Student Equity Steering Committee
CALL FOR PROPOSALS
Deadline June 30, 2015
Overview:
LBCC’s Student Equity Plan was submitted to the Chancellor’s Office following Board of Trustees’ approval on
December 9, 2014. Student Equity funding is provided to address disproportionate impact among students based
on differences in ethnicity, gender, age, disability, income, foster youth, and veterans. The call for proposals is
open to all faculty, staff, and administrators to submit projects designed to address the equity gaps in student
success that have been identified at LBCC. Please note that this calendar year there will be three calls for
proposals: mid-spring, mid-summer, and mid-fall.
The Student Success Committee will review the proposals and make recommendations to the Student Equity
Steering Committee. The Student Equity Steering Committee will make the final recommendations regarding the
allocation of resources for approved projects. Each proposal will be evaluated and ranked using the Proposal
Rating Rubric (See pp. 4-5). Approved projects can begin immediately and can be short-term or multi-year.
Proposals are due to Reauna Wong (rwong@lbcc.edu; mail code Y21) in the School of Student Success no later
than 4 p.m. on Tuesday, June 30, 2015. Proposals received after 4 p.m. will not be considered for this round of
proposal funding but will be held for future funding rounds. Please provide both an electronic copy and an
original copy with the required signatures. If you have any questions, contact: Karen Rothstein
(krothstein@lbcc.edu, ext. 4113) or Shauna Hagemann (shageman@lbcc.edu, ext. 4830)
Expectations for Funded Projects:
If the proposal is funded, the individuals responsible for the project will be required to collaborate with the Office
of Institutional Effectiveness to provide data for at least one measurable objective that supports achievement of
the equity goal the project is designed to address. Project leaders should make sure that the measure(s) to be
used to evaluate the effectiveness of the project activities are identified before the project begins. For projects
approved in summer, the expectation is that work actually begin no later than the following spring. A final report
(and possibly a mid-term report depending on the length of the project) must be presented to the Student
Success Committee.
Funding Considerations:
In general, Student Equity fund expenditures must:
 Be targeted towards the populations, goals and activities prioritized in the college Student Equity Plan as
defined in statute and title 5. Be targeted towards the populations, goals and activities prioritized in the
college’s Student Equity Plan.
 Meet the purpose, and address the target populations and success indicators of Student Equity as defined
in statute and title 5.
 Be necessary and reasonable.
 Projects will be funded to a maximum of $250,000.
As mandated by the Chancellor’s Office, Student Equity Funds may be used for the following:
 Outreach to potential student groups and communities identified in the equity plan, including targeted
publications and outreach materials.
 Student services and student services categorical programs that directly support improved outcomes on
success indicators for target populations prioritized in the Student Equity Plan.
 Research and evaluation related to improving student equity.
 Hiring a student equity program coordinator and staff directly supporting and implementing student
equity activities.
1






Supporting student equity planning processes.
Professional development, including funding of consultants to educate faculty and staff on the effects of
inequities; methods for detecting and researching inequities and their effects on college programs and
local communities; improving the use of data, and effective practices and methods for addressing and
improving outcomes for under-served students.
Adapting academic or career related programs and courses to improve student equity outcomes.
Providing embedded tutoring, counseling support for learning communities, and other instructional
support services that do not generate FTES.
In-State travel in support of student equity.
Other Direct Student Support including books, miscellaneous supplies and materials for students, student
transportation, and child care.
Student Equity Funds may not be used for the following:
 Construction -- Student equity funds may not be used for construction work, remodeling, or renovation.
 Gifts -- Public funds, including student equity funds, may not be used for gifts or monetary awards of any
kind.
 Stipends for Students -- Funds cannot be used to pay stipends to students for participation in student
equity activities.
 Computers, Office Supplies and Furniture – Purchasing computers, office supplies or furniture (desks,
chairs, bookcases, etc.) is not allowed.
 Other Administrative, Faculty or Staff Salaries and Benefits -- Program funds cannot be used to pay for any
staff or administrative overhead costs that do not directly support student equity described in the
college’s approved plan, such as budget office staff, business office staff, etc.
 Political or Professional Dues, Memberships, or Contributions -- Funds cannot be used for these fees or
expenses.
 Rental of Off‐Campus Space -- Use of funds to pay for off‐campus space is not allowed.
 Legal and Audit Expenses -- Program funds may not be used to pay for legal or audit expenses.
 Indirect Costs -- Program funds may not be used to pay for indirect costs, such as heat, electricity, or
janitorial services.
 Unrelated Travel Costs -- Program funds may not be used for the cost of travel not directly related to
student equity activities or functions.
 Vehicles -- Program funds may not be used to purchase or lease vehicles
 Clothing -- Program funds may not be used to purchase clothing such as jackets, sweatshirts, or tee shirts
(with the exception of required uniforms for students).
 Courses -- Program funds may not be used to deliver courses that generate FTES.
 Unrelated Research -- Institutional research that is not directly related to evaluating or improving student
equity outcomes.
 Supplanting -- Student Equity funding may not be used to supplant general or state categorical (restricted)
district funds currently expended on Student Equity activities. Any direct student support provided should
supplement, not supplant any services provided to students currently participating in college categorical
programs and any other federal, state, and county programs.
Background:
Governor Jerry Brown and the California State Legislature provided $70 million in the 2014-15 Budget Act to
establish the Student Equity program. The program was designed “to ensure equal educational opportunities and
to promote student success for all students, regardless of race, gender, age, disability, or economic
circumstances.” While a requirement has been in place since 1996 that colleges adopt Student Equity Plans, this
is the first time that dedicated state resources have been provided to support efforts to achieve the goals
reflected in those plans. Together with the doubling of funds for the Student Success and Support Program, this is
2
a valuable investment in the system’s Student Success Initiative to help colleges achieve student success goals for
all students. LBCC’s portion of the $70 is approximately $1.5 million.
Definitions:
Disproportionate Impact – “a condition where access to key resources and support or academic success may be
hampered by inequitable practices, policies, and approaches to student support or instructional practices
affecting a specific group” (CCCCO Student Equity Plan Template, 2014). Disproportionate impact is present when
one subgroup is not performing at the same rate as the comparison subgroup. Please see the Disproportionate
Impact Matrix to see the groups who experience disproportionate impact on the Success Indicators (pp. 6-7)
Success Indicators – the five success indicators as identified by the Chancellor’s Office are access, course
completion, ESL and basic skills, degrees and certificates, and transfer.
Student Equity Goals – The Student Equity Goals were identified by the Student Equity Plan Writing Workgroup.
This workgroup, comprised of faculty and staff, researched, discussed, and developed the goals that were
submitted to the Chancellor’s Office as part of LBCC’s Student Equity Plan. The plan can be found at:
http://www.lbcc.edu/Planning/documents/Student_Equity_Plan_submitted_to_Chancellor_Office_120114.pdf
Goal A: Access
To ensure equity among LBCC students, LBCC aims to increase access rates to the 80% index for AfricanAmerican/Black and Native American/Alaskan Native students; students 19 or younger and 25 to 39.
Goal B: Course Completion
To ensure equity among LBCC students, LBCC aims to increase course completion rates to the 80% index for
African-American/Black students.
Goal C: ESL and Basic Skills
To ensure equity among LBCC students, LBCC aims to increase course completion rates to the 80% index for each
of the basic skills subject areas:
 English: African-American/Black and Hispanic students; all student subgroups 25 or older
 Reading: African-American/Black and White students; male students; students 19 or younger and 40 or
older; students with disabilities
 ESL – Reading: Hispanic, White, and Unknown ethnicity students; all student subgroups 20 or older
 ESL – Writing: Hispanic and Unknown ethnicity students; all student subgroups 25 or older
 Math: African-American/Black and Hispanic students; students 40 or older; and students with disabilities
Goal D: Degrees and Certificates
To ensure equity among LBCC students, LBCC aims to increase degree completion to the 80% index for AfricanAmerican/Black and Hispanic students; students with disabilities.
LBCC also aims to increase certificate completion rates to the 80% index for African-American/Black, Hispanic,
White, and Unknown ethnicity students; male students; all student subgroups 24 or younger.
Goal E: Transfer
To ensure equity among LBCC students, LBCC aims to increase transfer rates to the 80% index for AfricanAmerican/Black and Hispanic students; students 40 or older; students with disabilities; economically
disadvantaged students.
3
Proposal Rating Rubric
Proposal Submission Item
1. Project Description: Briefly describe the
project. Include the student equity goal(s)
that will be addressed and the specific
group(s) being served. Please include data
from the college’s disproportionate impact
study that demonstrate the need for this
project.
2. Measure of success/Evaluation Plan:
Please explain how the success of this
project will be measured. Include possible
outcomes, data sources, and assessment
techniques.
3. Number of students/staff/faculty served:
Please include an estimate of the number
of students/faculty/staff who will be
served or impacted specifically by this
project.
4. Scale of the project: Describe the
potential of this project to impact larger
numbers of students if brought to scale or
institutionalized. Be as specific as possible
as to the number of students who could be
impacted.
4
Exceeds Expectations
Proposal provides a logical
rationale for why this
project will address the
disproportionate impact
for the identified groups
for the specific success
measure.
Proposal provides a
discussion of how the
measurable objectives
were developed,
why/how they provide
valid data of success, and
the methods for collecting
data.
The size of the population
is estimated, the method
for determining this
estimate is articulated.
Proposal provides a logical
rationale for the potential
impact, potential ways to
scale up plan, possible
barriers, etc.
3
Meets
Expectations
Proposal identifies
the groups, the
success measure
and data that
demonstrate
disproportionate
impact.
Proposal provides
measurable
objectives and
methods for
collecting data on
those metrics.
The size of the
population is
estimated, but how
the estimate was
derived is unclear.
Proposal identifies
possible impact
with some
discussion of why.
1
Somewhat Meets
Expectations
Proposal identifies
the groups but does
not link them to the
disproportionate
impact study.
0
Does Not Meet
Expectations
Proposal does not
specify the group to
be served.
Proposal defines
success but not in
measurable terms.
Some data sources
are mentioned, but
they are not tied to
measurable
objectives.
The size of the
population is
estimated but given
the scope of the
project, it is not an
accurate estimate.
Proposal mentions
scaling up project
with no details.
Success is vaguely
defined and lacks
measurable objectives
and methods for
collecting data to
demonstrate success.
The size of the group
to be served is not
provided.
Proposal does not
discuss scaling up.
4
Proposal clearly details all
expenses, and these
expenses align with the
proposed activities and
what is allowed by the
Chancellor’s Office
3
Meets
Expectations
Eligible expenses
are included with
adequate detail
and adequately
reflect the
proposed activities.
1
Somewhat Meets
Expectations
Expenses are
identified but with
inadequate detail
and insufficient
alignment with
proposed activities.
0
Does Not Meet
Expectations
Expenses are not
detailed and do not
align with the
proposed activities.
Proposal provides start
and end dates and
includes logical points to
capture data that will
inform project evaluation.
It includes a rationale for
why these dates were
chosen.
Proposal provides
reasonable start
and end dates and
includes logical
points to capture
data that will
inform project
evaluation.
Proposal provides
start but unclear
completion date
and no clear timing
of data capture to
inform project
evaluation.
Proposal does not
provide clear start or
end time, nor does it
suggest when
evaluative data will be
collected.
4
Exceeds Expectations
Proposal Submission Item
5. Preliminary budget: Describe the budget
needed to support the project. Please
provide an estimated range for the cost for
each budget category. For stipends,
reassigned time, faculty hourly pay, and
classified personnel requests, please
provide the estimated number of hours of
work as well as cost.
6. Duration: Please provide a detailed
timeline for the project, including start
date, dates for data collection to inform
the project evaluation, and an end date. If
multiple phases are proposed, the
completion date for each phase should be
included.
Are there the appropriate signatures on submission?
YES
NO
5
Disproportionate Impact Matrix
The figure below shows where disproportionate impact was found at LBCC for the subgroups and success
indicators required by the Chancellor’s Office. Please note the following:
Red: Presence of disproportionate impact
White: No presence of disproportionate impact
Blue: Reference group
Black: Not applicable (i.e., sub population not present in cohort or sample size too small)
Transfer
CTE Certificates
Degrees
BS - Math
BS - ESL Write
BS - ESL Read
BS - Reading
BS - English
Completion
Success Indicators
Access: LBCC




Ethnicity
African-American/Black
Asian/Filipino/Pacific Islander
Hispanic
Native American/Alaskan Native
White
Unknown
Gender
Female
Male
1
1
Age
19 or younger
20 to 24
25 to 39
40 or older
Disability
Students with a disability
Students without a disability
1
1
1
1
Income
Economically disadvantaged
Not economically disadvantaged
1
Foster Youth
Foster youth
Not foster youth
Veterans
Veteran
Not veteran
6
Disproportionate Impact
What is disproportionate impact?
A condition where access to key resources and support or academic success may be hampered by inequitable
practices, policies and approaches to student support or instructional practices affecting a specific group. (CCCCO
Student Equity Plan Template, 2014)
What is the 80% Rule?
The 80% Rule compares access or outcome/achievement rates of all other groups to that of the reference group
(e.g., highest performing group). If a subgroup performs at less than 80% of the reference group, there is
evidence of disproportionate impact.
In the example below, Group D is the highest performing group with an Access Rate of 94.4%. Based on the 80%
Rule, an Access Rate of 75.5% or lower indicates disproportionate impact (0.8 *94.4% = 75.5%). Therefore,
Groups A and E are experiencing disproportionate impact.
Access Rates
Disproportionate
Impact: Below
75.5%
94.4%
78.8%
77.2%
50.7%
25.5%
Group A
Group B
Group C
Group D
Group E
7