| Overall Rating | Bronze - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 33.44 |
| Liaison | Elizabeth Masuen |
| Submission Date | April 6, 2018 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
Metropolitan Community College
IN-18: Pre-Submission Review
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
0.50 / 0.50 |
Sarah
Murray Coordinator of Sustainable Practices Campus Planning and Sustainability |
The name, title, and organizational affiliation of each reviewer:
Pauline Laughlin, Assistant to the Vice President for Administrative Services, Metropolitan Community College
A brief description of the review process:
The reviewer received access to AASHE STARS and the completed (draft) submission. The reviewer compared MCC's responses to other internal systems (internet, staff source, etc.) for confirmation. If the internal response did not match MCC's submission, the reviewer made note on the provided STARS reviewer sheet. Once the internal review was completed, the reviewer sent it to the STARS point person, who responded to the reviewers comments via the STARS Reviewer sheet and sent back to the internal reviewer. Internal reviewer checked for accuracy and resubmitted that all clarifications/edits had been met and returned to STARS point person.
Which of the following describes the review process?:
Affirmation from the reviewer that the submission has been reviewed in full and that any identified inconsistencies have been addressed:
Copy of the completed STARS Review Template:
Affirmation from an additional reviewer that the submission has been reviewed in full and that any identified inconsistencies have been addressed:
Copy of the completed STARS Review Template for the 2nd reviewer:
Affirmation from a 3rd reviewer that the submission has been reviewed in full and that any identified inconsistencies have been addressed:
Copy of the completed STARS Review Template for the 3rd reviewer:
Affirmation from a 4th reviewer that the submission has been reviewed in full and that any identified inconsistencies have been addressed:
Copy of the completed STARS Review Template for the 4th reviewer:
The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
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.