Representatives from various University offices, academic units, and strategic committees gathered on 9 June 2026 for the first General Assembly of the ADNU 2030 Monitoring and Review Committees. The assembly marked the formal introduction of the proposed monitoring, review, and discernment mechanism that will guide the implementation of ADNU 2030: Road to Regnum Dei.
The program opened with a message from Dr. Janet Badong-Badilla, a member of the ADNU 2030 Strategic Planning Committee. She outlined the objectives of the assembly and situated the meeting within the broader implementation of the University’s strategic plan. According to Dr. Badong-Badilla, the assembly sought to introduce the proposed ADNU 2030 Monitoring, Review, and Discernment Framework, clarify the role of the monitoring and review committees, gather practical insights from stakeholders, identify existing institutional processes that may be incorporated into the framework, and solicit feedback before its formal adoption.
She also stressed that monitoring should go beyond tracking accomplishments and implementation milestones. A meaningful monitoring system, she noted, should also provide opportunities to reflect on mission effectiveness, institutional learning, and the ways in which the University’s values find expression in its programs and initiatives.
Dr. Marshal Murillo, Chairperson of the ADNU 2030 Strategic Planning Committee, then presented the proposed framework to the committee members. He discussed the rationale behind the proposal, its guiding principles, and the processes envisioned for implementation. The framework seeks to provide a systematic approach to monitoring progress, reviewing indicators of fruitfulness, identifying implementation bottlenecks, and informing institutional decision-making. It also aims to strengthen alignment between unit-level initiatives and the broader goals of ADNU 2030.
Following the presentation, committee members engaged in a discussion on the proposed mechanism. Participants raised questions on committee responsibilities, reporting arrangements, implementation realities, and long-term sustainability. The conversation also surfaced several existing reporting and assessment processes that may be integrated into the framework. These insights will help ensure that the monitoring and review mechanism remains practical, realistic, and responsive to institutional needs while avoiding unnecessary reporting burdens on offices and units.
