Leveraging an Interprofessional and Collaborative Task Force in Application for the Carnegie Foundation Elective Classification for Leadership for Public Purpose

ABSTRACT Through the American Council on Education, the Carnegie Foundation introduced the Elective Classification of Leadership for Public Purpose (EC‐LPP) in 2022. Application for this formal recognition is a voluntary but rigorous process involving the gathering and presentation of a variety of evidence of institutional indicators, concluding with a thorough third‐party review and status decision. The designation was initially piloted in partnership with 13 institutions, with 9 founding institutions successfully completing the process in 2021; however, no published work to date was available to provide guidance or insight for the next application round (American Council on Education, 2023). The purpose of this article was to describe the process employed at a Carnegie Special Focus Institution whereby an interdisciplinary team of stakeholders was charged to create, convene, and deploy the necessary processes and information in order to make an application for the 2024 cycle. Given the relative newness of the designation and the interest in the EC‐LPP designation by a variety of institutions across the country, it was anticipated that the process employed and lessons learned locally would be beneficial for other individuals and/or institutions considering future application(s). Summary Collaborative Framework for EC‐LPP Application: The paper outlines a 6‐week strategic process involving interdepartmental collaboration, emphasizing the importance of leadership, teamwork, and stakeholder engagement for institutions pursuing the Carnegie Elective Classification for Leadership for Public Purpose (EC‐LPP). Challenges in Organizational Structure: The manuscript highlights the complexities posed by decentralized structures, such as autonomous academic units, which can hinder cohesive data collection and narrative alignment, underscoring the need for institution‐wide coordination. Strategic Insights for Leadership Programs: The authors identify gaps in learner engagement in leadership initiatives and suggest expanding leadership frameworks to include student‐facing programs, ensuring institutional alignment with EC‐LPP's public purpose objectives. Lessons from the Feedback Process: Though the initial application was unsuccessful, the review panel's feedback provided actionable insights for improving future submissions, such as articulating leadership initiatives’ impact more broadly and refining assessment methods to demonstrate institutional commitment to leadership development.