Audit Report of G. H. College of Engineering, Nagpurghrce.raisoni.net/teqip17/AU1011.pdfTECHNICAL EDUCATION QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME (TEQIP) PHASE‐II Performance Audit Report

TECHNICAL EDUCATION QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME (TEQIP) PHASE‐II

Performance Audit Report of G. H. Raisoni College of Engineering,

Nagpur

Performance Auditor: Dr. P.D. Porey

Director, SVNIT, Surat

20th June to 22nd June 2013

NATIONAL PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT (NPIU) EdCIL House, 4th Floor, Plot 18‐A, Sector 16‐A

NOIDA ‐ 201 301, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh

2

3

Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat

Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013

Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra

Table‐1: Project Implementation

Sl. No.

Aspect

Perceived score,

out of 10

Performance Auditors Observations/Suggestions

1. Progress in securing Autonomous Institution status from the affiliating University & the UGC within 2 years of joining the Project OR Effectiveness of utilization of academic autonomy possessed/ obtained ( see Table‐26 in PIP)

08.00

Institute is Autonomous since May 2010 vide UGC Letter No. F.22‐ 1/2010(AC) dated 25/5/2010.

Institute has opted for one Complete Autonomy in One go.

Institute has adopted National knowledge commission’s 2008 report for designing scheme and syllabus.

The BOS has representatives of industry, professors from eminence repute like IIT and NIT, student representatives, alumni, and in house specialized faculties.

2. Sufficiency and quality of academic buildings

08.00

Sufficient Academic buildings are available with reasonably good quality and ambience. Institute has well air‐cooled Auditorium of 1000 capacity and air cooled gym, Indoor sports room, Conference rooms, Board room, Smart classrooms, laboratories.

4

3. Progress/achievement in starting new PG programs as evidenced by:

Securing AICTE approval

Establishment of

laboratories

Adequacy of student

enrolments

Cumulative number of

assistantships granted

08.00

As mentioned in PIP, Institute could start 3 programs out of 5.

AICTE has approved 3 PG Programes. They are Mobile Technology, Transportation Engineering and Communication Engineering.

AICTE has been approached For approval of 2 PG Programes in Structural Engineering and Power Electronics & Drives.

Three Specialized laboratories related to new Post Graduate programmes are established.

Almost all Post Graduate seats are filled up.

Institute has offered total 10 teaching assistantship for 2012‐13.

4. Progress/achievement in strengthening existing PG programs as evidenced by:

Establishment of proposed laboratories

Adequacy of student enrolments

Cumulative number of assistantships granted

08.00

All laboratories are for existing PG programmes are having requisite equipments and software.

All existing Post Graduate seats are filled upto 2012‐2013, admission process is still going on.

For 2012‐2013 total 10 teaching assistantships have been provided. Good practices of RRC, RPC, PG project review at desired stages of PG

rogrammes.

At least One Technical Paper is mandatory for submission of dissertation.

5. Progress/achievement in strengthening existing UG programs in Govt funded andaided institutions only as evidenced by: Establishment of proposed

laboratories Adequacy of student enrolments

N A

Not Applicable since it is only for Govt funded and aided institutions only

5

6. Improvements in Faculty Development as evidenced by:

Percentage/ increase in percentage of faculty benefiting from the Core Module of pedagogical training

Percentage of / increase in percentage of faculty benefiting from the Advanced Module of pedagogical training

Percentage of faculty with UG qualification registered/deputed for improving their qualification ( see Section‐3, 4(b) on page 20 of PIP)

Percentage of faculty deputed for subject domain training, seminars,etc. (faculty benefiting from subject domain training are required to share their gains with peers and also put their report on training on institution’s web site)

07.00

40% of faculty members are benefited in pedagogy training. 20% of faculty members are benefited in Advanced Module of

pedagogical training.

15% of faculty with Under Graduate qualification is deputed for improving their qualification.

35% the faculty deputed for subject domain training, seminars, etc.

2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13

From Externally Funded 2991880 2334106 20861404

From Consultancy Rendered 109672 4000 215825

From Training Programs Conducted 1943636 1946288 3800391

From Rental of Institutional Facilities 923000 1036000 102900

From Interest Earned Bank 910277 2218433 3637132

From Others 58395681 26582909 6413825

7. Generation, retention and utilization of the non‐tuition fee revenue generated through various activities

07.00

(e.g. any saving from block grant, Donations from alumni & charitable organization etc.)

6

8. Engineering faculty positions in terms of:

Reduction in vacancies

Increase in faculty appointed on regular basis

Increase in the number of faculty with at least a Masters degree

07.00

174 out of 256 faculties are appointed on regular basis (68%)

12% Increase in the number of faculty with at least a Masters degree.

9. Improvements in placement rate of UG pass outs

08.00

For UG Programmes it is Good

For post graduate placement is 100

10. Enhanced interaction with industry as evidenced by:

Increase in industry personnel registered for Masters & Doctoral programs

Increase in industry personnel trained by the institution in knowledge and/or skill areas

Increase in the number of consultancy assignments secured by the institution

Increase in the number of students’ and faculty visits to and/or training in industry

Increase in involvement of industry experts in curricula & syllabi improvements, laboratory improvements, evaluation of students and delivering expert lectures

Increase in the number of sandwich programs between industries and the institution

07.00

There is increase in industry personnel registered for Masters & Doctoral programs

69 industry personnel trained by the institution in knowledge

and/or skill areas

13 consultancy assignments secured by the institution

More than 100% Increase in the number of students’ and faculty visits to and/or training in industry

Good involvement of industry experts in curricula & syllabi improvements, laboratory improvements, evaluation of students and delivering expert lectures

7.55

7

Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat

Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013 Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra

Table 2. Performance Audit ‐ Implementation of Institutional Reforms

Sl. No.

Aspect

Perceived Score, out

of 10


1. Effectiveness of faculty evaluation bystudents as evidenced by:

Percentage/ increase in percentage of faculty evaluated by students in one or more subjects

Are results of evaluation properly used for teacher improvement?

10.00

100% of faculty evaluated by students in one or more subjects

Yes, results of evaluation properly used for teacher improvement by HoD & Dean‐Academics. Counseling of faculty is done and if required training is provided.

2. Establishment of four funds and their sizes

10.00

Corpus Fund : 11 lacs, Faculty Development : 11 Lacs, Equipment replacement Fund : 11 Lacs, Maintenance Fund : 11 Lacs

8

3. Offer of incentives to faculty for participation in consultancy, R&D and continuing education programs offered by the institution

10.00

Institute has well defined norms approved by BOG for promoting external interface and faculty competency.

10% incentive of the research grant from management’s share for getting grant from external agency.

Rs.5000/‐ for each referred journal publication. Rs.10000/‐ for each Ph.D. awarded under faculty

Rs.5000/‐ each for guiding Ph.D. student. Rs.30000/‐ for each patent in two stages – Rs.15000/‐ at the time of

filing patents and Rs.15000/‐ on grant of patent.

Reimbursement of publication fee / print fee of journal. Reimbursement of registration fee and TA/DA for attending

National & International Conferences. Book grant

Seed Money for R & D project. 70% of consultancy revenue to faculty. 50% fee concession for Ph.D.

50% of revenue generated out of CEP to faculty. And so on

10.00

9

Performance Auditors Report Name of Performance Auditor : Dr.P.D.Porey, Director SVNIT Surat


Table‐3 Performance Audit ‐ Improvement in Administrative and Managerial Efficiencies

S. No. Aspect Perceived

Score, out of 10


1. Modernization and decentralization of administration and financial management

07.00

Organization chart available and administrative powers are decentralized.

Statutory and non statutory committees Dean‐Structure is exist. Financial powers are given to Deans, Heads

2. Responsiveness to students academic and non‐academic requirements

04.00

Various Committees do exist but feedback from students reveals that there is need to improve the system for Students Response.

3. Responsiveness to faculty requirements

04.00

Various Committees and processes do exist but feedback from Faculty Members reveals that there is need to improve Responsiveness for the requirements of Faculty Members.

4. Utilization of institutional resource s 08.00

Optimal utilization of institutional resources.

10

5. Maintenance of academic and non ‐

academic infrastructure and facilities

08.00

Maintenance Cell takes care of infrastructure and facilities required for academic and non‐academic purpose.

Maintenance of computer and hardware, printer is in‐house.

Annual Maintenance contract system is in place

6. Extent of delegation of administrative and financial decision making powers to senior functionaries

08.00

Delegation of powers and responsibilities to senior functionaries like Deans & HoDs in the form of various portfolios being handled and committee incharges. 1. Board of Governors Unlimited 2. Head of Institution for: (a) single purchase of equipment, and (b) recurrent expenditure Unlimited 3. Dean Rs. 50,000/‐ 4. Heads of Department Rs. 50000/‐

6.50

11



Table 4. Performance Audit ‐ Quality of Education and Research


Score, out of 10


1. Improvements in curricula and /or syllabi N A Since First batch of Student is in Final, It is not applicable

2. Relevance of curricula and syllabi

08.00

Care has been taken to include requirements of Industry by involving persons from Industry in the relevant BOS. Emphasis has been given on interdisciplinary contents. Open electives are also introduced. General proficiency courses are also part of curriculum.

3. Improvement in teaching ‐learning processes as evidenced by:

Use of teaching aids Continuous evaluation through quizzes, assignments, mid‐semester examinations, etc.

Sharing of answer scripts with students and explanation of the evaluation carried out Introduction of flexibility in program offerings Increased availability of adequate electives

07.00

Interactive smart boards, LCD Projectors, NPTL Lectures, Online Journals are used, activity based learning is adopted. Continuous Evaluation System do exist Answer sheets are shown to the students after examination and grievances if any are resolved.

number of electives are as below for each department

Department Electives Choices

Electrical Engg 3 5

Civil Engg 3 6

Mechanical Engg 3 6

IT 3 5

CSE 5 5

ETC 3 5

ETRX 3 5

12

4. Progress in securing accreditation of eligible UG & PG programs ( institutions are to achieve target of 60% of eligible UG & PG programs accreditedand/or applied for within 2 years of joining theProject)

10.00

All the eligible Under Graduate programmes are accredited and re‐accredited ad applied for second cycle of reaccreditations in December 2012. Out of nine eligible Post Graduate Programs, three are accredited upto 2014, for six programmes visit is over and result is awaited

5. Increased collaboration with industry in R&D as evidenced by:

Increase in number of joint and industry sponsored R&D work undertaken

Increase in financial contribution by industry for R&D

02.00

There is a need to improve the R&D activity in association with Industries.

6. Increase in percentage of revenue fromexternally funded R&D projects and consultancies in the total revenue of

05.00

8.5% Increase in percentage of revenue from externally funded R&D projects and consultancies in the total revenue of the institution from all sources

7. Increase in the number of publications in refereed journals

03.00

There is a need to improve upon publication of Research Papers in Referred Journals.

8. Increase in the number of patents filed 10.00 18 patents filed during TEQIP‐II as compared to 5 pre‐TEQIP.

7.14

13


Dates of Performance Audit : 20‐06‐2013 to 22‐06‐2013

Name of Institution with location : G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering Nagpur, Maharashtra

Table 5. Performance Audit ‐ Performance in the Governance of Institutions

The objective of institutional Governance with review is to assist institutions, using evidence –based approach, in their self assessment of current Governance Practice. A thorough review will indicate the level of effectiveness of institutional Governance and the Governing Body and identify action points for improvement. It will also indicate that:

The conduct of the Governing Body is an accordance with the standards of behavior that the public should rightfully expect.

The Governing Body and the individual Governors are exercising their responsibilities in the interest of the institution as a whole.

The Review has been undertaking by a Group who have internal and external credibility to undertake such exercise.

INSTITUTIONAL GOVERN ANCE REVIEW TEMPLATE Perceived Score,

out of 10 Performance Auditors

Observations/Suggestions

A. PRIMARY ACCOUNTABILITIES

SELF‐REVIEW QUESTIONS

Has the Governing Body approved the institutional strategic vision, mission and plan – identifying a clear development path for the institution through its long‐term business plans and annual budgets?

10.00

Yes

Has the Governing Body ensured the establishment and monitoring of proper, effective and efficient systems of control and accountability to ensure financial sustainability

10.00

Yes

Is the Governing Body monitoring institutional performance and quality assurance arrangements?

10.00

Yes

14

Has the Governing Body put in place suitable arrangements for monitoring the head of the institution’s performance?

Yes

B. OPENNESS & TRANSPARANCY IN THE OPERATION OF GOVERNING BODIES

Does the Governing Body publish an annual report on institutional performance?

10.00 Yes

Does the Governing Body maintain, and publicly disclose, a register of interests of members of its governing body?

10.00

Yes

Is the Governing Body conducted in an open a manner, and does it provide as much information as possible to students, faculty, the general public and potential employers on all aspects of institutional activity related to academic performance, finance and management?

10.00

Yes

C. KEY ATTRIBUTES OF GOVERNING BODIES

Are the size, skills, competences and experiences of the Governing Body, such that it is able to carry out its primary accountabilities effectively and efficiently, and ensure the confidence of its stakeholders and constituents?

10.00

Yes

Are the recruitment processes and procedures for governing body members rigorous and transparent? Does the Governing Body have actively involved independent members and is the institution free from direct political interference to ensure academic freedom and focus on long term educational objectives?

10.00

Yes

Are the role and responsibilities of the Chair of the institution and the Member Secretary serving the Governing Body clearly stated?

10.00

Yes

Does the Governing Body meet regularly? Is there clear evidence that members of the governing body attend regularly and participate actively?

10.00

Yes

15

D. EFFECTIVENESS AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW OF GOVERNING BODIES

Does the Governing Body keep their effectiveness under regular review and in reviewing its performance, reflect on the performance of the institution as a whole in meeting its long‐term strategic

10.00

Yes

Does the Governing Body ensure that new members are properly inducted, and existing members receive opportunities for further development as deemed necessary?

10.00

Yes

E. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE

Does the Governing ensure regulatory compliance* and, subject to this, take all final decisions on matters of fundamental concern of the institution.

08.00

Yes

Does the regulatory compliance include demonstrating compliance with the ‘not‐for‐profit’ purpose of education institutions?

08.00

Yes

Has there been accreditation and/or external quality assurance by a national or professional body? If so, give details: name, status of current accreditation etc

10.00

YesNAAC accredited with ‘A’ Grade w.e.f. 2012 and NBA Accreditation details are as belowl:

Date of Accreditation Programmes Accredited for 3/5 years File No. B.E. Electrical Engg. 3 years B.E. Electronics Engg. 3 years

6/5/2002

B.E. Mechanical Engg. 3 years

NBA/24 BRD‐AIR 2002

11/2/2003 B.E. Computer Science & Engg. 3 years NBA/ACCR‐98(11)/2001 B.E. Electronics & Telecommunication Engg. 5 years 18/5/2007 B.E. Information Technology 5 years

NBA/(Review) ACCR‐98/2002

2/3/2009 B.E. Civil Engg. 3 years NBA/ACCR‐98/2002

9.12

16

B.E. Electronics Engg. 21/3/2007 B.E. Electrical Engg.

Re‐accredited for 5 years NBA/(Review) ACCR‐98/2002

B.E. Computer Science & Engg. Re‐accredited for 5 years 18/5/2007 B.E. Mechanical Engg. Re‐accredited for 3 years

NBA/(Review) ACCR‐98/2002

B.E. Civil Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Electrical Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Mechanical Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Electronics Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation B.E. Computer Science & Engg. Applied for Re‐Accreditation

18/12/2012

B.E. Information Technology Applied for Re‐Accreditation M.Tech. Heat Power Engg. 19/5/2009 M.Tech. Computer Science & Engg.

3 years NBA/ACCR‐98/2008

3/6/2009 M.Tech. Integrated Power System 3 years NBA/ACCR‐98/2008 28/3/2011 M.Tech. Electronics Engg. 3 years 28‐199/2010‐NBA

M.E. Embedded Systems & Computing 22/9/2011 M.E. Wireless Communication & Computing

3 years 28‐199/2010‐NBA

M.Tech. VLSI ‐‐ 11/8/2011 M.Tech. CAD/CAM

Visit Over, Result Awaited

M.Tech. Heat Power Engg. M.Tech. Integrated Power System M.Tech. Computer Science & Engg.

‐‐

M.Tech. Environmental Engg.

Visit Over, Result Awaited ‐‐

17

Table 6. Performance Audit ‐ Support to Weak Students


Score, out of 10


1. Percentage of students that complete the full first year and transit successfully to Second Year

09.00

2010‐2011 – 97.70%2011‐2012 – 98.86% 2012‐2013 – 98.90%

2. Effectiveness of techniques used for identifying weak students

09.00

Following is the criteria adopted to identify weaker students:

• Three diagnostic tests were conducted for all students. • Class assessment examinations (CAE) are treated at par with diagnostic

tests. CAEs are conducted in all subjects at regular intervals. • Performance in CAE‐1, CAE‐2, CAE‐3 is assessed. Remedial teaching is

commenced immediately after CAE‐1. • Students scoring less than 40% marks (between 0‐8 marks out of 20) in

all or any of the three subjects are considered weak. • For 2013‐14, an online common diagnostic test based on 12th standard

syllabi shall be administered on all students admitted to First year B. E.

3. Conduct of remedial teaching throughout academic session

09.00

Remedial teaching is done throughout academic session. 873 (Even Semester 2011‐2012 & Odd Semester 2012‐2013)

4. Conduct of specialized soft skills and professional skills training

08.00

Specialized soft skills and professional skills training is conducted regularly.

5. Increase in the number of campus interviews

05.00

Efforts are seen for enhancement of placements but there is no improvement in campus interviews.

6. Establishment and functioning of a Finishing School

05.00

Sincere efforts have been made to teach various skills to the students so that chances of their employability will increase.

7. Increase in the number of internal and external students that attend high intensity training conducted by the Finishing School

05.00

Efforts are made by providing course on Oracle, Courses by Tata Technologies,

IBM, National Instruments, CL express course, Android course by NES Pune etc.

7.14

18

Improvements noticed on shortcomings reported during earlier Performance Audits NOT APPLICABLE SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST AUDIT REPORT

Brief statements on continuing shortcomings and reasons thereof NOT APPLICABLE SINCE THIS IS THE FIRST AUDIT REPORT

Recommendations for Mentors

MAY PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR IMPROVING R & D ACTIVITIES SO ALSO FOR INTERACTION WITH FACULTY MEMBERS FROM INSTITUTIONS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE FOR QUALITY RESEARCH JOINT R&D PROPOSALS, INTERACTION WITH INDUSTRY

Documents

Audit Report of G. H. College of Engineering, Nagpurghrce.raisoni.net/teqip17/AU1011.pdfTECHNICAL EDUCATION QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME (TEQIP) PHASE‐II Performance Audit Report