Skip to Main Content

Quick Answers: Departmental Review Process


The University Quick Answers Working Group developed the following departmental annual review process to ensure the content in Quick Answers is accurate and meets style and web accessibility requirements.

It is up to each department to determine when and how they conduct their review, provided it takes place at least every 12 months and includes the requirements outlined here.

Note: The University Quick Answers Working Group has a separate review process for topics, style, and other system-based processes within Quick Answers.


Departmental Review Scope:

The review process covers existing Quick Answers that have already gone through the publishing review process.  It is assumed that all content published in Quick Answers has already met the standards outlined in the Style & Practice Checklist.



Once every 12 months all departments must actively verify that all content in their Quick Answers is accurate. Departments may review their content more frequently if desired.


Content includes:

  • Text and images
  • Links
  • Keywords/topics

Content should be updated throughout the year as needed. New content should go through the Style & Practice Checklist when it is created.

Content update responsibilities

Departments are responsible for the accuracy of any content they own, regardless of who owns the answer or where the content lives.

Departments are responsible for notifying others when their departmental content changes.

Any content issues discovered through the review process must be resolved before the review process is considered complete.  New content created during the review process must go through the new content publishing process.

Bring questions to the University Quick Answers Working Group for content owned by the departments represented on the group.  Contact Lisa Raymond for any questions regarding content owned by departments not represented on the working group.

Content Verification

The Departmental Review Process consists of answering the following questions for each Quick Answer.  Also, any issues discovered in answering the questions must be resolved before the review process is considered complete.

  • Does the question makes sense and fits how students ask the question?
  • Does the question need to be asked in more than one way? (e.g., should there be multiple questions with the same answer)
  • Is the content accurate as written?
  • Do the links go where they say they do and where intended by the author?
  • Do links and additional resources reflect appropriate resources throughout the university?
  • Are topics aligned with the content? 
  • Are additional topics needed?
  • Do keywords align with the content?
  • Are links, images, videos, and tables accessible?


Each department is responsible for tracking review information and for providing review reports upon request.  How this information is tracked is up to each department.

Required information:

  • date and editor for any updates
  • date and reviewer for all annual reviews

Catalog & Handbook Links

All links to the university catalog and handbook must be verified and updated before each March and September term start, as that is when the catalog links change. 

It is highly recommended that you inventory all the catalog and handbook links in your Quick Answer content so that you can easily find the impacted answers.

Things to consider

When creating your departmental review process, you may find it helpful to consider the following questions.

  • Who does the review?
  • How frequently do you review your content? (at least once every 12 months is required)
  • When do you do the review? (ongoing, all at once)
  • How do you integrate the catalog link review into the general content review?
  • Do you need a tracking system beyond what is required by the review process outlined here?
  • How do you want to do the review? (alphabetical by question, by views; who does what—one person checks links, one person checks content, or one person does all the reviews for each answer)
  • What is your process for knowing what has been reviewed and what hasn't?
  • How/when will you update any content issues discovered in the review process?
  • How do you determine that the reviews are done correctly? (e.g., if GAs are doing the reviews, does someone need to spot check what they are doing)
  • Who is the spokesperson for reaching out to other departments?  Who should other departments contact about your department's content?
  • Do content changes need to tracked beyond what is required by this review process?