to ascertain common issues and to ensure a more holistic approach to remediation and closure of action items. Implementation of the recommendations from external reviews has been partly affected by the impact of Covid-19 when the primary focus of the institution was to effectively deliver learning and teaching to students and maintaining financial viability.

To support closing the quality loop, USP is strengthening its institutional data and business intelligence capabilities and is working on improving data integrity and the development of integrated data reporting dashboards to inform decision-making. The Course Experience Survey (CES) results is being addressed by mandating the provision of CES results with actions to address concerns to the Teaching Quality Committee (TQC) from the third quarter of 2023. The University Planning and Quality Office (PQO) is strengthening both the CES and Total Experience Survey (TES) relevant question structures for ease of root cause attribution, reporting and remediation. PQO will commence reporting results for the updated TES in 2024 for the end of 2023 which aims to drive improvement in student support services areas at campus and programme levels.

Overall, USP will work on developing an Internal Quality Assurance Framework for monitoring and continuous improvement of the University’s operations. This will allow for an overarching framework for internal quality assurance that will embed all the existing initiatives described above with specific targeted outcomes. The owners of the functional areas will be identified in the Internal Quality Assurance Framework for accountability on closure of the loop on actions for improvement. The University is working on operationalisation of risk management at departmental, sectional and school levels.

Introduction

The self-study process for WSCUC reaffirmation has been an enriching journey, providing profound insights into our institutional strengths, challenges, and areas for growth. This reflection encapsulates the key learnings from the analysis presented in the essays of Section B, offering a coherent understanding of the current state of USP in relation to the WSCUC Standards. 

Standard 1: Defining Institutional Mission and Acting with Integrity

USP’s dedication to aligning its mission and vision with the evolving educational landscape and unique needs of the Pacific region stands out as a significant strength. The University’s strategic engagement with stakeholders and its comprehensive communication strategies have effectively enhanced the visibility and understanding of its core goals and values [CFR 1.7 and 4.8]. The proactive approach to embedding strategic priorities into daily operations and regular reporting ensures that the institution remains focused on achieving its goals and contributing to the well-being and resilience of Pacific communities [CFR 1.1, 3.11 and 4.1].

The institution's strong commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) through diverse policies and initiatives, together with its transparency and integrity practices, further solidifies USP’s reputation as a responsive and accountable institution. The effectiveness of USP’s DEI policies and frameworks is evident, as there have been no reported cases of discrimination within the context of the University's diversity. However, the self-study also highlighted areas for improvement that the University was already aware of through its internal processes, particularly in reducing gender disparity in academic and senior positions and enhancing the accessibility of its campuses [CFR 1.2, 3.6 and 4.5].

Additionally, the self-study identified the need for improving communication and transparency within the University. One specific recommendation is to ensure that the summaries and outcomes of internal committee meetings, such as the Academic Programme Committee (APC) and the Teaching Quality Committee (TQC), are circulated to all staff [CFR 1.7]. This practice will keep everyone well-informed and updated, fostering a more inclusive and transparent institutional culture.

While the University’s policies are thoroughly developed and guided by the policy development framework, there is a need to ensure that these policies are reviewed in a timely manner [CFR 4.1]. The issue of lapsed policies has been noted by the University, and this was once again highlighted through the self-review exercise. Addressing this will further strengthen the institution’s commitment to maintaining high standards of governance and accountability.

Standard 2: Achieving Educational Objectives and Student Success

The adoption of the Learning and Teaching Excellence Framework has been instrumental in aligning USPs educational objectives with its mission and vision. This framework ensures the robustness of degree programmes through rigorous quality assurance processes, including alignment with international standards and internal accreditation [CFR 2.1, 2.2 and 4.1]. However, the self-study revealed that academic governance mechanisms need strengthening to close the quality loop more effectively. The prolonged rate of programme reviews and the need for more efficient internal quality assurance processes indicate areas requiring immediate attention [CFR 2.4, 2,6 and 4.1].

Faculty members are crucial to the success of academic programmes, contributing through curriculum development, course design, and delivery. Their subject matter expertise and industry engagement ensure that programmes remain relevant and up-to-date. Despite these strengths, there is a need to further invest in professional development and institutional support for faculty members. Initiatives such as dedicated curriculum administrative support and ongoing professional development opportunities will continuously enhance faculty capacity to innovate and improve academic offerings  [CFR 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.3, 4.1 and 4.6].

The self-study highlighted the decline in retention and completion rates starting in 2021, primarily due to external factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The disparities in retention and completion rates across different study modes emphasise the need for targeted interventions. Investments in student relationship management systems and a comprehensive tactical response framework are critical steps toward improving student retention and completion rates [CFR 2.10, 3.10 and 4.3].

While USP offers a wide range of support services and co-curricular opportunities to enhance the student experience, there is a need for a more strategic evaluation framework to assess the effectiveness of these initiatives consistently. Implementing a robust evaluation process will help optimise resources and enhance the impact of support services, leading to improved student outcomes and satisfaction [CFR 2.13, 2.14, 4.1, 4.3 and 4.5].

Standard 3: Assuring Resources and Organizational Structures

Reflecting on Standard 3, USP has made significant progress in aligning its resources and organisational structures with its strategic objectives and commitment to educational excellence. This reflection highlights the institution's strengths, challenges, and areas for improvement, providing insights that will guide future development.

USP has shown strength in strategic resource management, particularly in aligning financial planning with institutional goals. The diversification of revenue streams and the implementation of tighter financial controls have contributed to financial stability [CFR 3.4 and 3.5]. Strategic investments in physical and technological infrastructure have ensured that resources remain accessible and effective for students, faculty, and staff [CFR 3.6, 4.1 and 4.3].

The governance and leadership structures at USP, led by the independent USP Council, have provided effective oversight and strategic direction. The diverse and skilled membership of the Council has been crucial in guiding the University's mission, integrity, and sustainability. [CFR 3.7, 3.8 and 4.8] The leadership structure, including key roles like the Vice-Chancellor and Deputy Vice-Chancellors, ensures comprehensive oversight across all domains [CFR 3.9].

Despite these strengths, challenges persist, particularly in financial sustainability and employee engagement. Declines in tuition revenue and government grants highlight the need for continued diversification of income sources and cost management [CFR 3.4, 3.5 and 4.3]. The gap in conducting the Employee Engagement Survey since 2017 indicates a need for regular assessments to better understand and address faculty and staff needs, enhancing organisational climate and retention [CFR 3.2 and 3.3].

Insights from this reflection will guide USP's future development by enhancing financial sustainability through innovative funding models and partnerships [CFR 3.4 and 3.5]. Regular employee surveys will be prioritised to foster an inclusive and supportive work environment [CFR 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3]. Additionally, refining governance and decision-making processes will strengthen data-informed practices, ensuring strategic initiatives are based on comprehensive information [CFR 3.10, 3.11 and 4.5].

This analysis of Standard 3 will catalyse USP's future development by encouraging proactive resource management and organisational improvements [CFR 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6]. Addressing challenges and building on strengths will enable USP to enhance institutional practices and support its mission of high-quality education across the Pacific region [CFR 3.7 and CFR 3.8]. Through continuous reflection and adaptation, USP will navigate the complexities of higher education and achieve sustainable growth and excellence [CFR 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 4.1, 4.4 and 4.5].

Standard 4: Creating an Institution Committed to Quality Assurance and Improvement

USP employs a range of initiatives for Internal Monitoring, encompassing Strategic Plan Monitoring, Financial Audits, Reviews of Academic programmes and Support Sections, Institutional Research, and Data Analysis, as well as adherence to the University Risk Management Policy and Procedures [CFR 4.1]. 

The strengths of Internal Monitoring lie in the institution's diverse range of monitoring initiatives, ongoing efforts to address external review recommendations and student feedback, and the recognition of the need for enhanced business intelligence capabilities [CFR 4.2, 4.3 and 4.5]

However, identified weaknesses include the absence of a consolidated framework for monitoring all functions, the lack of an internal academic programme review process, challenges in implementing recommendations due to the impact of Covid-19, the need for improved analysis of survey results, and the absence of standard reporting on actions addressing student feedback. 

Proposed actions for improvement involve the review and development of policies and frameworks, prioritised analysis of action items, strengthening institutional data and business intelligence capabilities, improving data integrity and the development of integrated data reporting dashboards to inform decision-making [CFR 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4].