Portland Community College
PRE-4: Reporting Methodologies
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
N/A |
Stephania
Fregosi Sustainability Analyst Academic Affairs |
Narrative outlining the data collection process used in the preparation of this report:
Narrative outlining the data collection process used in the preparation of this report (required)
We began with a review in the Fall of 2024 at PCC’s STARS 2.2 report to determine which of the two assessment tools we should use and concluded that STARS 3.0 made the most sense for the college due to substantial changes in personnel and in the reorganization of the college. As the Sustainability Department was already building many new relationships across the institution, it was the perfect opportunity to ask new questions.
While some data is at our disposal year round (course offerings, energy data for example), data that is not in our control requires coordination with our institutional partners. For example, we worked with institutional effectiveness closely to get a better handle on our performance on institutional equity and with dining services to create a new structure for evaluating dining services.
We also took advantage of the college's efforts to gather information for the elective Classification for Community Engagement offered by the Carnegie Foundation. While this project won't be complete in time for us to earn STARS credit for community engagement, we were able to reduce some of our data gathering efforts with other offices.
These new data collection methods offset some of the shifts we've made in doing business around energy and waste due to COVID-19. As the college continues to reopen, we expect to regain these programs and come out even stronger.
For the majority of the credits, Institutional Characteristics are used from FY 2023 is used; however at times, FY 2023 data was unavailable. Nuances in energy reporting, commuting and water use may require differences in the calculation of campus space and the population due to the nature of the data. This is explained within each section of the report. For example, the commuting survey was last performed for employees and students in FY 2022, but we use that to compute our commuting emissions for FY 2023 using FY 2023 employee and student FTE counts.
List of personnel who led the reporting process (optional)
Stephania Fregosi, Sustainability Analyst
Briar Schoon, Associate Dean of Sustainability Strategies
List of personnel who led the reporting process:
Stephania Fregosi, Sustainability Analyst
Briar Schoon, Dean of Sustainability Strategies
List of additional personnel who contributed to the reporting process:
We would like to thank the following departments for their extensive contributions to gathering data.
Office of the President
Finance and Business Services
- Planning and Capital Construction
- Accounts Payable
- Procurement
Academic Affairs
- Teaching and Learning
- Institutional Effectivness
- International Programs
- Accessibility Ed and Disability Resources
- Community Based Learning
Student Affairs
- Basic Needs Sustainability & Leadership
- Multicultural Services
- Student Government
Operations
- Facilities Management Services
- Energy Management
- Environmental Health and Safety
- Buildings and Grounds
- Auxillary Services
- Dining Services
- Parking and Transportation
Information Technology
Other Committees
- SPARC
- Bee Campus USA
- Tree Campus USA
as well as our many public and community partners throughout the region.
Were students involved in the data collection process?:
Narrative outlining how students were involved in the data collection process:
The Sustainability Department has collaborated with PCC’s Geospatial Technology program to encourage students to take on course projects that help refine the college’s understanding of stormwater, greenspace and tree canopy.
Description of the internal data quality controls used in the preparation of this report:
Our Sustainability Analyst enrolled in the STARS 3.0 Workshop and used the tools to check for common errors. We made use of many of the templates that were provided by AASHE. Narrative were sent to our internal partners for review and revision, with particular attention paid to newer areas (e.g. dining, contracting and well-being and work). We also conducted a final review on each credit before submission.
In terms of quantitative checks, we conducted a reality check on compartive figures and reviewed credits that made use of institutional characteristics as a default to ensure that years, FTEs, and Building Space lined up with the correct data space.
Were any independent audits or external assurance processes used in the preparation of this report?:
Narrative outlining the independent audits or external assurance processes used in the preparation of this report:
Notes about the information provided for this credit:
Additional documentation for this credit:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.