Framework of the Quality Assurance System at UAD

Ahmad Dahlan University (UAD) has a framework for institutional quality improvement that focuses on four main aspects: Planning, Implementation, Evaluation, and Improvement. This is aimed at ensuring a progressive and sustainable workflow in the implementation of the quality assurance system. The four main aspects of the Quality Assurance System at Ahmad Dahlan University (SPM-UAD) are as follows:

In the first subsystem of the Quality Assurance System, which is the planning subsystem (PLAN), several fundamental aspects need to be prepared, including:

1. The formulation of academic quality policy. The academic quality policy is formulated and established by the university’s quality team, faculties, bureaus, institutions, and bodies. The formulation of this policy refers to the organization’s vision, mission, and objectives. In addition, the needs of stakeholders also become a primary consideration, manifested through societal needs, industrial needs, and professional needs.
2. In the next stage, the university team, faculties, bureaus, institutions, and bodies establish quality objectives and quality standards. These quality standards contain key performance indicators in the context of implementing the quality policy. Additionally, the quality standards also include quality items that reflect the organizational health in various quality areas.
3. In the subsequent stage, the quality policy and quality standards are operationally translated into quality guidelines. This document comprises various steps that need to be taken to implement the quality policy and achieve quality standards.
4. One component of the quality guidelines is the procedure manual. The procedure manual explains the various stages of work that must be followed to complete specific tasks within the organization. This Procedure Manual is designed to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of efforts to achieve academic quality standards.
5. Work patterns are also regulated through work instruction documents that assist each personnel in the organization in independently completing their work according to their job descriptions.
6. Within the planning subsystem, various forms and supporting documents are also designed for the implementation of activities, including various monitoring instruments, evaluation tools, and quality audit documents.
7. At the program level, the study program must develop graduate competencies and program specifications that demonstrate various competencies designed by the program and the efforts developed to achieve these graduate competencies.

The next quality framework is the implementation subsystem (DO). In this subsystem, at every level of the organization, including the university, faculties, bureaus, institutions, bodies, and study programs, various activities are carried out to implement quality policies and achieve quality standards. At this stage, every implementation of work programs, quality guidelines, procedure manuals, and others must be recorded at all times. These activity records (quality records) are crucial to support the effectiveness of monitoring, evaluation, and quality audits. Therefore, every organizational unit must have a mechanism for managing quality records effectively.

Another subsystem that builds the quality framework is evaluation (CHECK). The evaluation stage is conducted to assess the implementation efforts of quality policies and the fulfillment of quality standards. The evaluation system is referred to as Quality Audit (AM). This AM-UAD includes desk evaluation activities and visitations. Quality audits are conducted routinely once per semester. The management of quality audits is under the coordination of the Quality Assurance Body (BPM) upon the audit order from the university leadership and involves trained auditors appointed by the Rector. The results of these audits for the university, faculties, bureaus, institutions, bodies, and study programs are improvement plans (ACTION).

At the improvement stage, university leadership, faculties, bureaus, institutions, bodies, and study programs develop follow-up plans in response to the results of monitoring and evaluation. The results of monitoring and evaluation, as well as the follow-up plans, must be periodically reported to the Rector.