Big Bend Community College
7662 Chanute Street NE ● Moses Lake, WA 98837
D-1800 Library & Grant County Advanced, Masto C & D
Study Session:
Business Meeting:
May 9
12:00 p.m.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
12:00 p.m. – 5:15 p.m.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
8:00 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.
Study Session Agenda
Call to Order and Welcome
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
12:05 p.m.
Executive Session
To review the performance of a public employee.
12:55 p.m.
Break
1:00 p.m.
Mission Study Recommendation: Close statewide skills gap
for technical trained workers.
Discuss
Tab 1
Discuss
Tab 2
Discuss
Tab 3
Discuss
[Tab 6]
Discuss
[Tab 7]
Discuss
Tab 4
Dixie Simmons
1:30 p.m.
Mission Study Recommendation: Contribute more to the
production of baccalaureate degrees.
Michelle Andreas
2:00 p.m.
Break
2:10 p.m.
Mission Study Recommendation: Build a 21st Century
Learning Infrastructure
Denise Graham and Wayne Doty
2:45 p.m.
2012 Supplemental Capital Budget Allocations
Wayne Doty
2:55 p.m.
2013 Budget Allocations and Tuition Approval
Denise Graham and Nick Lutes
3:50 a.m.
2013-15 Operating Budget Development
Denise Graham and Nick Lutes
5:15 p.m.
Adjourn
5:45 p.m.
Dinner Meeting with State Board Members, Big Bend CC
Trustees, staff and State Board Deputy Directors.
Big Bend CC, Bldg. D-1800, Masto A & B
May 10
7:30 a.m.
Regular Business Meeting Agenda
Continental Breakfast
Big Bend CC, D-1800, Masto A & B
8:00 a.m.
Call to Order and Adoption of Agenda
Action
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
8:05 a.m.
Host College Presentation: Big Bend Community College
Bill Bonaudi, Big Bend Community College President
8:55 a.m.
Executive Directors Report
Jan Yoshiwara
Discuss
SBCTC Meeting Agenda
May 9-10, 2012
Page 2
9:25 a.m.
Approval of Consent Agenda
Action
Tab 5
Action
Tab 6
Action
Tab 7
Discuss
Tab 8
Discuss
Tab 9
a. SBCTC Meeting Minutes, March 29, 2012
b. SBCTC Special Meeting Minutes, April 17, 2012
c. SBCTC 2012-13 Meeting Schedule
Resolution12-05-09
d. Olympic College Property Acquisition, Broadway Avenue
Resolution 12-05-10
e. Bates Technical College Local Expenditure Authority, Downtown
Main Building Restoration
Resolution 12-05-11
f. Clover Park Technical College Local Expenditure Authority,
Learning Resource Center Renovation
Resolution 12-05-12
9:30 a.m.
2012 Supplemental Capital Budget Allocations
Resolution 12-05-13
Wayne Doty
9:40 a.m.
2013 Budget Allocations and Tuition Approval
Resolution 12-05-14
Resolution 12-05-15
Denise Graham and Nick Lutes
9:50 a.m.
Parenting Education Waiver WAC Change
Kathy Goebel
10:30 a.m.
Break
10:40 a.m.
Student Achievement Initiative Update
Jan Yoshiwara and David Prince
11:25 a.m.
Chair’s Report
Discuss
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
• Trustees’ Association Report
Tom Malone, TACTC President
• Presidents’ Association Report
Gerald Pumphrey, WACTC President
• Parking Lot
Jan Yoshiwara
• Executive Director Recruitment Update
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
• Appointment of Nominating Committee for 2011-12 SBCTC
Chair and Vice Chair Positions
• Efficiency Study Report Update
Erin Mundinger
• Student Achievement Council Report Update
Sharon Fairchild
12:15 p.m.
Adjournment
Next Meeting: June 20-21, 2012 ~ Clover Park Technical College
5/1/12
EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under RCW 42.30.110, an Executive Session may be held. Action from the Executive Session may be taken, if
necessary, as a result of items discussed in the Executive Session.
PLEASE NOTE: Times above are estimates only. The Board reserves the right to alter the order of the agenda. Reasonable
accommodations will be made for persons with disabilities if requests are made at least seven days in advance. Efforts will be made to
accommodate late requests. Please contact the Executive Director’s Office at (360) 704-4309.
Sharon Fairchild, Chair ● Beth Willis, Vice Chair
Jim Bricker ● Erin Mundinger ● Shaunta Hyde
Elizabeth Chen ● Anne Fennessy ● Wayne Martin ● Larry Brown
Charles N. Earl, Executive Director ● Beth Gordon, Executive Assistant
(360) 704-4400 ● FAX (360) 704-4415 ● www.sbctc.edu ●1300 Quince Street SE ● PO Box 42495 ● Olympia, WA 98504-2495
STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEM
TAB 1
May 9, 2012
Topic
Mission Study recommendation: Close the state-wide skills gap for technically trained workers
Description
In 2008, the Board commissioned a task force to gain a better understanding of where
Washington’s community and technical college system is today and where it needs to be in the
future. The task force identified our state’s most urgent need is to educate more people to
higher levels of skill and knowledge.
When community and technical college students join or rejoin the state workforce their added
skills translate to higher income and a more robust state economy. We affirm that the
community and technical colleges are a critical element in the production of skilled workers.
The purpose of this agenda item is to discuss policy options for the mission study
recommendation, “Close the statewide skills gap for technically trained students”, and to identify
additional key initiatives and process that can further support that recommendation.
We have learned through recent experience that our agility in responding to the skills gap is
impacted by access to economic development planning resources such as;



A more direct role working with Department of Commerce’s economic development staff
to tie training capacity to business expansion and relocation efforts.
Streamline processing of the Job Skills program to increase the number of colleges and
employers participating.
A strategic planning process to support the timely acquisition and maintenance of
contemporary industry tools and technologies. Establishing a regular process to project,
identify, and support needed equipment for high demand fields should be studied more
completely to identify accurate cost estimates.
Key Questions


Do the proposed system level initiatives further the Board’s System Direction and Mission
Study Recommendations?
What strategies can the Board and system groups use to continue to support these
priorities?
Analysis
The recent economic downturn has caused significant growth in workforce training programs.
The increase has been demonstrated in high demand fields such as aerospace, manufacturing,
health care, and information technology. Aligning the right skills at the right time requires
responsive planning for both long and short term implementation. We are compelled to provide
the current short term skills needed for labor and industry. We must also incorporate strategic
TAB 1
Page 2
planning to be prepared for emerging markets, new technologies, and maintaining an adequate
pipeline of trained workers to fulfill jobs requiring a greater depth of knowledge.
Now through 2018, Washington State is projected to have over 1.2 million job openings
requiring some college or an associate degree but not a bachelor degree. Washington jobs in
highest demand are those that require some college but not a bachelor degree. (Help Wanted:
Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018, Georgetown University 2010
Report)
The State Board for Community and Technical Colleges’ research and the Workforce Training
and Education Coordinating Board’s (WTECB) report on skills gaps demonstrates both our
accomplishments to date as well as the need for continued efforts. Occupations requiring major
equipment investments present some challenge to a quick and responsive curriculum delivery.
Colleges are confronted with a need to support the acquisition and maintenance of
contemporary industry equipment during times of restricted budgets.
The State Board’s System Direction goal for economic demand calls for continuous
reassessment and program development in order to support the changing needs of local
industries and increase the number of skilled employees in the areas of greatest unmet need.
Workforce professionals continually scour labor market information, seek industry advice, and
participate in local economic development initiatives to determine whether programs are still in
demand or whether it is time to adjust or renew.
To help meet the aerospace industry skill shortages the Washington Council on Aerospace and
community and technical colleges worked with business to identify anticipated demand, skills
standards, and resources to advance capacity. Colleges collaboratively approached the need
by combining available talent, process for industry certification, and replication of needed
curriculum.
Other Board implemented initiatives make important contributions by helping students to move
further and faster through basic skills, developmental education, and technical training. Some
of these initiatives are the Student Achievement initiative, the I-BEST and I-DEV program in
which basic skills are contextualized and integrated into occupation-specific education or
developmental education, credit for prior learning, and the growth and utilization of eLearning
open courseware.
This study recommendation will identify strategies that use innovation and collaboration to
decrease the skills gap, address economic demand, and provide an opportunity for further
discussion of policy issues related to closing the skills gap.
Accomplishments to date:
Colleges adjust new programs based upon employment demand. Between July 2009 and
September 2011 over 560 professional and technical short-term, certificate and degree
programs (out of a total of 1,600) were discontinued. Resources were redirected toward
opening 213 new programs targeted to meet emerging and growing employer needs. Including:





33 health programs
29 manufacturing programs – most supporting aerospace
26 business programs
23 construction programs – most involving ”Green” or energy efficient construction
18 information technology/computer programs
TAB 1
Page 3
Since September 2011 an additional 131 programs have been removed with 74 new or adapted
programs indicating the rate of adjusting programs is increasing to meet current workforce
needs. Programs that traditionally offer longer formats are segmented into shorter term
pathways to support quicker transition into the workforce. Continuing education at many of our
colleges serves as a fluid training resource, quickly developing non-credit, self-supported job
training programs and often utilizing the Job Skills program to meet immediate skill needs for
employers. Lastly, in partnership with business and labor, we continue to encourage growth of
I-BEST, high quality flexible short term training, apprenticeships, and credit for work based
learning.
Over the past two years, colleges have benefitted from a strong partnership with Boeing and
aerospace suppliers supported by investments from the Governor’s Workforce Investment Act
(WIA) 10 percent discretionary fund. This resulted in new programs designed to match industry
requirements, curriculum shared by colleges, and students gaining employment in the industry.
These activities continue in the Air Washington U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) grant.
(Attachment A)
The Air Washington project has helped close the aerospace and advanced manufacturing skills
gap because industry needs are known and shared; industry drives the curriculum.
Furthermore, the aerospace efforts have multiplied to serve other manufacturing employers in
marine, composites, recreational device manufacturing.
Capacity and demand:
As of January 2012, the average annual employer demand for all workers with mid-level
education and training is expected to be 43,000 net openings between 2014 and 2019. In 2010,
34,000 Washington residents completed their mid-level training and education. If that
completion number remains the same going into the future, the projected mid-level skills gap is
9,000 Washington workers per year (Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board,
skills gap analysis). To close that gap, community and technical colleges must increase outputs
by 26 percent.
Enrollments are retracting from the record levels presented over the past few years. In Fall
2011, professional/technical programs, the largest mission area, declined by 8,144 or 9 percent
from Fall 2010 to a total of 85,973 students. The reduction in enrollment capacity was due to
budget cuts, especially the loss of worker retraining funds.
Additional resources:
1. Equipment funding – A portion of the jobs bill package directs a total of $15 million
(one-time) of the supplemental Capital Budget (SB5127 and 6074) to support the
community and technical colleges’ purchase of major equipment in high demand fields
(primarily aerospace, health care, and manufacturing).
2. Expansion of Basic Food Employment and Training – Now available in 27 out of 34
CTC’s. An additional resource of $ 9.8 million to assist food stamp eligible students to
enroll in technical training and achieve an employment pathway
3. Customized Training Program – A revolving loan fund created in statute to provide
training assistance to businesses. Funding for FY13 has been increased to $2 million
(up from $175,000)
4. I-BEST and I-DEV expansion – I-BEST for Developmental Education models are
extending the pathways developed in currently approved I-BEST programs to the next
higher level of a career pathway with a clear articulation. $476 thousand made available
5. Hospital Employees Education and Training – $1.9 million to develop or expand
innovative training programs for incumbent hospital workers that lead to careers in
nursing and other high demand health care fields
TAB 1
Page 4
6. Aerospace Joint Apprenticeship Committee – Apprenticeships developed by
Aerospace Joint Apprenticeship Committee, comprised of industry employers,
employees, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers
(IAMAW). $2.6 million
Presentation:
The improving economic outlook supports an environment of business growing and/or relocating
to Washington State. Increased system representation alongside the progressive initiatives of
the Department of Commerce and the Employment Security Department could support
increased system representation, earlier response to emerging skills gaps, consistent
communication and presence with industry, and potential stabilization of workforce enrollments.
Colleges are developing staff positions to assist meeting this need.


Bill Bonaudi, President, Big Bend Community College, representing the Aerospace
Curriculum Alignment Team to elaborate on the need for collaboration and industry
partnership.
Janet Gullickson, Interim District Academic Officer, Spokane Community Colleges, to
share perspective on developing a position focusing on regional and local partnerships
to ensure business, industry, and the community have access to a responsive, state-ofthe-art training organization.
Background Information



Attachment A: The Case for Aerospace
Attachment B: Washington’s Community and Technical Colleges TRAIN (Training for
Regional and Industry Needs), November 2011
http://www.sbctc.edu/college/documents/WorkforceTRAIN.pdf
Attachment C: Workforce Board Skills Gap report, January 2012
http://www.hecb.wa.gov/sites/default/files/SkilledEducatedWorkforce2011.pdf
Outcomes
Board members will have an opportunity to discuss policy options related to closing the
statewide skills gap for technically trained workers.
Prepared by: Dixie Simmons, dsimmons@sbctc.edu, 360-704-4333
Marie Bruin, mbruin@sbctc.edu, 360-704-4360
TAB 1
Attachment A
Washington’s Community and Technical Colleges
The Case for Aerospace
“Boeing is already ramping up all five of its jetliner models. Yet a whopping half of Boeing’s workforce
will be eligible to retire within five years. As a result, Washington will need to vastly expand what it
does to get people factory-ready.” – Puget Sound Business Journal, Sept. 23, 2011
Making aerospace soar
Aerospace is an economic powerhouse that generates jobs and fuels our economy. Washington’s community and
technical colleges are producing the world-class employees needed to keep it that way. With 650 companies and roughly
92,000 aerospace workers, Washington has the largest concentration of aerospace expertise in the world. To stay
competitive – and stay in Washington – these companies need mechanics, engineers, machinists, and other employees
trained at community and technical colleges and universities.
Rapidly narrowing the gap
Washington’s aerospace industry faces a shortage of skilled workers due to increased orders, pending retirements, and
technological advancements that outdistance workers’ skills. Community and technical colleges have ramped up training
to narrow the skills gap and move well-trained workers into well-paying jobs.

Twenty-two of Washington’s 34 community and technical colleges offer aerospace-related training: Bates,
Bellingham, Big Bend, Centralia, Clark, Clover Park, Columbia Basin, Edmonds, Everett, Green River, Highline,
Lake Washington, Lower Columbia, North Seattle, Olympic, Peninsula, Renton, Shoreline, Skagit Valley,
South Seattle, South Puget Sound, and Spokane.

In 2010-2011, community and technical colleges trained 5,600 students for high-demand fields like aircraft
mechanics, composites, computer-assisted design, and precision machining – a 30 percent increase since 2006.

Thirty-two percent of Washington students who earned bachelors’ degrees in STEM (science, technology,
engineering, and math) fields in 2006 started at community and technical colleges.
Returns on investments
Two-year colleges have collectively reprioritized their lean budgets to support the aerospace industry. Governor
Gregoire, the Legislature, and the federal government have also made significant investments.

Governor’s Investment in Aerospace – a $1.4 million investment from Governor Gregoire from her
discretionary portion of federal Workforce Investment Act funds.

Air Washington grant – a $20 million competitive federal grant to a consortium of 11 community and technical
colleges and the Aerospace Joint Apprenticeship Committee (described below).

AJAC Apprenticeships – The Legislature provided money for aerospace and advanced manufacturing
apprenticeships. These are developed by the Aerospace Joint Apprenticeship Committee, comprised of industry
employers, employees, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
www.sbctc.edu
April 10, 2012
Attachment A
Page 2
Center of Excellence
Skills that work … continued
Colleges share cutting-edge curricula designed jointly
with aerospace leaders and industry subject-matter
experts. Leading the way is the Center of Excellence for
Aerospace and Advanced Materials Manufacturing at
Everett Community College. The center is a one-stop
hub for the industry and experts to design curricula
that’s deployed system-wide.
Composites: Composites are high impact, fiberreinforced resins used in the aerospace, shipbuilding,
and construction industries. Future Boeing aircraft will
likely be made of this lighter, stronger and more
efficient material. Seven community and technical
colleges offer composites training patterned after a
highly successful program at Clover Park Technical
College, where students learn how to fabricate,
assemble, and repair composite materials. Clover Park
and South Seattle community colleges partnered with
community colleges in Maryland, Tennessee and Ohio
to share a $20 million federal grant to expand the
program nationally.
Skills that work
Curricula mapped to jobs: The job skills needed by
Boeing were matched against college courses in a
project by the Aerospace Curriculum Alignment Team
(ACAT) and the Center of Excellence for Aerospace
and Advanced Materials Manufacturing. The two
organizations looked for gaps in key program areas and
designed courses to meet the need:
composites
electronics
machine tool technology
industrial manufacturing technology
aircraft mechanics
ACAT is made up of 16 community and technical
colleges along with local and state workforce
development agencies.





Region-focused facilities
Anchored on each side of the state are aerospace
training centers that focus on regional industry demand.
Washington Aerospace Training Center
(WATR)/Edmonds Community College: Located
at Paine Field, the WATR training center offers shortterm certificates for aircraft-assembly, maintenance, and
inspection jobs in the large aerospace manufacturing
plants and related businesses of the Puget Sound
corridor.
Fast-track machining courses: Eleven colleges are
among the first in the nation to offer “Right Skills Now”
training, a fast-track credentialing system launched by
the National Association of Manufacturers with the
President’s Jobs Council and the Manufacturing Institute.
The program offers a two-quarter precision machining
program and internships, as well as college credits
toward a degree.
From the first graduating class of August 2010
to February 2012, 698 students had completed
training.
 Boeing interviews students who successfully
complete training certificates.
The assembly mechanic program is also available
through Renton Technical College and will soon be
offered at Yakima Valley Community College.
FAA-certified courses: Five community and
technical colleges offer Federal Aviation Administrationcertified training so students can test for their Airframe
and Powerplant licenses and repair planes built in the
United States. A similar effort is underway to train
students in European Aviation Safety Agency standards
so companies here can bid on repair contracts for
overseas airlines.
Inland Northwest Aerospace Technology
Center/Spokane Community College: The Inland
Northwest Aerospace Technology Center provides
training needed by aerospace companies that supply
tools and parts for aircraft. Courses include CADD
(computer-aided design and drafting) and design
technology, CNC machinist, computer software
engineering, electronics, hydraulic and pneumatic
automation, and welding. The programs fill training gaps
identified in an analysis of the Eastern WashingtonNorth Idaho employment area.
– continued next column –

aerospace.4.10.12docx 1-May-12
TAB 1
Attachment B
Washington’s Community and
Technical Colleges TRAIN
Training for Regional and Industry Needs
“The last thing you want to be doing is turning students away during a recession when they
need the retraining.” ~ George Boggs, American Association of Community Colleges
Washington’s community and technical colleges enroll over 260,000 students per year in certificate and degree
programs1 and are the fourth most productive state system in the nation when averaging completions to the state’s
funding per full-time student. 2 Over 150,000 students complete professional and technical programs each year and 74%
are employed within a year with an average annual starting salary of $30,000. 3
A college education: more important than ever
The vast majority of new jobs require higher skills. A recent study says college education has become the new gateway
to the middle class. Those without some form of postsecondary education face a high probability of poverty. 4
Ever-advancing technology requires workers at all levels to possess critical thinking, teamwork, technology, and
information literacy skills.
Collaborating to fill high-demand jobs in Washington
Despite high unemployment, there are high-wage jobs right now for those with the right education and skills. Through
2018, Washington State is projected to have 1.2 million job openings requiring some college or an associate degree but
not a bachelor’s degree.
 67 percent of jobs in Washington State will require a college education
 35 percent of those require some college or an associate’s degree, but not a bachelor’s degree
Jobs in highest demand require some college, but not a bachelor’s degree
Industry Sector
Business/sales/office administrative support
Healthcare practitioners and technicians
Hospitality and food services
Construction
Manufacturing/production
Transportation and material moving
Installation, maintenance and equipment repair
Personal care/services
Information Technology
Number of
jobs available
through 2018
537,000
111,000
100,000
65,000
64,000
61,000
60,000
55,000
40,000
Source: Georgetown University
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
www.sbctc.edu
November 2011
Attachment B
Page 2
Education pays
Over time, education pays off in higher earnings and lower unemployment rates. In 2011, the unemployment rate for
Washington state was 9.3 percent. For those with an associate degree, it was seven percent. For those with a high
school diploma it was 10.3 percent and for those without a high school diploma it was 14.9 percent.5
More than1.5 million Washingtonians have no college education and nearly 500,000 of those individuals lack a high
school diploma. Yet our state needs every individual to have the education, skills and abilities needed to fill current and
future jobs. 6
Annual income by education level
Source: "Education pays: More education leads to higher earnings, lower unemployment,"
Occupational Outlook Quarterly, June 2010
Unemployment rate by level of education
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2011, www.bls.gov/emp/ep_ chart_001.htm.
Data are 2010 annual averages for persons age 25 and over.
Responsive to labor markets
A hallmark of community and technical colleges is their ability to respond quickly to changing labor market and
workforce needs. Colleges phase in new programs based on employment demand, while culling or closing others.
Attachment B
Page 3
Between July 2009 and September 2011, more than 560 professional and technical short-term, certificate and degree
programs (out of a total 1,600) were discontinued at community and technical colleges, including pulp and paper
manufacturing, residential appraiser, para-educator, and horticulture.
Resources were redirected to launch 213 new programs in high-demand and emerging occupations requiring some
college education but not a bachelor’s degree. These new programs will provide education to over 8,200 students
across the state, an important step in closing the skills gap for high demand jobs.7
New programs included:




33 health care
29 manufacturing – most supporting aerospace
26 business
23 construction – most in ”green” or energy-efficiency




18 information technology/computer
12 maintenance and repair
10 culinary/hospitality
20 energy and sustainability
Flexing with the economy
College program capacity waxes and wanes in response to market forces.
Colleges ramped up program offerings when information technology (IT) was booming in the late 1990s. IT programs
were cut back after the dotcom bust in 2000-01. In 2007, the IT industry made a comeback, thanks in large part to
cross-pollinating with other industries like health care, creating a training need for programs like Health Informatics.
In early 2000, in response to the enormous need for nurses and health care professionals, colleges expanded their health
programs, while at the same time, manufacturing slumped and colleges decreased those training programs.
In 2008, public leaders worked to keep Boeing and 600 aerospace industry suppliers in Washington, in part, by
dedicating funding for education and training to ensure a skilled aerospace workforce. Colleges ramped up aerospace
manufacturing programs across the state.
Recent Highlights
Aerospace Manufacturing
Air Washington, a statewide consortium of colleges, workforce development councils, labor, and businesses received a
three year $20 million federal grant to develop and implement innovative education, training and services necessary to
meet Washington state's growing workforce demands in aerospace manufacturing, assembly, maintenance, composites
and electronics. This grant specifies that the equivalent to 2,600 full-time students will be prepared for current and
future aerospace manufacturing jobs.
Health Care
While many communities experienced nursing shortages, rural communities were desperate for Registered Nurses who
would remain in small communities. Lower Columbia College responded by launching its now nationally-recognized
Rural Outreach Nursing Education (RONE) program. RONE uses online and distance learning to educate and train
Licensed Practical Nurses in rural communities to become Registered Nurses, allowing them to stay and serve their local
rural communities. The program was launched in 2009 and enrolls a cohort of 14 students per year including rural
students from around the state in communities like Morton, Republic, and Davenport.
Information Technology
Bellevue College and its Center of Excellence in Information Technology, in partnership with colleges and health
information agencies in the western United States, received two national grants in late 2010 from the Office of the
National Coordinator for Health Information Technology ($6.4 million over two years) and the National Science
Foundation ($509,000 over three years). A statewide group (K-12 through college and graduate studies) is working on
coordinated Health Information Technology education issues, re-training more than 1,000 dislocated IT workers for jobs
in the healthcare industry, and developing a National Health Information Technology certificate and curriculum.
Attachment B
Page 4
Partnering with business and labor
A hallmark of community and technical colleges nationally and in Washington State is the ability to maintain quality
programs through ties to local and regional business leaders and their workers. College leaders and faculty are involved
with local chambers of commerce, business organizations, labor organizations, workforce development councils, and
large, medium, and small businesses that make up their communities.
Colleges work directly with employers through the Job Skills program to provide short‐term training, customized to
meet a business or industry’s need. This dollar-for-dollar matching grant serves both new and current employees and
plays a significant role in helping businesses build and retain a quality workforce.
In 2010-2011, 34 Job Skills partnerships between community and technical colleges and local businesses trained new
employees or to improve current employee skills resulting in wage increases and promotions for employees, job
retention, and improved company efficiency and competitiveness.
Many community and technical colleges’ partner with labor unions to provide apprenticeship programs, so individuals
can learn trades and occupations through on-the-job training supervised by Journey-level craft persons or trade
professionals, while “related supplemental instruction” is provided by colleges. In 2010, there were 13,790 active
apprentices in programs supported by apprenticeship/college partnerships.
Each professional-technical program has an advisory committee made up of local business leaders, workers, and labor
representatives working in the field of study. Advisory committee members keep college leaders and faculty current on
industry and workforce needs, employment forecasts, new technologies and equipment, skill demand, and future
industry trends. Faculty stay up-to-date and connected to changes in their fields by going back to industry for “on the
ground” skills and experience.
Leveraging resources and relationships





In June, Green River Community College was enlisted to provide Six Sigma Black Belt training to 11
manufacturing companies. The college will bring together the necessary experts to conduct a statistical analysis
of the companies and provide a train-the-trainer series to deliver Six Sigma training.
In October, Yakima Valley Community College was contacted by GE Aviation, a manufacturer that
designs, manufactures, assembles and tests hydraulic actuation systems, of the need to upgrade the skills of its
current employees to stay competitive in the global market place. Yakima Valley College will assemble specialists
to train GE Aviation production workers in skills needed in today’s entry-level manufacturing jobs: computer
basics (Microsoft Office Suite), conflict resolution, communication skills, problem solving, customer service,
leadership and general business practices needed to form high performing self-directed manufacturing teams.
Walla Walla Community College hosts the $6.8 million dollar William A. Grant Water & Environmental
Center funded by U.S. Department of Commerce, Pacific Power Blue Sky Renewable Energy, Port of Walla
Walla, Walla Walla County and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. This center of
innovation and collaborative leadership prepares students for careers in the water and environmental
workforce, bringing together tribal, county, agriculture, and business concerns at Walla Walla Community
College.
Bellingham Technical College, in collaboration with Heath Tecna, a local aerospace company, Northwest
Economic Council, Northwest Workforce Council, Bellingham Waterfront Innovation Zone, WorkSource
Whatcom, and Employment Security Department obtained $95,000 in federal funding to develop a training
program for potential new employees for Heath Tecna, part of a larger effort projected to create 400 new jobs
and bring $40 million in new export business to Whatcom County.
Edmonds Community College operates the Washington Aerospace Training and Research Center at Paine
Field. Opened in 2010, the center was built to create career opportunities in the aerospace industry. Students
learn skills for entry-level aerospace jobs in 12 weeks. Between the center’s opening in 2010 and September

Attachment B
Page 5
2011, 357 students have graduated and 324 of those students interviewed with local employers. To date, 232
graduates have gone to work as union aircraft assembly workers.
Maximizing efficiency
Colleges are increasing program collaboration to meet workforce demand and maximize resources by sharing 32 highdemand professional and technical programs in a “hybrid” approach. Courses are delivered partially online and partially
in-person, allowing one college to provide course content at a distance while a local partner college provides the onground and in-person clinical, cooperative learning, and lab portion of the program. 8

Nuclear medicine: Bellevue College and Columbia Basin College share a program

Energy: Centralia College, Grays Harbor College, Wenatchee Valley College and Peninsula College

Machining, paramedic, and automotive programs: Columbian Basin College and Walla Walla Community College.

Electronics, radiology technology, and agriculture: Wenatchee Valley College and Big Bend Community College

Whatcom Community College and Pierce College share a Physical Therapy program.
Educating those most in need for family-wage jobs
The impact of budget cuts to community and technical colleges’ programs for those most in need is of concern. Colleges
continue to lose funds that support long-term unemployed, low-income, and low-skilled citizens—as well as veterans—
who need education and training to prepare for high-demand, high-wage jobs.
Unemployed
The Worker Retraining program supports laid-off and unemployed workers who seek to retrain and get back to work.
Since the Worker Retraining program was established in 1993, colleges have consistently enrolled more workers than
the program has been funded to serve. Colleges have maximized worker retraining investments and stretched other
resources to meet the needs of laid-off workers. Last year (2010-11), 19,600 students (13,403 FTES) trained for new
careers through the state-funded program. Worker Retraining FTE enrollments increased by five percent over the prior
record-setting year and exceed the state’s 2010-11 enrollment target by 27 percent.
Low-Income
Community and technical colleges provide special financial assistance to low-income students. Opportunity Grants, the
Basic Food and Employment Training (BFET) program, and the WorkFirst program provide tuition assistance and
support services to low-income students who need at least one year of college with a job credential to prepare for highdemand jobs.
Low-Skilled
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) is Washington community and technical colleges’ nationally
recognized program that helps individuals who have below high school level literacy (math, reading, writing, speaking and
listening) obtain the education and skills they need to get jobs. In 2011, I-BEST was named a Bright Idea by Harvard's
John F. Kennedy School of Government. I-BEST pairs Adult Basic Education or English as a Second Language courses
with professional and technical courses so students learn literacy and workplace skills at the same time. I-BEST
dramatically reduces the traditional time it takes students to learn critical job skills. Students participating in I-BEST are
nine times more likely to earn a job skills credential than similar students entering Adult Basic Education programs.
Attachment B
Page 6
Veterans
Washington State is home to a large contingent of military veterans and their families who desire the advantages and
benefits of a fulfilling professional-technical and academic postsecondary education. The colleges have designated
veterans’ services offices to help veterans navigate the college environment and requirements. Nearly all of our
community and technical colleges (26 of 34) are Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges (SOC). SOC provides
educational opportunities to service members who, because of frequent relocations, have trouble completing college
degrees. Notably, Pierce College Fort Steilacoom and Shoreline Community College were each selected in 2010 to
develop a federally designated Center of Excellence for Veteran Student Success.
Skills gap likely to widen due to budget cuts
Budget cuts to colleges are crippling capacity to enroll and graduate more students in high demand occupation areas.
Colleges simply do not have the classes available for all of the citizens seeking to improve their earning power and future
career opportunities, and budget cuts limit the ability of colleges to afford high-end technology and equipment needed to
provide “real life” education and training for tomorrow’s occupations.
Our community and technical colleges and universities would have to increase their graduation rates by 10 percent each
year to meet business and industry demand for qualified workers. 9
Sources:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Annual Report, SBCTC 2009-2010
NCHEMS
Job prep completers, SBCTC 2008-2009
Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018, Georgetown University 2010 Report
Washington State Employment Security, U.S. Dept. of Labor Statistics
2010 Census
Calculations based on 24 students per program over two years.
Efficiency Study 2010
Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements through 2018, Georgetown University 2010 Report
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 2
May 9, 2012
Discussion
Action
Topic
Mission Study Recommendation: Contribute more to the production of baccalaureate degrees
Description
The Washington State Community and Technical Colleges Mission Study created a twenty year
plan to reduce barriers and expand higher education opportunities for more Washington
residents. The Mission Study identified 10 actions to accomplish the goals of the System
Direction. Action statement #4 is “Contribute more to the production of baccalaureate
degrees…” with a specific focus on increasing the number of transfer students entering
universities and expanding programs that lead to applied bachelor degrees.
Washington State is celebrating 40 years of direct transfer agreements between community and
technical colleges (CTCs) and public and private four-year colleges and universities. This
history has produced nationally recognized processes, policies, and practices in transfer
education. In addition, Washington’s community and technical colleges are implementing a
broad range of strategies to increase the number of transfer students prepared to enter fouryear colleges and universities, built on our history of success.
The most critical policy issue related to CTCs role in bachelor degree attainment rests in the
relatively new authority for SBCTC to approve applied bachelor degrees awarded by CTCs.
This area is particularly open because:
 the community and technical college system does not have a specific plan related to
applied bachelor degree approval;
 the state will experience a higher education governance change with the elimination of
the Higher Education Coordinating Board and its current bachelor degree approval
authority; and
 Budget provisos associated with specific colleges go beyond applied bachelor degree
programs and allow Bellevue College to offer specific non-applied bachelor degree
programs.
This study session will lay the foundation and encourage Board members to identify important
policy questions related to the future role of bachelor degrees granted by community and
technical colleges.
Key Question
What should be the role of the community and technical college system in increasing bachelor
degree access and attainment for Washington State residents?
TAB 2, Page 2
Analysis
Washington State’s governing authority regarding bachelor degree approval will be dramatically
changed July 1, 2012 as a result of the elimination of the Higher Education Coordinating Board
and the creation of the Student Achievement Council. The new Student Achievement Council
will no longer have program approval authority for bachelor degree programs, leaving the only
bachelor degree program approval authority with SBCTC. This change is coupled with a
proviso in 2011-13 operating budget act that allows non-applied degree authority for Bellevue
College and specific applied degree authority for the Seattle Community College District.
SBCTC staff will provide the board with transfer and bachelor degree data that will serve as a
foundation for identifying critical policy questions and issues related to CTCs future in offering
bachelor degrees. Data will relate to:
 Transfer
o State targets for transfer degrees
o Technical colleges authority to offer limited associate degrees
o Number of transfer degrees produced by CTCs
o Ways we are increasing transfer
o Number of transfer students enrolled in Washington State bachelor degree
programs
 Bachelor degree production
o State target for public bachelor degrees
o Number of bachelor degrees awarded in 2009-10
o High demand occupation areas identified in Washington State
 Applied bachelor degrees
o Original purpose of CTCs offering applied bachelor degrees
o State target for applied bachelor degrees produced by CTCs
o Applied bachelor degree enrollments and completions
o Types of bachelor degree programs being considered by CTCs
o Current budget proviso related to Bellevue and Seattle colleges
 Policy questions being considered by WACTC regarding bachelor degree production
Details of each of these areas are provided in Attachment A.
Background Information
Attachment A: CTC Role in Bachelor Degree Attainment
Mission Study at http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/docs/sbctc_mission_study-interactive-web.pdf.
Substitute House Bill 2655 which gives SBCTC authority for applied baccalaureate at
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/2655-S.pdf
Recommendation/Outcomes
Staff will assist board members in identifying critical policy issues and questions related to the
future of bachelor degree programs offered by community and technical colleges. Issues and
questions identified will provide the framework for a later and more in-depth discussion.
Prepared by: Michelle Andreas, mandreas@sbctc.edu, 360-704-4338.
Tab 2
Attachment A
CTC Role in Bachelor Degree Attainment
Overarching question: What should be the role of the community and technical
college system in increasing bachelor degree access and attainment for
Washington State residents?
Background Information
Transfer

State targets for transfer degrees – 19,000 by 2015

Technical colleges have authority to offer limited associate degrees in Major
Related Programs (MRPs):
o Renton – Business MRP, Pre-Nursing MRP, Elem Ed. MRP
o Lake Washington – Business MRP, Pre-Nursing MRP, Technology MRP

Number of transfer degrees produced by CTCs – 16 percent increase over
three years
2008-09
13,529
2009-10
13,973
2010-11
16,183

Ways we are increasing transfer includes:
o Revision of MRPs (Business, Nursing, Biology) due to curriculum changes
at universities.
o Revision of Direct Transfer Agreement (DTA) – math and communication.
o Washington 45 which is a list of courses offered at CTCs and accepted as
general education at all universities.
o Increased transparency and publication of courses needed at universities
for majors.

Number of transfer students enrolled in Washington state bachelor programs
(three year history). *This does not include students who transfer out-of-state.
Transfers to Public Institutions
Transfers to Independent Institutions
Transfers to University of Phoenix
Transfers to Western Governors University
Transfers to CTC Applied Bachelors
Total Transfers/Transitions
2008-09
10,319
3,223
1,983
512
103
16,140
2009-10
10,563
2,885
2,990
565
100
17,615
2010-11
10,600*
2,323
2,154
1,646
204
17,492
*Estimate adding TESC/CWU/EWU winter and spring transfers
Sources: SBCTC AYR 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 (excludes Running Start), WGU Self Report, and college
institutional research data sites
1
Tab 2
Attachment A
Bachelor degree production

State target for public bachelor degrees.
o 13,800 increase annually in bachelor degree production to reach 42,400
degrees produced by 2018.

In 2009-2010 public baccalaureate institutions awarded 22,278 bachelor
degrees, private baccalaureate institutions awarded 7,700 bachelor degrees.

High demand occupation areas identified in Washington State by the
Georgetown University study through 2018:
o Sales and Office Support (185,000 available jobs)
o STEM with the majority in computer and mathematical sciences and
engineering (130,000 available jobs)
o Management (128,000 available jobs)
o Education (69,000 available jobs)
o Health (58,000 available jobs)
Applied bachelor degrees

Original purpose of CTCs offering applied bachelor degrees:
o Washington’s four-year institutions provided very few options for technical
degree holders (SBCTC, May 2004; SBCTC, May 2005). Most of the
existing opportunities were available through private institutions and most
were located in the western region of the state.
o “An applied baccalaureate degree is specifically designed for individuals
who hold an associate of applied science degree, or its equivalent, in
order to maximize application of their technical course credits toward the
baccalaureate degree; and it is based on a curriculum that incorporates
both theoretical and applied knowledge and skills in a specific technical
field.” (RCW 28B.50.030)
The legislation also specifies that the programs were to serve place-bound
working adults and fill skill gap needs in specific high-demand
occupations.
o 2010 legislature passed Substitute House Bill 2655 giving the State Board
for Community and Technical Colleges authority to approve community
and technical college applied baccalaureate degree programs. In
November 2010, the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
and the Higher Education Coordinating Board approved a process,
selection criteria, and application materials for community and technical
colleges seeking to offer an applied baccalaureate program.
2
Tab 2
Attachment A
o Beginning July 1, 2012, SBCTC will retain sole authority for bachelor
degree approval for degrees produced by community and technical
colleges due to the elimination of the HECB and its program approval
authority.

State target for applied bachelor degrees produced by CTCs – 1,400 applied
degrees need to be produced by 2030.

Applied bachelor degree enrollments and completions (see pages 4-5).

Types of bachelor degree programs being considered by CTCs (see pages 6-7).

Current budget proviso related to Bellevue and Seattle Colleges.
Bellevue College is authorized to offer applied baccalaureate degrees in
information technology, health care services and management, biotechnology,
and pre-professional preparation for medical fields. These degrees shall be
directed at high school graduates and transfer-oriented degree and professional
and technical degree holders. In fiscal year 2012, Bellevue College will develop a
two-year plan for offering these new degrees. The plan will assume funding for
these new degrees shall come through redistribution of its current per full-time
enrollment funding. The plan shall be delivered to the legislature by June 30,
2012.
The Seattle community college district is authorized to offer applied
baccalaureate degree programs in business/international business and
technology management, interactive and artistic digital media, sustainability,
building science technology, and allied and global health. These degrees shall
be directed at high school graduates and professional and technical degree
holders. In fiscal year 2012, Seattle community colleges shall develop a twoyear plan for offering these new degrees. The plan will assume that funding for
these new degrees comes through redistribution of its current per full-time
enrollment funding. The plan shall be delivered to the legislature by June 30,
2012.
Policy Questions Being Considered by WACTC
In meeting state goals for bachelor degree attainment:
 What should be the specific expectation for the number of bachelor degree
graduates produced by the CTC system?
 Should every college offer a bachelor degree?
 What should be the specific types of bachelor degree graduates produced by the
CTC system? Applied degrees only? Open to any degree that meets state
need? Open to any degree that meets regional need?
 Should the system focus on specific program areas in demand or regions in need
of bachelor graduates or both as a priority for CTCs offering bachelor degrees?
3
Tab 2
Attachment A
Applied Bachelor Degree Enrollments
College/Program
Bellevue
Columbia
Basin
Lake
Washington
Olympic
Peninsula
Seattle
Central
Seattle
South
System Total
Applied Arts in Inter. Design
BAS in Radiology and Imaging
Sciences
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
Summer 10
FTES
HC
Fall 10
FTES
HC
Winter 11
FTES
HC
Spring 11
FTES
HC
Annual
2011
FTES HC
16.4
23.1
38
47
56.9
47.1
98
73
57.7
26.2
97
44
61.4
26.8
101
48
64.1
41.1
137
109
8.3
0
16.5
0
25.9
0
26.6
0
25.8
0
47.8
85
120.5
171
109.8
141
114.8
149
131.0
246
BAS in Management
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
6.6
0.0
15
0
37.3
0.7
50
0
52.2
0.3
62
0
51.3
3.0
63
0
49.2
1.3
73
0
6.6
15
38.0
50
52.6
62
54.3
63
50.5
73
BA of Tech. in Applied Design
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
7.5
0.3
12
0
34.3
2.7
36
0
38.5
2.3
39
0
33.3
1.7
37
0
37.9
2.3
41
0
7.9
12
37.0
36
40.9
39
35.0
37
40.2
41
Bachelor of Science Nursing
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
6.5
1.5
19
0
20.9
8.1
39
0
15.9
3.1
29
0
21.2
5.9
33
0
21.5
6.2
62
0
8.0
19
29.0
39
19.1
29
27.1
33
27.7
62
BAS in Applied Management
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
2.2
0.0
7
0
37.2
0.0
40
0
33.7
0.0
38
0
29.9
0.7
36
0
34.4
0.2
49
0
2.2
7
37.2
40
33.7
38
30.6
36
34.6
49
BAS Behavioral Science
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
12.7
0.0
17
0
43.0
0.0
52
0
44.7
0.7
55
0
42.5
0.0
52
0
47.6
0.2
60
0
12.7
17
43.0
52
45.4
55
42.5
52
47.9
60
5.7
0.0
11
0
44.4
0.0
55
0
46.3
0.7
50
0
41.4
0.0
52
0
45.9
0.2
65
0
5.7
11
44.4
55
47.0
50
41.4
52
46.1
65
90.9
166
349.1
443
348.4
414
345.6
422
378.0
596
BAS in Hospitality Management
Non-Matriculated Upper
Division Course Enrollments
Total
4
Tab 2
Attachment A
Applied Bachelor Degree Completions
Bellevue College
Bellevue College
Bellevue College
Centralia College
Columbia Basin College
Lake Washington Institute
of Technology
Olympia College
Peninsula College
Seattle Central
Community College
South Seattle Community
College
Totals
Bachelor of Applied Science, Radiation
& Imaging Sciences
Bachelor of Applied Arts, Interior Design
Bachelor of Applied Science, Health
Care Technology & Management
Bachelor of Applied Science, Applied
Management (pending)
Bachelor of Applied Science, Applied
Management
Bachelor of Applied Technology,
Applied Design
Bachelor of Science, Nursing
Bachelor of Applied Science, Applied
Management
Bachelor of Applied Science, Applied
Behavioral Science
Bachelor of Applied Science, Hospitality
Management
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
11
12
10
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
0
0
14
11
6
8
8
13
9
0
0
16
5
20
20
35
51
139
5
Tab 2
Attachment A
Degrees Under Consideration
Bates
 Applied Baccalaureate – Public Safety Administration
 Applied Baccalaureate – Biomedical Technology
Bellevue
 Criminal Justice with emphasis in Cyber Security
 Digital Forensics
 Information Technology
 Biotechnology
 Pre-professional Preparation for Medical Fields
 RNB Nursing Program
Centralia
 Project Management for Journeymen
 Applied Management (pending)
Clark
 Health Informatics
 Cyber Security
Clover Park
 Applied Aerospace Engineering Technician
 Advanced Materials/Non-Destructive Testing
Columbia Basin
 Nuclear Technology
 Applied Neuropsychology
 Applied Project Management
 Nursing
Everett
 Graphics and Web Design
Green River
 Bachelor of Applied Science in Business Management and Entrepreneurship
 Bachelor of Applied Science in Court Reporting and Captioning (GRCC)
Lake Washington
 Biomedical Engineering Technology
 Energy Engineering Technology
 Funeral Services
 Transportation and Logistics Management
6
Tab 2
Attachment A
Renton
 Construction Management
Seattle
 Non-Profiting Accounting
 Real Estate
 Nanotechnology
 Professional Technical Teacher Education
 Sustainable Building Construction
Skagit Valley
 BAS in Environmental Conservation
Walla Walla
 Enology and Viticulture
 Accounting
 Energy Systems
7
STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEM
TAB 3
May 9, 2012
Topic
Mission Study Recommendation: Build a 21st Century Learning Infrastructure
Description
In 2008, the Board commissioned a task force of Board members, trustees, presidents, faculty,
and staff to gain an understanding of where Washington’s community and technical colleges are
today and where they need to be in the future to meet the needs of Washington’s residents.
Using the SBCTC System Direction as the framework, the task force recommended pursuit of
ten challenges in a twenty year action plan. This agenda item updates the Board on the status
of the challenge to building a 21st century learning infrastructure.
Key Questions
•
•
•
How are changes in learning affecting the colleges’ infrastructure needs?
Are we heading in the right direction with the capital selection process?
Is the system making progress toward building a 21st century learning infrastructure?
Analysis
The Board has a goal to use technology, collaboration, and innovation to meet the demands of
the economy and improve student success. The Board has adopted the principle that policy
direction and investments are to be centered upon student needs, student diversity, the impact
of new technologies, and enhancing students’ knowledge, skills, and educational attainment.
Specific measurements are to gauge success and the colleges are to be rewarded for improved
results toward this goal.
In 2009 the Washington Association of Community and Technical Colleges (WACTC) requested
the Instruction Commission (IC) to make recommendations about the physical space needs to
address changes in the teaching and learning environment, the deployment of technology, and
lessons learned regarding the design of physical space in a collaborative campus process. The
presidents also requested that the Business Affairs Commission (BAC) review the capital
budget development process and make recommendations to improve it based on lessons
learned and how the needs for space are changing.
In 2010 the WACTC created a task force to use the IC and BAC recommendations to update
our capital project selection criteria to reflect new learning environments, sustainability, market
conditions, and applicable legislation. The task force is chaired by a member of the WACTC
Capital Committee and has representation from the system’s BAC, IC, Student Services
Commission, Operations and Facilities Council, Information Technology Commission, Library
Media Directors Council, the Trustees Association of Community and Technical Colleges, and
state board staff.
In 2011 the WACTC asked BAC to provide a recommendation to integrate project categories
into a single scoring process for future selections and to work with the IC to develop
TAB 3, Page 2
recommendations for vocational space uses and needs for future update of the Capital Asset
Model. These recommendations are due to WACTC in September 2012.
New biennial capital appropriations for the community and technical colleges increased from
about $16 million in 1981-83 to about $525 million in 2007-09. The current biennium has about
$343 million in new appropriations for capital. The capital selection process needs to encourage
proposals with reasonable costs and differentiate projects relative to our goals for system wide
prioritization of future resources.
Background Information
SBCTC Mission Study - http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/docs/sbctc_mission_study-interactive-web.pdf
SBCTC System Direction - http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/docs/sbctc_system_direction_final.pdf
Outcomes
An overview of the budget development process, sources and uses of capital funding, and
progress made toward mission goals will be presented. There will be an emphasis on how the
balance of funding has changed, what future learning environments might look like, and how we
can use the capital selection process to support policy objectives.
Prepared by: Wayne Doty, 360-704-4382, wdoty@sbctc.edu
STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEM
TAB 4
May 9, 2012
Topic
2013-15 Operating Budget Development and Framework
Description
The 2013-15 operating budget request for the community and technical college system will be
submitted to the Office of Financial Management in September 2012. The Board will identify
items to include in the budget request at the June Board meeting, for final adoption in
September. At the May meeting, representatives from the presidents, local trustees, faculty,
and students will meet with the Board to continue the discussion on the development of the
2013-15 operating budget request for the community and technical colleges.
Key Questions
•
•
•
How can the 2013-15 operating budget request further the Mission Study’s Twenty-Year
Action Plan?
What should be the theme or themes of this budget request?
What items should be included in the 2013-15 operating budget request?
Analysis
Representatives from the college presidents, local trustees, faculty, and students met with the
Board at the March meeting to provide input on potential items to include in the budget request
in the context of the Mission Study Twenty-Year Action Plan. (See Attachment A, 2013-15
Operating Budget Development: Framework for Small Group Discussions, March 2012 Board
Meeting; and Attachment B, Mission Study Twenty-Year Action Plan.)
The items identified through small group brainstorming discussions fall into six main categories:
employee compensation and development; enrollments; student support to increase student
success; technology; tuition and financial aid; and building repair and maintenance. (See
Attachment C: Potential 2013-15 Operating Budget Request Items Identified by Small Groups
at March Board Meeting.)
At their April 26-27th meeting, the college presidents will hold a budget academy to identify
themes and potential budget request items. The results of their discussion will be provided at
the May Board meeting.
Also at the May Board meeting, the Board and system representatives will again break into
small groups. The groups will be asked to (1) identify the goals in the Mission Study TwentyYear Action Plan that could be advanced with additional funding from the state; (2) identify
potential themes for the budget request; and (3) refine and prioritize the list of potential items.
TAB 4, Page 2
Background Information
Attachment A: 2013-15 Operating Budget Development: Framework for Small Group
Discussions, March 2012 Board Meeting
Attachment B: Mission Study Twenty-Year Action Plan
Attachment C: Potential 2013-15 Operating Budget Request Items Identified by Small Groups
at March Board Meeting
Outcomes
Goals from the Mission Study Twenty-Year Action Plan that can be advanced with additional
state funding will be identified; potential budget request themes will be identified; the list of
potential budget request items will be refined and prioritized.
Prepared by: Denise Graham, 360-704-4350, dgraham@sbctc.edu and Nick Lutes, 360-7041023, nlutes@sbctc.edu.
TAB 4
Attachment A
2013-15 Operating Budget Development:
Framework for Small Group Discussions
March 2012 State Board Meeting
Since the fall of 2008, state funding for the community and technical
colleges has been cut by $160 million, or 22%. While some of the
reduction has been offset by tuition increases, the colleges have had to
balance budgets by increasing class size, cutting student services and
other staff, reducing and eliminating professional/technical programs,
cutting back on ABE programs, and offering fewer courses.
Next biennium, the state budget will continue to be strained. At this
point in the budget and revenue cycle, it is not possible to tell whether
additional cuts will be necessary going into next biennium. However,
there could be some opportunities for new targeted, strategic
investments across state government and in education in particular. The
Governor and legislators will be asking, "As the state economy begins to
recover and state revenues begin to increase, where should we invest our
first new dollars to make the biggest impact?"
The community and technical college system should be asking similar
questions as we begin to strengthen our capacity to provide Washington
citizens the training and education needed to compete in the workplace
and to move to higher levels of educational attainment.
Each small group should provide 5 items in response to this question:
In what critical areas should the state invest to increase
student success, educational attainment and our
colleges’ contribution to a vibrant economy?
TAB 4
Attachment B
Mission Study Twenty-Year Action Plan
1. Serve more people, including groups who have been underserved
in the past.
2. Close the statewide skills gap for technically trained workers.
3. Increase funding for adult basic skills programs.
4. Contribute more to the production of baccalaureate degrees.
5. Work with our partners in the P-20 education system to create
seamless, easy-to-navigate pathways for all students.
6. Use performance measures and funding as incentives to improve
student retention and achievement.
7. Invest in sustaining faculty and staff excellence.
8. Build a 21st century learning infrastructure.
9. Promote the adoption of web-based and mobile technology tools
for eLearning and online student services.
10. Devote a larger share of system resources to teaching and
learning by making smarter use of technology and promoting
efficiencies in college district governance.
TAB 4
Attachment C
Potential 2013-15 Operating Budget Request Items Identified by Small Groups at the
March Board Meeting
1.
2.
3.
4.
Potential Budget Request Items Identified by
Small Groups at March Board Meeting
Employee Compensation and Development
a. Faculty and Staff Salary Increases
b. Professional Development
c. Faculty Increment Funding
d. Close part-time faculty salary gap
e. Full-Time/Part-Time Faculty Mix
Enrollment – Establish policy goals related to
gaps and fund them.
a. General Enrollments
b. ABE/ESL
c. I-BEST
d. STEM
e. Underserved Students
f. Professional/Technical Programs
i. Address skills gap
ii. Fund high-cost programs
g. Pre-college (Dev. Ed.)
i. Faculty: investment for professional
development
ii. Wrap-around student services
iii. Build on best/promising practices
(e.g., I-TRANS)
Increase commitment to student success and
completion by increasing availability of
comprehensive wrap-around services.
a. Single point of contact
b. Book loan program
c. Opportunity Grants
d. Counseling/advising
e. Academic planning
f. Increase number of faculty and staff
Innovation: Continue investment in technology
a. Professional development in use of
technology
b. Open Course Library
c. eLearning and online services
d. Statewide/library resources
e. Teaching & learning (new technology)
5. Tuition and Financial Aid
a. No tuition increases
b. Increase financial aid
c. Scholarships for undocumented
students not eligible for financial aid
6. Building repair & maintenance funding from
operating budget
System Direction/Mission Study
Invest in sustaining faculty and staff
excellence.
Economic Demand: Strengthen state and
local economies by meeting the demands
for a well-educated and skilled workforce.
Student Success: Achieve increased
educational attainment for all residents
across the state.
Serve more people, including groups who
have been underserved in the past.
Increase funding for adult basic skills
programs.
Close the statewide skills gap for technically
trained workers.
Student Success: Achieve increased
educational attainment for all residents
across the state.
Innovation: Promote the adoption of webbased and mobile technology tools for
eLearning and online student services.
Devote a larger share of system resources
to teaching and learning by making smarter
use of technology and promoting
efficiencies in college district governance.
Student Success: Achieve increased
educational attainment for all residents
across the state.
Innovation: Build a 21st century learning
infrastructure.
TAB 4
Attachment C
Other items mentioned in small group discussions:
•
•
•
•
•
ctcLink. This item is not included above because the legislature has already authorized a funding
source.
Student Management Systems: This item is not included in the list above because it will be part
of the ctcLink implementation.
Focus on Ed Partnerships: College Readiness (K12), Transfers (4 year).
Frame the request around overall statewide investment in Higher Ed.
Dedicated, reliable, protected stream of funding.
TAB 5a
REGULAR MEETING OF THE STATE BOARD FOR
COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
MEETING MINUTES
March 29, 2012
State Board Members
Sharon Fairchild (Chair), Spokane
Beth Willis (Vice Chair), Lakewood
Jim Bricker, Coupeville
Erin Mundinger, Omak
Shaunta Hyde, Lake Forest Park
Elizabeth Chen, Federal Way
Anne Fennessy, Seattle
Wayne Martin, Richland
Larry Brown, Auburn
Statutory Authority: Laws of 1967, Chapter 28B.50 Revised Code of Washington
State of Washington
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
Olympia
ACTION INDEX
March 29, 2012
Resolution
Number
12-03-02
12-03-03
12-03-04
12-03-05
12-03-08
Description
Adoption of Consent Agenda:
- Approval of State Board Regular Meeting Minutes
for February 2, 2012
- Peninsula College Local Expenditure Authority,
Fort Warden Building 202 Renovation
- Pierce College Local Expenditure Authority,
Science Dome
- Green River Local Expenditure Authority,
Lindbloom Student Center Design
- Lake Washington Local Expenditure Authority,
HVAC and Welding Improvements
- Clover Park Technical College, Property Exchange
and Sale
Page in
Minutes
2
2
2
2
2
2
12-03-06
Request for Proposal for ctcLink
3
12-03-07
Centralia College Applied Baccalaureate degree in Applied
Management
4
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
Olympia
Regular Meeting Minutes
March 29, 2012
State Board Office, Olympia, WA
The State Board held a study session on March 29, from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the State Board
Office in Olympia. The Board heard a presentation on Mission Study Recommendation: Promote the
adoption of web-based and mobile technology tools for eLearning and online student services. The
Board received updates on Legislative Session including a report from Representative Larry Seaquist
and the Student Achievement Initiative Review. The Board also had a chance to review and discuss
the ctcLink milestones and key issues in preparation for their vote on the ctcLink ERP Request for
Proposal.
State Board Members Present: Sharon Fairchild (Chair), Beth Willis (Vice Chair), Jim Bricker, Erin
Mundinger, Shaunta Hyde, Elizabeth Chen, Anne Fennessy, Wayne Martin, Larry Brown
State Board Members Absent:
CALL TO ORDER AND WELCOME
Chair Sharon Fairchild called the meeting to order at 8:15 a.m., welcomed those present and asked
for self-introductions.
ADOPTION OF REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
MOTION: Moved by Beth Willis and seconded by Larry Brown that the State Board adopt its
March 29, 2012 regular meeting agenda.
MOTION CARRIED.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Data Governance Committee Structure
Parenting Education Waiver WAC Change
HECB Letter – University Center of North Puget Sound
Revised Mission Study Recommendation Schedule
WELA Annual Report (Cindy Hough)
Student Achievement Council
Aerospace Pipeline and Program Advisory Panels
Anne Fennessy recommended that the Board nominate the Executive Director as its
representative to the Student Achievement Council.
MOTION: Moved by Anne Fennessy and seconded by Erin Mundinger that the State Board
support the nomination of the Executive Director as its representative to the Student
Achievement Council.
MOTION CARRIED.
State Board Regular Meeting minutes
March 29, 2012
Page 2
ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA (Resolutions 12-03-02 through 12-03-05 and 12-03-08)
MOTION: Moved by Beth Willis and seconded by Shaunta Hyde that the State Board adopt the
consent agenda for its March 29, 2012 regular meeting as follows:
a) Approval of February 2, 2012 State Board regular meeting minutes
b) Resolution 12-03-02 (ATTACHMENT #1): Peninsula College Local Expenditure
Authority, Fort Warden Building 202 Renovation
c) Resolution 12-03-03 (ATTACHMENT #2): Pierce College Local Expenditure Authority,
Science Dome
d) Resolution 12-03-04 (ATTACHMENT #3): Green River Local Expenditure Authority,
Lindbloom Student Center Design
e) Resolution 12-03-05 (ATTACHMENT #4): Lake Washington Local Expenditure Authority,
HVAC and Welding Improvements
f) Resolution 12-03-08 (ATTACHMENT #5): Clover Park Technical College Property
Exchange and Sale
MOTION CARRIED.
2013 BUDGET ALLOCATIONS AND TUITION PREVIEW
Denise Graham and Nick Lutes of the State Board staff presented that as of March 15, the outcome of
the 2012 supplemental budget remains unknown, as the legislature ended its regular session on
March 8 and resumed under a Governor requested special session the following Monday, March 12.
An enacted budget is anticipated within the next month. In May the Board will adopt initial operating
budget allocations, as well as tuition and fee schedules for FY 2013. Staff provided context and
information relevant to the upcoming decisions to the Board and the Board provided direction to staff
on FY 2013 allocations and on tuition increases for resident and non-resident students. Ed Brewster,
representing WACTC along with a panel of students presented to the Board the impacts of the budget
cuts and possible tuition increases.
The Board discussed with the staff and panel of presenters the budget allocation and tuition schedule
decision points including; Operating Budget Allocation Methodologies, Tuition, Enrollment Rule
Recommendations and Innovation Account Funding. The Board will be voting on the 2013 Budget
Allocations and Tuition Increases at the next State Board meeting in May.
2013-15 OPERATING BUDGET DEVELOPMENT
Denise Graham and Nick Lutes of the State Board staff presented that the 2013-15 biennium
operating budget submittal is due to the Office of Financial Management (OFM) September 2012. At
the February meeting the Board received a presentation on the status of our fiscal environment to
ground the discussions about priorities in the new biennium.
Board members, Trustees, Presidents, Students and Labor Representatives broke into small groups
to discuss the 2013-15 operating budget development framework. They discussed what critical areas
the state should invest to increase student success, educational attainment and our colleges’
contribution to a vibrant economy. From the break out group discussions the suggestions will be
complied and brought back to the Presidents and then the Board at the next couple of meetings.
State Board Regular Meeting minutes
February 2, 2012
Page 3
Erin Mundinger recommended that the Board create a task force to continue in the 2013-15
Operating Budget Development discussions.
MOTION: Moved by Erin Mundinger and seconded by Beth Willis that the State Board staff
come back to the Board with a proposal on the task force.
MOTION CARRIED.
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR CTCLINK (RESOLUTION 12-03-06)
Mike Scroggins of the State Board staff presented that the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Project (ctcLink) will replace a wide variety of computer systems across the 34 colleges. The ERP will
provide improved student services, comprehensive financial aid services, a unified view of human
resources, integrated financial management controls, and robust reporting and research capabilities.
The ERP will be the template to align college and system business processes.
The next phase is to release the request for proposals, evaluate the vendor responses, select an
apparent successful vendor, and negotiate and sign contracts.
During the previous days study session the Board received information about approximately how
much each college would be contributing to the Innovation Account the legislature established, how
security and privacy would be handled and how the project is lining up with the efficiency study. They
also discussed the major technology milestones and the project principles.
MOTION: Moved by Erin Mundinger and seconded by Jim Bricker that the State Board adopt
Resolution 12-03-06 (ATTACHMENT #6) to grant the Executive Director authority to take the
steps necessary to release a RFP (Request for Proposal), evaluate responses, and recommend
an apparent successful vendor for the Washington State community and technical college
system.
MOTION CARRIED.
CENTRALIA COLLEGE APPLIED BACCALAUREATE DEGREE IN APPLIED MANAGEMENT
(RESOLUTION 12-03-07)
Jan Yoshiwara and Kathy Goebel of the State Board staff presented that in November 2010, the State
Board and the Higher Education Coordinating Board (HECB) approved a process, selection criteria,
and application materials for community and technical colleges seeking to offer an applied
baccalaureate degree program.
Centralia College completed an initial step in the approval process when college administrators met
with State Board members in October 2011 to discuss how the proposed Applied Management
degree aligns with the college’s strategic goals and helps meet regional/statewide needs.
An intermediate step in the approval process (and final action step for the State Board) requires State
Board approval of denial of the college’s application to offer the proposed Bachelor of Applied Science
degree. If approved, Centralia College’s application moves to the HECB for consideration.
State Board Regular Meeting minutes
February 2, 2012
Page 4
The Board heard a presentation from a Centralia College panel outlining how the Centralia College
Bachelors of Applied Science Management (BASM) would benefit both students and the community.
MOTION: Moved by Jim Bricker and seconded by Shaunta Hyde that the State Board adopt
Resolution 12-03-07 (ATTACHMENT #7) to approve the Centralia College Applied
Baccalaureate Degree in Applied Management.
MOTION CARRIED.
CHAIR’S REPORT
Chair Fairchild presented her report:
• Trustees’ Association Report. TACTC President Tom Malone reported on the topics of:
Open Course Library Savings, Greater Good Campaign Add in the Seattle Times, TACTC
Spring Convention In June that will also include another GISS Training, and the TACTC Fall
Conference which will look beyond the GISS Training and Transforming Lives Video.
• Presidents’ Association Report. WACTC President Gerald Pumphrey reported on the
topics of: The WACTC Meeting including the Washington All-Academic Awards and
Gubernatorial Candidate Jay Inslee, Greater Good Campaign Add in the Seattle Times,
Outcomes of Legislative Sessions and Budget effects on the colleges.
• Parking Lot Items. A list of the State Board’s “Parking Lot” items was presented for review
and updates.
ADJOURNMENT/NEXT MEETING There being no further business, the State Board adjourned its
regular meeting of March 29, 2012 at 12:35 p.m. The State Board will hold its next regular business
meeting May 9-10, 2012 at Big Bend Community College.
______________________________
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
Tab 5b
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE STATE BOARD FOR
COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
MEETING MINUTES
April 17, 2012
State Board Members
Sharon Fairchild (Chair), Spokane
Beth Willis (Vice Chair), Lakewood
Jim Bricker, Coupeville
Erin Mundinger, Omak
Shaunta Hyde, Lake Forest Park
Elizabeth Chen, Federal Way
Anne Fennessy, Seattle
Wayne Martin, Richland
Larry Brown, Auburn
Statutory Authority: Laws of 1967, Chapter 28B.50 Revised Code of Washington
State of Washington
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
Olympia
ACTION INDEX
April 17, 2012
Resolution
Number
Description
Adoption of Special Meeting Agenda
Page in
Minutes
1
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
Olympia, Washington
Special Meeting Minutes
April 17, 2012
SBCTC Office, Olympia
State Board Members Present: Sharon Fairchild, Beth Willis, Jim Bricker, Erin Mundinger,
Shaunta Hyde, Elizabeth Chen, Anne Fennessy, Wayne Martin, Larry Brown
State Board Members Absent: Wayne Martin
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Sharon Fairchild called the State Board’s special business meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.
and welcomed those present.
ADOPTION OF SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
MOTION: Moved by Jim Bricker and seconded by Larry Brown that the State Board
adopt its April 17, 2012 special meeting agenda as presented.
MOTION CARRIED.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board convened in executive sessions from 10:05 a.m. to 10:40 a.m. to review the
performance of the Executive Director. No action was taken by the Board during the executive
session.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the State Board adjourned its special meeting of April 12, 2012
at 10:40 a.m.
_____________________________
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 5c
May 10, 2012
Consent Item
Action (Resolution 12-05-09)
Topic
Approval of 2012-13 State Board Meeting Dates and Locations
Description
The State Board adopts a schedule of regular meetings each fiscal year for publication in the
Washington State Register. Meetings are held approximately seven times per year on
community and technical college campuses at intervals of six to eight weeks. Locations rotate
among all 34 community and technical colleges, balancing visits on the east and west sides of
the state. During legislative sessions, meetings are held in or near Olympia. The two-day
meetings include a study session on the first day designed to provide Board members with an
in-depth discussion about policy issues, and a regular business meeting on the second day
when action items are addressed. The State Board holds its annual retreat in September.
Major Considerations
•
•
•
•
Board members reviewed and commented on a preliminary meeting schedule, and the
proposed schedule incorporates their feedback
The executive director and deputy executive directors reviewed and approved the proposed
meeting schedule.
The proposed meeting schedule is designed to align properly with the Board’s policy and
budget decision-making processes.
The meeting dates and locations have been confirmed by the host college presidents.
Analysis
The following schedule of seven State Board regular meetings is proposed for 2012-13:
September 10-12, 2012 (retreat)
State Board Office, Olympia
October 24-25, 2012
Grays Harbor College
December 5-6, 2012
Pierce College Fort Steilacoom
February 6-7, 2013
State Board Office, Olympia
March 27-28, 2013
State Board Office, Olympia
May 8-9, 2013
Green River Community College
June 19-20, 2013
Spokane Falls Community College
Recommendation
It is recommended that the State Board adopt Resolution 12-05-09 approving its schedule of
meeting dates and locations for 2012-13 for publication in the Washington State Register.
Prepared by: Beth Gordon, 360-704-4309, bgordon@sbctc.edu
TAB 5b
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-09
WHEREAS the State Board adopts its meeting schedule for the fiscal year for
publication in the Washington State Register;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board has agreed upon the following
meeting dates and locations for 2012-13:
September 10-12, 2012 (retreat)
October 24-25, 2012
December 5-6, 2012
February 6-7, 2013
March 27-28, 2013
May 8-9, 2013
June 19-20, 2013
State Board Office, Olympia
Grays Harbor College
Pierce College Fort Steilacoom
State Board Office, Olympia
State Board Office, Olympia
Green River Community College
Spokane Falls Community College
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on May 10, 2012.
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 5d
May 10, 2012
Consent Item
Action (Resolution 12-05-10)
Topic
Olympic College Property Acquisition (Broadway Avenue)
Description
Olympic College is requesting authority to acquire the section of Broadway Avenue running
through campus, from 13th Street to 16th Street, when it is vacated by the City of Bremerton.
The acquisition is a part of the college’s master plan and was approved by the college’s Board
of Trustees on April 17, 2012. In exchange for the vacated property, the State Board would
dedicate a strip of land along Warren Avenue and 13th Street to the city.
Major Considerations
•
•
•
The vacated property and the property to be dedicated have similar values.
Any expenditures above the dedicated property value will be paid from mitigation costs
covered in the Humanities Building Replacement appropriation.
The proposed acquisition is within the college’s facility master plan.
Analysis
The City of Bremerton has agreed to vacate a section of Broadway Avenue which runs through
the Olympic College campus, from 13th Street to 16th Street. In return, the college will dedicate
to the city property along Warren Avenue and 13th Street and be responsible for constructing a
traffic signal there. Obtaining ownership of the property is a part of Olympic College’s facility
master plan. The Department of Enterprise Services is helping the college put together the
transfer documents, which are still being drafted. Any expenditures above the dedicated
property value that arise will be paid out of mitigation costs covered in the state appropriation for
the construction of the college’s Humanities Building Replacement Project (20061204).
Background Information
Attachment A: Map of Broadway Avenue vacation
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-05-10, giving Olympic College authority to
exchange the section of Broadway Avenue running through campus, from 13th Street to 16th
Street, when it is vacated by the city, for property along Warren Avenue and 13th Street, as
shown on Attachment A.
Prepared by: Wayne Doty, 360-704-4382, wdoty@sbctc.edu
TAB 5d
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-10
A resolution relating to Olympic College’s authority to exchange property with the City of
Bremerton.
WHEREAS Olympic College has as part of their master plan the acquisition of the
section of Broadway Avenue running through campus, from 13th Street to 16th Street; and
WHEREAS the City of Bremerton has agreed to vacate the property and let Olympic
College take over ownership in exchange for dedication of property along Warren Avenue and
13th Street; and
WHEREAS any expenditures above the dedicated property value that arise will be paid
out of mitigation costs covered in the state appropriation for the construction of the college’s
Humanities Building Replacement Project (20061204).
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical
Colleges gives Olympic College authority to exchange the section of Broadway Avenue running
through campus, from 13th Street to 16th Street, when it is vacated by the city, for property along
Warren Avenue and 13th Street, as shown on Attachment A.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED May 10, 2012.
_______________________________________
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
TAB 5d
Attachment A
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 5e
May 10, 2012
Consent Item
Action (Resolution 12-05-11)
Topic
Bates Technical College – Local Expenditure Authority (Downtown Main Building Restoration)
Description
Bates Technical College is seeking approval to use up to $190,000 in local funds, including
$160,000 in financed equipment, for their Downtown Main Building Restoration project. The
project is expected to cost $1,411,000. The balance of the funding will come from existing state
appropriations. The college’s Board of Trustees has approved the project. Capital projects over
$400,000 require State Board authorization.
Major Considerations


The college has sufficient local funds dedicated for this project.
The college’s Board of Trustees has approved the project.
Analysis
The third floor and room M218 on the second floor of Bates Technical College’s Downtown
Campus Main Building were built using hazardous materials which are now breaking down and
becoming a safety concern for faculty and students. A number of 9’x9’ asbestos containing
materials (ACM) floor tiles have started breaking and have become so worn that fibrous
materials are becoming air born. Where floor tiles have been broken from normal use of the
spaces, the black mastic has become exposed. Several walls have tested positive for lead
paint where it was flaking off the wall at exterior window locations.
Programs have been temporarily relocated and abatement activities have begun to eliminate
risk of hazardous materials exposure to building occupants. The requested project is required
to complete restoration of the spaces, restoring them to usable educational spaces for
instructional program activities.
The total cost of the restoration is estimated to cost $1,411,000. The college already has state
appropriations for emergency and hazardous material remediation of $967,525 dedicated to this
project. The college will obtain a COP for equipment valued at approximately $160,000. The
college will also use $254,000 in savings from existing minor works appropriations after
providing OFM and legislative finance committees the required notice.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-05-11, allowing Bates Technical College local
expenditure authority to use up to $190,000 for their Downtown Main Building Restoration.
Prepared by: Wayne Doty, 360-704-4382, wdoty@sbctc.edu
Tab 5e
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-11
A resolution relating to Bates Technical College’s local expenditure authority for the Downtown
Main Building Restoration.
WHEREAS, the third floor and room M218 on the second floor of Bates Technical
College’s Downtown Campus Main Building were built using hazardous materials which are now
breaking down and becoming a safety concern for faculty and students; and
WHEREAS, programs have been temporarily relocated and abatement activities have
begun to eliminate risk of hazardous materials exposure to building occupants. The requested
project is required to complete restoration of the spaces, restoring them to usable educational
spaces for instructional program activities; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of the restoration is $1,411,000 and the difference will be paid
from existing state appropriations and a new equipment COP.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical
Colleges authorizes Bates Technical College local expenditure authority, not to exceed
$190,000, for the Downtown Main Building Restoration.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on May 10, 2012.
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 5f
May 10, 2012
Consent Item
Action (Resolution 12-05-12)
Topic
Clover Park Technical College – Local Expenditure Authority (Learning Resource Center
Renovation)
Description
Clover Park Technical College is seeking approval to use up to $1,900,000 in local funds for
their Learning Resource Center Renovation project. The college’s Board of Trustees has
delegated local expenditure approval to the president, who has approved the project. Capital
projects over $400,000 require State Board authorization.
Major Considerations
•
•
The college has sufficient local funds dedicated for this project.
The college’s president has approved the project.
Analysis
Clover Park Technical College’s 35+ year old library is in need of renovation, as part of their
Learning Resource Center. The renovation cost is not expected to exceed $1,900,000.
Approximately $1,000,000 will come from the sale of land to the Clover Park School District and
another $700,000-$900,000 will come from college reserves.
Background Information
Clover Park Technical College property exchange and sale to Clover Park School District:
SBCTC Resolution 12-03-08
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-05-12, allowing Clover Park Technical College
local expenditure authority to use up to $1,900,000 for their Learning Resource Center
Renovation.
Prepared by: Wayne Doty, 360-704-4382, wdoty@sbctc.edu
Tab 5f
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-12
A resolution relating to Clover Park Technical College’s local expenditure authority for their
Learning Resource Center Renovation.
WHEREAS, Clover Park Technical College’s 35+ year old library is in need of
renovation, as part of their Learning Resource Center; and
WHEREAS, the renovation cost is not expected to exceed $1,900,000. Approximately
$1,000,000 will come from the previously approved sale of land to the Clover Park School
District and another $700,000-$900,000 will come from college reserves.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical
Colleges authorizes Clover Park Technical College local expenditure authority, not to exceed
$1,900,000 for the Learning Resource Center Renovation.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on May 10, 2012.
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 6
May 10, 2012
Discussion
Action (Resolution 12-05-13)
Topic
2012 Supplemental Capital Budget Allocations
Description
The Legislature passed two bills for the 2012 capital budget on April 11, 2011 and the Governor
signed them into law on April 23, 2012. Senate Bill 5127 provides General Obligation (GO)
Bond funding for the design of Olympic College’s Instruction Center, construction of North
Seattle’s Technology Building Renewal, and part of the funding for an Equipment Pool to
support high-demand fields of study. Senate Bill 6074 reduces current GO Bond appropriations
for bid savings at Everett and Clover Park and funds construction of Tacoma’s Health Careers
Center with GO Bonds. Senate Bill 6074 also authorizes financing of the Skagit Valley and
Lower Columbia projects with Certificates of Participation (COPs), and funds the remainder of
the Equipment Pool from the Building Fee account. It also authorizes a long-term lease for
Spokane, locally supported COPs at Everett and Spokane, and financing of the ctcLink project
from the Innovation Fund. The State Board is to manage the Equipment Pool that includes
$16,630,000 of items, but is only funded with $15,000,000.
Key Question
•
Does the proposed allocation of the 2012 supplemental capital appropriations to the
colleges and their use of non-appropriated and non-allotted “local funds” for debt service on
alternately financed projects align with the SBCTC’s System Direction and Mission Study
objectives to strengthen the economy and improve student success through the use of
innovation?
Analysis
The supplemental budget provides the community and technical colleges with $135,255,000 in
new appropriations and financing authority for capital projects in our system’s priority order. It
also provides appropriations and authority for projects totaling another $72,100,000.
The budget will significantly improve our ability to address existing capital needs at the
community and technical colleges.
Major Project Allocations (Attachment A)
The SBCTC’s capital request for new appropriation is compared to the enacted law in
Attachment A. This attachment also provides the allocation amount and SBCTC project
numbers for the major projects.
TAB 6, Page 2
Alternatively Financed Projects (Attachment B)
In addition to the Building Fee backed COPs for major projects, the Legislature authorized
$57,100,000 in new COPs to be paid back from non-appropriated funds. There is also authority
for a long-term lease subject to the approval of the Office of Financial Management as required
by chapter 43.82 RCW. These authorities are listed in Attachment B.
Equipment Pool (Attachment C)
The Legislature provided a list of equipment by college that could be acquired with the
$15,000,000 provided. The list is valued at $16,630,000. The Executive Director will adjust the
allocations in response to actual costs in a manner that is equitable to the colleges. Attachment
C has the initial allocation by college for the equipment and a description of how the allocations
will be managed.
Background Information
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Attachment A: Major Project Allocations
Attachment B: Alternatively Financed Projects
Attachment C: Equipment Pool
High‐Demand Fields of Study Equipment List, LEAP Capital Document No. 2012-34 –
http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/Budget/Detail/2012/hcLEAPDoc2012-340308.pdf
2011-13 Budget Request (Resolution 10-06-29) –
http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/admin/June_2010_Complete_Agenda.pdf
Budget Update Study Session –
http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/admin/January_20_2011_Complete_Agenda_Packet.p
df
Spokane Aerospace (Resolution 10-09-44) –
http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/admin/2010_Complete_Retreat_Agenda.pdf
Recommendation
State Board staff recommends that the Board adopt Resolution 12-05-13 which provides:
1. Major project funding allocations to the colleges at the appropriated value. The required
set aside for Art will be sent directly to the Art Commission.
2. Authority for colleges to use non-appropriated and non-allotted “local funds” for
alternatively financed and major projects consistent with their capital request.
3. Distribution of funding for equipment to support high-demand fields of study as provided
by the Legislature.
4. Authorization for the Executive Director to approve fund transfers for emergencies and
hazardous material abatement to colleges when circumstances arise during the
biennium in accordance with SBCTC policies.
5. Authorization for the Executive Director to adjust the allocations for equipment in
response to actual costs and make technical corrections to all allocations, if necessary.
Prepared by: Wayne Doty, 360-704-4382, wdoty@sbctc.edu
TAB 6
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-13
A resolution relating to the 2012 supplemental to the 2011-13 capital budget.
WHEREAS, a supplemental to the 2011-13 capital budget has been passed by the
Legislature modifying the biennial capital program for Community and Technical Colleges; and
WHEREAS, the 2012 supplemental capital budget includes funding for major projects
and equipment and authorizes alternatively financed projects.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical
Colleges distribute a total of $81,066,000 in new appropriations, $69,189,000 in new authorities
for major projects and equipment, and reduces existing appropriations by $752,000 as
presented in Attachment A; and
BE IT RESOLVED, that the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges allocate
$57,100,000 in new Certificates of Participation and pursue a long term lease as described in
Attachment B; and
BE IT RESOLVED, that the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges allocate
$15,000,000 for Equipment as described in Attachment C and the Executive Director will adjust
the allocations in response to actual costs in a manner that is equitable to the colleges; and
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Executive Director is authorized to make adjustments as
may be necessary in response to actions taken by the Governor, for computational errors, data
corrections, externally-imposed restrictions or guidelines, legislative appropriation provisos,
restrictions, guidelines, and uniform accounting and reporting requirements.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on May 10, 2012.
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
SBCTC Capital Requests for New Appropriated Funds in 2012 Supplemental
Request is based on May 28, 2010, June 30, 2010 and January 7, 2011 WACTC Recommendations and SBCTC Resolutions 10-06-29, 10-08-33, 11-1-8 and 11-09-50. Projects
funded in the 2011-13 biennial budget have been removed from the list.
Request 2Dec11
New Law 23Apr12 (Note I)
Priority
Phase
College
Number
SBCTC #
Project
New Approp. Cummulative New Approp. Cummulative
(631,000)
(631,000)
20081221
K258
Index Hall Replacement
Construction Everett
(752,000)
(121,000)
20062699
K257
Allied Health Care Facility
Construction Clover Park
14,248,000
92000011 Attach. C Equipment Pool
15,000,000
Construction Statewide
30,574,000
44,822,000
1
20081224
K354
Academic and Student Services Building
30,574,000
30,574,000
Construction Skagit Valley
69,189,000
83,437,000
2
K355
Health and Science Building
38,615,000
38,615,000
Construction Lower Columbia 20081225
72,813,000
87,061,000
3
Olympic
30000122
K356
College Instruction Center
3,624,000
3,624,000
Design
96,148,000
110,396,000
4
30000129
K357
Technology Building Renewal
23,335,000
23,335,000
Construction North Seattle
135,255,000
149,503,000
5
20082701
K358
Health Careers Center
39,107,000
39,107,000
Construction Tacoma
141,382,000
149,503,000
6
Centralia
30000123
Student Services
6,127,000
Design
178,490,000
149,503,000
7
20082702
Health Science Building
37,108,000
Construction Bellevue
179,520,000
149,503,000
8
Columbia Basin
20082704
Social Science Center
1,030,000
Design
181,221,000
149,503,000
9
Peninsula
30000126
Allied Health and Early Childhood Dev Center
1,701,000
Design
226,659,000
149,503,000
10
20081226
Science and Math Building
45,438,000
Construction Grays Harbor
229,335,000
149,503,000
11
South
Seattle
30000128
Cascade
Court
2,676,000
Design
231,135,000
149,503,000
12
Renton
30000134
Automotive Complex Renovation
1,800,000
Design
239,569,000
149,503,000
13
Edmonds
30000137
Science Engineering Technology Bldg
8,434,000
Design
257,148,000
149,503,000
14
30000120
Seattle Maritime Academy
17,579,000
Construction Seattle Central
276,186,000
149,503,000
15
30000121
Palmer Martin Building
19,038,000
Construction Yakima Valley
305,367,000
149,503,000
16
20081222
Trades and Industry Building
29,181,000
Construction Green River
306,936,000
149,503,000
17
Whatcom
30000138
Learning Commons
1,569,000
Design
331,097,000
149,503,000
18
20082703
Mohler Communications Technology Center
24,161,000
Construction Bates
368,379,000
149,503,000
19
20082705
Health and Advanced Technologies Building
37,282,000
Construction Clark
Notes: A) Construction occurs in order of system priority.
B) Predesigns and designs needed for 2013-15 construction are added to the list assuming about $291M in state capital appropriations in 2013-15.
C) Construction Administration costs are included in the period when construction is funded including the CA shifts in 2009-11 Enacted 2010 Supplemental Budget.
I) Based on SB 5127 and SB 6074. The projects at Lower Columbia and Skagit are COPs backed by Building Fee. The State Board is to manage the Equipment Pool that
includes $16,630,000 of items but is only funded with $15,000,000. The list is here - http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/Budget/Detail/2012/hcLEAPDoc2012-340308.pdf
Tab 6
Attachment A
Tab 6
Attachment B
SBCTC Capital Requests for Alternatively Financed Projects to be paid from non-appropriated funds in 2012
List is based on SBCTC Resolutions 11-09-50 and 11-12-64.
Request
College
Number
Authorize
SBCTC
30000719
Authorize
Everett
30000718
Authorize
Authorize
Authorize
Community Colleges
of Spokane
Community Colleges
of Spokane
Cascadia
30000720
Note 2
Note 2
SBCTC # Reference Project
Administrative System
SSHB1909
Replacement Project
Renovate Corporate and
K359
Continuing Education Building
ESHB 1497 Spokane Aerospace Long Term
Sec. 6007 Lease at Geiger Field
Institute of Extended Learning
K360
addition at SCC
UWB/Cascadia Student Union
Building
Request
16Feb12
New Law
23Apr12
50,000,000
50,000,000
4,000,000
4,000,000
Note 1
Included
3,100,000
3,100,000
5,900,000
Note 4
Notes:
1) The lease will be paid in advance from the exchange of the Geiger Field property and lease-hold improvements at Felts
2) These projects were added on December 1, 2011 in Resolution 11-12-64.
3) ctcLink project total is $100,000,000. The portion financed was revised down to $50,000,000 on February 16, 2012 as
supported by the offices of the Chief Information Officer and the State Treasurer.
4) Cascadia withdrew request.
TAB 6
Attachment C
State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
High
-Demand Fields of Study Equipment List
LEAP Capital Document No. 2012
-34
Project 92000011 funded in SB 5127 and SB 6074 with 057 and 060, respectively.
College
Bates Technical College
Bellevue College
Bellingham Technical College
Big Bend Community College
Centralia College
Clark College
Clover Park Technical College
Columbia Basin College
Edmonds Community College
Everett Community College
Grays Harbor College
Green River Community College
Highline Community College
Lake Washington Institute of Technology
Lower Columbia College
North Seattle Community College
Olympic College
Peninsula College
Pierce College Ft. Steilacoom
Pierce College Puyallup
Renton Technical College
Seattle Central Community College
Shoreline Community College
Skagit Valley College
South Puget Sound Community College
South Seattle Community College
Spokane Community College
Spokane Falls Community College
Tacoma Community College
Walla Walla Community College
Wenatchee Valley College
Whatcom Community College
Yakima Valley Community College
Grand Total
Expected Cost
689,000
994,000
1,087,000
258,000
173,000
834,000
1,009,000
310,000
397,000
763,000
272,000
1,045,000
204,000
443,000
544,000
235,000
624,000
131,000
625,000
167,000
255,000
742,000
729,000
172,000
367,000
393,000
320,000
111,000
576,000
391,000
922,000
418,000
430,000
16,630,000
Initial Allocation Amounts by Fund
057
060
Amount SBCTC # Amount SBCTC #
Total
509,602 K361
111,864 K394
621,466
735,189 K362
161,383 K395
896,572
803,976 K363
176,482 K396
980,458
190,824 K364
41,888 K397
232,712
127,956 K365
28,088 K398
156,044
616,852 K366
135,406 K399
752,258
746,283 K367
163,818 K400
910,101
229,283 K368
50,331 K401
279,614
64,456 K402
293,632 K369
358,088
564,335 K370
123,878 K403
688,213
201,179 K371
44,161 K404
245,340
772,909 K372
169,663 K405
942,572
150,884 K373
33,121 K406
184,005
327,655 K374
71,924 K407
399,579
402,358 K375
88,322 K408
490,680
173,813 K376
38,154 K409
211,967
461,527 K377
101,311 K410
562,838
96,890 K378
21,269 K411
118,159
462,268 K379
101,474 K412
563,742
123,517 K380
27,113 K413
150,630
188,605 K381
41,401 K414
230,006
548,804 K382
120,469 K415
669,273
539,189 K383
118,359 K416
657,548
127,216 K384
27,926 K417
155,142
271,441 K385
59,585 K418
331,026
290,674 K386
63,806 K419
354,480
236,680 K387
51,954 K420
288,634
82,098 K388
18,022 K421
100,120
426,025 K389
93,518 K422
519,543
289,193 K390
63,481 K423
352,674
681,938 K391
149,694 K424
831,632
309,165 K392
67,865 K425
377,030
318,040 K393
69,814 K426
387,854
12,300,000
2,700,000
15,000,000
Note: Allocations will be adjusted to actual costs up to a system total of $15M. If actual costs exceed $15M, then
allocations will be adjusted so that each college pays the same percentage of local funding above the funding
provided, or in another equitable manner as determined by the SBCTC Executive Director.
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 7
May 10, 2012
Discussion
Action
2013 Allocations
2013 Tuition Rates
(Resolution 12-05-14)
(Resolution 12-05-15)
Topic
Fiscal Year 2013 Operating Budget Allocations and Enrollment Rules
Fiscal Year 2013 Tuition Rates
Description
The Legislature passed the 2012 supplemental operating budget (3ESHB 2127) on April 11, 2012
and the Governor signed the bill into law on May 2, 2012. The Board is asked to adopt the initial
allocation for the FY 2013 operating budget appropriations to the college districts and the State
Board office. The Board will also consider for adoption enrollment rules for the 2012-13 academic
year.
The State Board has responsibility for adopting operating fees, building fees and the maximum
allowable student activity fees for the community colleges, as well as the tuition for upper division
students enrolled in the system’s applied baccalaureate programs. At this meeting the Board will be
asked to adopt 2012-13 tuition rates, effective Fall Quarter 2012.
Key Questions






Does the proposed FY 2013 initial allocation to college districts and State Board office align with
the System Direction and Mission Study recommendations?
Are the proposed earmarks totaling $40,331,212 in funding for certain specified uses consistent
with Board priorities?
Are the proposed FY 2013 enrollment rules consistent with the Board’s goals of maintaining
access and student success?
Should lower division resident tuition increase by the maximum allowable 12 percent?
Should lower division non-resident tuition increase by 12 percent or the same dollar amount as
resident tuition?
Should upper division tuition increase by the maximum allowable 12 percent?
Analysis
2013 ALLOCATION
Budget Changes
After final enactment of the 2012 supplemental budget, the community and technical college
system’s 2011-13 biennium operating appropriations total $1.18 billion, $1.158 billion of which are
included in the operating budget and are distributed to the colleges through the operating budget
allocations. The remaining $22.8 million are M&O funds included in the capital budget. (See
Attachment A – SBCTC 2011-13 Biennium Source of Funds.)
TAB 7, Page 2
Operating budget appropriations for the second year of the biennium, FY 2013, total $573,188,000.
The sources of funding are as follows:



$516,861,000 from General Fund-State
$47,553,000 from the Education Legacy Trust Account
$8,774,000 from the Community/Technical College Capital Projects Account
Community and Technical College’s funding changes from FY 2012 to FY 2013 are driven by two
sources. The first source is year-to-year changes in the biennial budget enacted last year. These
changes are:




($3.5 million) in additional Permanent Budget Reductions
($4.753 million) in additional One-time Reductions
$871,000 in Maintenance & Operations and leases funding
$842,000 in additional adjustments, including compensation and pension changes
Changes made in the 2012 supplemental budget include:

Alternative Finance Project Debt Service: $4.756 million per year from the
Community/Technical College Capital Projects Account for debt service payments related to
Certificates of Participation issued to construct Skagit Valley College’s Academic and
Student Services Building and Lower Columbia College’s Health and Science Building.
(Note: This account is funded by building fees collected by the colleges.)

Statewide Aerospace Training Coordination: $131,000 provided to implement the
provisions of 2SHB 2156 which requires the State Board, in cooperation with other
aerospace and advance manufacturing materials training providers, to better coordinate
training opportunities in these fields.

Miscellaneous Pass-through adjustments: $9.028 million net reduction in appropriations
related to changes in employer contributions for PEBB health benefits, workers
compensation, and adjustments to central service charges from other state agencies.
Earmarks and Provisos (See Attachment B – FY 2013 State Board Earmarks and Legislative
Provisos.)
The operating budget bill contains eight funding provisos, totaling $41.9 million:




$2,725,000 million for the Job Skills Program
An additional $1,497,000 million from existing funds to expand the Student Achievement
Initiative
$33,261,000 for the Worker Retraining Program
NEW in 2012 supplemental budget:
o $2,000,000 from existing funds to support STEM Enrollment Expansion.
o $1,851,000 million from existing funds into the Customized Training Program (one-time).
o $131,000 for Statewide Aerospace Training Coordination.
o $100,000 from existing funds to support the Jefferson Education Center.
Over the years, the State Board has earmarked certain funds, requiring the colleges to use them for
specified purposes only. Although earmarked funds limit local flexibility, they also ensure that recent
commitments made to the Legislature are honored. In addition, earmarks express Board priorities.
State Board staff recommends the continuation of earmarks identified in FY 2012. FY 2013 earmark
recommendations are listed in Attachment B – State Board Earmarks and Legislative Provisos.
Some of these earmarks are for funding recently added to the two-year colleges budget, and as
such represent significant commitments on the part of the system to legislative priorities. Examples
of these types of earmarks include the following:
TAB 7, Page 3




Aerospace Training
Hospital Employee Education and Training Program
Opportunity Grants
Technology Transformation
Other recommended FY 2013 earmarks are existing earmarks that reflect high priorities of the State
Board. These include the following earmarks:














Aerospace Apprenticeships
Applied Baccalaureates
Basic Skills Enhancement
Centers of Excellence
Disability Accommodations
Employment Resource Center
Gateway Center
Labor Education & Research Center
Students of Color
University Center of North Puget Sound (UCNPS)
University Contracts
Additional Worker Retraining (beyond that included in the budget bill proviso)
Workforce Development Projects
Workplace-Based Instructional Programs
Finally, State Board staff recommends most earmarked items be reduced by 0.7%. This is the same
percentage cut applied to the colleges as the result of the General Reductions. State Board staff
recommends protecting the following earmarks from reductions: Basic Skills Enhancement;
Opportunity Grants, and Worker Retraining.
Recommended Allocations
The initial allocation for fiscal year 2013 consists of adjustments to current year funding (removing
one-time and variable funding and annualizing items funded for less than 12 months in FY 2012);
adjustments to base allocations to reflect changes in pension, health insurance, and workers
compensation contribution rates; additional funds provided by the Legislature; and distribution of the
various budget reductions to colleges and the State Board office.
The Permanent Budget Reduction of $3.6 million is distributed based on proportionate share of state
allocations adjusted for provisos and protected earmarks. For FY 2013 the Permanent Budget
Reduction is a combination of the $3.5 million efficiency savings enacted last year plus $100,000 to
fund the Jefferson Education Center.
The One-Time Reduction of $4.7 million is distributed based on proportionate share of state
appropriations. SBCTC program funds, future allocations, and reserves are excluded from the onetime reduction. The $1.851 million reduction to fund the Customized Training Program and the
$1.497 million reduction for the Student Achievement Initiative are distributed to districts based on
each district’s proportionate share of state allocations adjusted for provisos and protected earmarks.
(See Attachment C – FY 2013 Initial Allocation and Attachment D - FY 2013 Use of Funds.)
Future Allocations
The following budget items require additional information and will be allocated throughout the fiscal
year:
TAB 7, Page 4

Aerospace Apprenticeships – $2,392,921 will be allocated in consultation with the
Aerospace Apprenticeship Committee. College apprenticeship program development and
anticipated capacity will be considered in allocation decisions.

Aerospace Training – $1,515,400 will be allocated through an RFP process.

Alternative Finance Project Debt Service – $4,756,000 will be allocated to Lower
Columbia College and Skagit Valley College based on the average debt service payment
over the life of the loan, prorated to state appropriations provided for this purpose.

Basic Skills Enhancement – $3,469,574 will be allocated in 2013 based on the most recent
four quarter average (summer through spring of Academic Year 2011-12) Basic Skills FTES
enrollments, excluding Sheltered Workshops.

Centers of Excellence Performance Funding – $349,851 will be allocated to colleges
based on performance agreements with the State Board.

Facilities Maintenance and Operations – $870,391 will be allocated throughout the year
based on actual substantial completion dates of new buildings.

Hospital Employee Education and Training (HEET) – $1,997,233 will be allocated based
on a competitive application process.

Opportunity Grants – $57,700 will be allocated mid-year to meet excess demand.

Student Achievement Initiative – $1,813,104 million will be allocated this fall based on net
gain in student achievement points earned in the 2011-12 academic year compared to the
2010-11 baseline year.

Transformation Fund –$2,000,000 is set aside for further discussion on possible use as a
system Transformation Fund. The source of this funding is the $2 million assessed from
colleges in the current fiscal year to support advanced planning for the ctcLink project

Worker Retraining Variable – $13,465,335 will be allocated based on 60% of colleges’
prorata share of the system’s average worker retraining enrollments for two years and 40%
on a prorata share of unemployment data. Each FTE will be funded at $4,611.

Workforce Development Projects – $554,547 will be allocated throughout the year for
targeted workforce development initiatives.
(See section 4 of Attachment D – FY 2013 Use of Funds for total future allocations.)
In addition, a proviso in the 2012 supplemental budget directs $2 million in existing funds to be used
to increase science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) enrollments. This adjustment will
take place in a future allocation.
Enrollment Rules
The Legislature assigns enrollment targets for the community and technical college system through
the operating budget. The State Board seeks to ensure that legislative targets are met and that
scarce resources are deployed where needed most by (a) allocating enrollments and associated
funding to the districts; (b) adopting rules specifying the conditions under which a district is eligible to
receive additional growth enrollments; and (c) adopting rules specifying the conditions under which a
district’s allocated enrollments and associated funding will be reduced.
FY 2013 enrollment allocations are shown in Attachment E – FY 2013 Enrollment Allocations.
At its March meeting, the Board was briefed on staff recommendations to maintain current year
enrollment rules as recommended by the WACTC Board of Presidents, through its Business Affairs
Commission. (See Attachment F – FY 2013 Enrollment Rules.)
TAB 7, Page 5
2013 TUITION
Background
As the state entered the 2012 supplemental budget period, budget writers were faced with a
projected shortfall of $1.5 billion. OFM modified the agency portion of the budget process and
requested proposals to reduce state expenditures by 5% and 10%. For the CTC system, this
amounted to potential reductions exceeding $100 million. The cycle of reductions that have been
our budget reality since the fall of 2008 seemed certain to continue. Fortunately, the result of the
2012 supplemental budget was the best outcome the CTC budgets have seen for a number of
legislative cycles. Buoyed by strong political support for Higher Education, lower caseload forecasts
(e.g., Medicaid) and a slight bump in revenue, the CTC system received no new major budget
reductions for FY 2013.
This is significant for many reasons. One is that it allows colleges time to continue implementing the
reductions from the last budget cycle. Less than a year ago the Legislature and Governor enacted a
biennial budget that reduced the Community and Technical Colleges by $110 million by the end of
2013. This represented
85% of the annual
investment level CTCs
received in FY 2011.
This reduced support
came at a time when
enrollments were
peaking at 117% of
legislative targets.
As they have
traditionally done, the
Legislature authorized
significant tuition
increases to provide
colleges a tool to
acquire additional
revenue to manage
state disinvestment. The
projected value of two 12% tuition increases by FY 2013 was $76 million, of which $61 million would
be available to colleges for general operations. (The remaining $15 million is dedicated to fund the
Innovation Account). This increase in revenue won’t replace the $100+ million in state resources
taken from the base, but dampens the percent reduction in total resources from 15% to 7%.
To minimize the impact of tuition increases on the most vulnerable students, the Legislature
increased funding for the State Need Grant (SNG) to keep pace with the tuition increases authorized
in the budget. A necessary and consistently provided adjustment, this increase only helps students
who currently receive the grant. There are still 26,000 eligible students who don’t receive funding
due to the lack of capacity in SNG program.
At the April meeting, the Board was briefed on FY 2013 Budget Allocation and Tuition Policy
decision points. After hearing from students, staff, and college Presidents, the Board raised multiple
questions and requested further examination of tuition increases and the impact on students.
As a result of these inquiries a survey has been distributed to colleges to gather information on the
uses of the revenue from a 12% tuition increase. The results of the survey will be compiled into a
hand-out and distributed to the Board at the meeting.
TAB 7, Page 6
In addition, a handout has been put together in a Question/Answer format to provide additional
information regarding tuition and related topics. (See Attachment G – Questions and Answers:
2013 Tuition.)
Resident Tuition
The State Board has the authority to increase resident tuition up to 12%, on average across all credit
loads. Staff recommendations are to increase tuition and fees for a full-time student by 13% and for
part-time students by 11%. This would represent an average annual increase of 12% across all
credit loads. For a full-time student taking 15 credits for three quarters, tuition could increase from
$3,542 in the current year to $4,005 in FY 2013.
The difference in the full-time increase and the recommendation for part-time is to continue reducing
the premium paid by part-time students. Part-time students pay an average of $106 per credit,
compared with $88 per credit paid by full-time students. This “premium” is a remnant of an old
tuition philosophy that did not charge any additional tuition for credits 11 through 18. Through
differential tuition increases since 2002, the Board has reduced the “part-time premium” from 50% to
22%. Staff recommendations are to further reduce the premium to 20% for FY 2013. This would be
accomplished by increasing the per credit rate for part-time students (1-10 credit hours) by 11%.
When combined with the 13% increase for full-time students, the average increase remains at the
legislatively authorized 12%.
(See Attachment H – Community College Tuition and Fee Rates.)
Non-Resident Tuition
Current year tuition for a non-resident student enrolled for 15 credits is $8,750 per year. This is
almost 2.5 times the amount paid by a resident student. There are 7,000 non-resident and
International Contract students (who also pay at the non-resident tuition rate). Because nonresident student tuition is relatively high compared to other states, college Presidents have been
concerned that the cost structure could discourage international students from attending Washington
community colleges, and they have requested in recent years that the State Board increase nonresident tuition by a lower percentage than resident tuition. Since 2004, the State Board has
increased non-resident tuition rates by the same dollar amount, rather than the same percentage, as
resident tuition.
The tuition schedule in Attachment H increases non-resident tuition by the same dollar amount as
resident tuition.
Upper Division Applied Baccalaureate Tuition
The operating budget bill authorizes 12% tuition increases for upper division applied baccalaureate
courses at the two year colleges. An additional statutory requirement is that tuition for upper division
applied baccalaureate courses at two year colleges must not exceed tuition at the regional
universities.
2011-12 resident tuition and fees for upper division applied baccalaureate courses is $6,701 for 15
credits for three quarters. This is slightly below (-4%) the average regional university undergraduate
resident tuition of $6,969. A 12% increase for the 2013 academic year would result in an annual
tuition of $7,505. (See Attachment H – FY 2012 Tuition Charts for Upper Division Courses in
Applied Baccalaureate Degree Programs.)
Staff recommends that Upper Division Applied Baccalaureate tuition for non-residents remain at
current levels in order to comply with the statutory requirement that these rates not exceed the rates
at the regional schools.
TAB 7, Page 7
Innovation Account
The State Board has the authority to dedicate up to 3% of operating fees revenues to the
Community and Technical Colleges Innovation Account. The account will support system-wide
innovations, the first of which the CTCLink enterprise reporting system. Last year the Board
dedicated 2% toward the funding of the account. This year staff recommends increasing the setaside by one percentage point, to 3%. This increase is necessary to ensure sufficient cash flow for
the CTCLink project.
Background Information








Attachment A – 2011-13 Biennium Source of Funds
Attachment B – FY 2013 State Board Earmarks and Legislative Provisos
Attachment C – FY 2013 Initial Allocation
Attachment D – FY 2013 Use of Funds
Attachment E – FY 2013 Enrollment Allocations
Attachment F – FY 2012-13 Enrollment Rules
Attachment G – Questions and Answers: 2013 Tuition
Attachment H – Community College Tuition and Fee Rates
Recommendation
The Board is asked to approve the allocation of funds to the college districts and to State Board
office and programs, and to delegate authority to the Executive Director to approve future allocations
as described in Resolution 12-05-14.
The State Board staff recommends adoption of Resolution 12-05-15, approving the following tuition
increases:
 Increase lower division resident student tuition by 12% on average across all credit loads.
 Increase lower division non-resident student tuition by the same dollar amount as resident
students.
 Increase tuition for upper division courses in applied baccalaureate programs by 12% across
all credit loads.
Prepared by: Denise Graham, 360-704-4350, dgraham@sbctc.edu and Nick Lutes, 360-704-1023,
nlutes@sbctc.edu
TAB 7
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-14
A resolution relating to the 2011-13 operating budget.
WHEREAS the 2012 supplemental operating budget has been passed by the Legislature appropriating
funds for the Community and Technical Colleges for the 2011-13 biennium; and
WHEREAS the State Board has the authority to award and allocate appropriated state general funds,
Education Legacy Trust Account funds, and Community/Technical College Capital Projects Account funds; and
WHEREAS the funds appropriated to the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges in the
2012 supplemental appropriations act for fiscal year 2013 includes General Fund-State of $516,861,000,
Education Legacy Trust Account of $47,553,000, and Community/Technical College Capital Projects Account
of $8,774,000 as displayed on the Attachment A – 2011-13 Biennium Source of Funds;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges:
1. Approves the FY 2013 initial allocation of operating funds totaling $573,188,000 as displayed on
Attachment C – FY 2013 Initial Allocation;
2. Authorizes the Executive Director to allocate an additional $40,229,244 throughout the year for items
found in Section 4 of Attachment D – FY 2013 Use of Funds Statement;
3. Authorizes the Executive Director to make adjustments as necessary in a future allocation to implement
the proviso in the 2012 supplemental budget to increase STEM enrollments;
4. Earmarks the following funds and requires they be spent only for these purposes: Aerospace
Apprenticeships, Aerospace Training, Applied Baccalaureates, Basic Skills Enhancements, Centers of
Excellence, Disability Accommodations, Employment Resource Center, Gateway Center, Hospital
Employee Education and Training, Labor Education and Research Center, Opportunity Grants, Students
of Color, Technology Transformation, University Center of North Puget Sound, University Contracts,
Worker Retraining Program, Workforce Development Projects, and Workplace-Based Instructional
Programs.
5. Approves the FY 2013 Enrollment Allocations as displayed in Attachment E – FY 2013 Enrollment
Allocations.
6. Approves the FY 2013 Enrollment Rules as displayed in Attachment F – FY 2013 Enrollment Rules.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges authorizes
the Executive Director to make adjustments, as necessary, for actions taken by the Governor, computational
errors, data corrections, externally imposed restrictions or guidelines, legislative appropriation provisos,
uniform accounting and reporting requirements, and unanticipated changes in funding.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED May 10, 2012.
_______________________________________
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
TAB 7
STATE OF WASHINGTON
STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES
RESOLUTION 12-05-15
A resolution relating to 2012-13 Tuition and Fees.
WHEREAS, the Legislature’s biennial budget provides that resident lower division student tuition and
fees may be increased by a maximum of an average of 12 percent per year by the State Board for Community
and Technical Colleges; and
WHEREAS, RCW 28B.15.067 grants the State Board authority to set tuition and fees for non-resident
students to the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature has enacted RCW 28B.15.069 establishing that tuition and fees for upper
division courses not exceed rates at the regional universities; and
WHEREAS, the State Board for Community and Technical colleges adopted a tuition and fee policy for
students enrolled in applied baccalaureate degree programs; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature has limited increases in technical college tuition and S&A fees to the same
increases as community college operating fees;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges:

Adopts the community college lower division course tuition and fee schedule and rates for 2012-13 as
set forth in Attachment H;

Limits the maximum increase in technical college tuition and S&A fees to 12 percent for the 2012-13
school year as set forth in Attachment H;

Adopts the community college upper division course tuition and fee schedule and rates for 2012-13 as
set forth in Attachment H;

Requires the deposit of 3% of operating fee revenues into the Community and Technical College
Innovation Fund.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED on May 10, 2012.
Sharon Fairchild, Chair
ATTEST:
Charles N. Earl, Secretary
TAB 7
Attachment A
State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
2011‐13 Biennium Source of Funds
2011‐12
2012‐13
BIENNIUM
APPROPRIATED FUNDS
I. 2011‐13 APPROPRIATIONS
General Fund‐State, 001‐1
Funds not Provisoed
Customized Training Program
Jefferson Education Center
Job Skills Program
STEM Enrollments Expansion
Worker Retraining
Workforce Training/Aerospace
Total General Fund‐State
Education Legacy Trust Account, 08A‐1
Funds not Provisoed
Student Achievement Initiative
Total Education Legacy Trust Account
CTC Capital Projects Account, 060‐1
Alt. Finance Project Debt Service
TOTAL 2011‐13 AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
496,655,000
200,000
0
2,725,000
0
33,261,000
0
532,841,000
476,793,000
1,851,000
100,000
2,725,000
2,000,000
33,261,000
131,000
516,861,000
973,448,000
2,051,000
100,000
5,450,000
2,000,000
66,522,000
131,000
1,049,702,000
46,109,552
1,593,448
47,703,000
44,146,448
3,406,552
47,553,000
90,256,000
5,000,000
95,256,000
4,019,000
8,774,000
12,793,000
584,563,000
573,188,000
1,157,751,000
5/2/2012
TAB 7
Attachment B
Washington State Community and Technical Colleges
FY 2013 State Board Earmarks and Legislative Provisos
FY 2013 Earmarks
1 Aerospace Apprenticeships
2 Aerospace Training
3 Applied Baccalaureates
4 Basic Skills Enhancement
5 Centers of Excellence
6 Disability Accomodations
7 Employment Resource Center
8 Gateway Center
9 Hospital Employee Education & Training
10 Labor Education & Research Center
11 Opportunity Grants
12 Students of Color
13 Technology Transformation
14 UCNPS / BS in Nursing
15 University Contracts
16 Worker Retraining Program
17 Workforce Development Projects
18 Workplace‐Based Instructional Programs
Current
Earmark
$ 2,739,319
1,525,935
1,610,721
3,469,574
1,552,283
1,752,910
1,147,639
68,483
2,054,490
164,000
12,500,000
1,018,662
1,016,287
1,783,754
949,175
6,498,100
558,402
45,655
Total Earmarks $ 40,455,389
FY 2013 Provisos
1 Job Skills Program
2 Customized Training Program
3 Jefferson Education Center
4 STEM Enrollment Expansion
5 Student Achievement
6 Worker Retraining Program
7 Workforce Training/Aerospace
Reduction
Amount
$ (18,911)
$ (10,535)
$ (11,122)
$ ‐
$ (10,712)
$ (12,101)
$ (7,923)
$ (473)
$ (14,183)
$ (1,132)
$ ‐
$ (7,032)
$ (7,016)
$ (12,314)
$ (6,553)
$ ‐
$ (3,855)
$ (315)
Revised
Earmark
$ 2,720,408
1,515,400
1,599,599
3,469,574
1,541,571
1,740,809
1,139,716
68,010
2,040,307
162,868
12,500,000
1,011,630
1,009,271
1,771,440
942,622
6,498,100
554,547
45,340
$ (124,177) $ 40,331,212
$ 2,725,000 $ ‐
1,851,000 ‐
100,000 ‐
2,000,000 ‐
1,813,104 ‐
33,261,000 ‐
131,000 ‐
$ 2,725,000
1,851,000
100,000
2,000,000
1,813,104
33,261,000
131,000
Total Provisos $ 41,881,104
‐ 41,881,104
Grand Total $ 82,336,493
$ (124,177) $ 82,212,316
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
5/2/2012
TAB 7
Attachment C
Washington State Community and Technical Colleges
FY 2013 Initial Allocation
Step 4: New and Variable Allocations
(1)
(24) FY 2012 Allocations through #6
Subtotal FY 2013 Initial Allocations
Bates
Bellevue
Bellingham
Big Bend
Cascadia
Centralia
Clark
Clover Park
Columbia Basin
Edmonds
Everett
Grays Harbor
Green River
Highline
Lake Washington
Lower Columbia
Olympic
Peninsula
Pierce
Renton
Seattle
Shoreline
Skagit Valley
South Puget Sound
Spokane
Tacoma
Walla Walla
Wenatchee Valley
Whatcom
Yakima Valley
18,051,633
26,541,777
11,315,050
8,418,176
8,245,365
10,114,108
24,937,009
16,009,550
17,896,793
21,870,947
21,395,015
8,575,334
24,033,385
21,230,594
12,609,292
10,835,793
17,691,233
9,320,431
22,103,337
14,958,988
58,250,110
18,531,943
15,202,722
13,881,717
48,093,051
17,406,268
14,025,122
10,694,249
10,300,480
16,190,966
17,679,096
26,206,432
8,801,095
8,390,641
8,315,680
9,927,513
24,834,632
15,717,713
17,906,124
21,513,585
20,895,308
8,431,490
21,221,539
20,614,791
12,078,381
10,708,268
17,617,217
9,245,191
21,886,317
14,474,331
56,239,562
18,305,437
15,164,211
13,920,926
48,143,047
17,345,927
13,879,385
10,673,258
10,316,926
16,031,266
District Subtotal
548,730,438
SBCTC Admin
SBCTC Program
Districts
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
(29)
New Facilities M&O
Alt. Finance Project Debt Svc.
Student Customized Jefferson Achievement Training Program Education Center Initiative Pool ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
‐
1,996,880
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
2,021,120
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
(48,181)
(73,725)
(24,690)
(23,078)
(23,616)
(26,884)
(71,577)
(42,955)
(49,315)
(60,247)
(59,691)
(21,959)
(58,329)
(57,173)
(33,544)
(30,428)
(49,045)
(24,148)
(60,861)
(39,481)
(156,170)
(51,185)
(42,964)
(39,701)
(138,759)
(48,109)
(36,234)
(29,425)
(29,476)
(45,602)
Workforce Training/ Aerospace ‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
100,000
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
131,000
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
536,485,289 ‐ 4,018,000
(1,496,552) ‐
100,000
15,456,935
10,706,179
15,592,486 ‐ ‐
5,652,702 ‐ ‐
‐
‐
‐
1,851,000
Allocation Total
574,893,552
557,730,477 ‐ 4,018,000
Future Allocations
9,837,448
System Total
584,731,000
(31)
(32)
(33)
Reserves FY 13 Permanent Budget Reduction General One‐
Time Reduction
(111,247)
(170,226)
(57,008)
(53,285)
(54,528)
(62,074)
(165,266)
(99,181)
(113,865)
(139,107)
(137,824)
(50,701)
(134,677)
(132,010)
(77,450)
(70,256)
(113,242)
(55,756)
(140,524)
(91,159)
(360,587)
(118,182)
(99,201)
(91,667)
(320,387)
(111,080)
(83,662)
(67,940)
(68,058)
(105,298)
(281,040)
(430,037)
(144,016)
(134,611)
(137,753)
(156,816)
(417,505)
(250,558)
(287,654)
(351,420)
(348,180)
(128,084)
(340,231)
(333,492)
(195,659)
(177,484)
(286,079)
(140,854)
(355,000)
(230,291)
(910,939)
(298,559)
(250,607)
(231,576)
(809,382)
(280,617)
(211,351)
(171,634)
(171,934)
(266,011)
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
(34)
(35)
(36)
One‐Time Reduction for Temporary 3% Total FY 2013 Customized Salary Reduction Initial Allocation
Training Program
(363,343)
(840,566)
(241,842)
(203,724)
(199,229)
(250,204)
(865,225)
(371,878)
(411,731)
(676,853)
(559,106)
(193,850)
(657,590)
(591,015)
(293,788)
(289,224)
(502,626)
(230,713)
(613,478)
(301,760)
(1,657,625)
(497,001)
(436,327)
(382,585)
(1,345,888)
(545,891)
(351,840)
(272,010)
(287,170)
(365,378)
16,815,693
24,600,692
10,299,881
7,947,400
7,871,345
9,398,283
23,226,530
14,900,012
16,982,564
20,211,442
19,847,678
8,009,737
21,979,689
19,430,386
11,436,452
10,103,242
16,605,564
8,863,853
20,641,179
13,762,809
52,961,083
17,277,203
14,281,973
13,126,293
45,357,007
16,300,727
13,151,482
10,095,855
9,723,831
15,192,570
131,000 ‐
(3,455,448) (8,729,374) (1,851,000) (14,799,460)
510,402,455
‐
‐
‐ ‐
‐ ‐
(90,499) (228,626) ‐
(5,222) ‐ ‐
(215,540)
‐
15,057,821
7,498,480
(1,496,552) 1,851,000
100,000
131,000 ‐
(3,551,169) (8,958,000) (1,851,000) (15,015,000)
532,958,756
37,403,041 656,126 738,000
1,496,552
‐
‐
‐ (15,644) (48,831) ‐
‐
40,229,244
595,133,518 656,126 4,756,000
‐
1,851,000
100,000
131,000 (15,644) (3,600,000) (8,958,000) (1,851,000) (15,015,000)
573,188,000
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
(30)
(59,592)
(91,186)
(30,538)
(28,543)
(29,209)
(33,252)
(88,529)
(53,129)
(60,995)
(74,516)
(73,829)
(27,159)
(72,143)
(70,715)
(41,488)
(37,634)
(60,661)
(29,867)
(75,275)
(48,831)
(193,158)
(63,307)
(53,139)
(49,104)
(171,624)
(59,503)
(44,816)
(36,394)
(36,457)
(56,407)
‐
5/2/2012
Washington State Community and Technical Colleges
FY 2013 Initial Allocation
Step 4: New and Variable Allocations
Column
TAB 7
Attachment C
Title
Description
(1) (24) FY 2012 Allocations through #6
Subtotal FY 2013 Initial Allocations
State allocation for FY 2012 through Allocation #6.
Column 24 represents the subtotal of FY 2013 initial allocations as a result of adjustments made to FY 2012 Allocation #6. These changes include: adjusting for one‐
time and variable allocations, annualizing M&O, lease increases, and pass‐through adjustments to the base (pension rate changes, PEBB rate reduction, etc.).
(25)
New Facilities M&O
(26)
Alt. Finance Project Debt Svc. New construction is funded at $6.39 per square foot. Remodeled square footage is unfunded in the 2011‐13 biennial budget. Allocations will be made based on the actual substantial completion date and funding will be added to base budgets.
Debt service funding is allocated based on the average debt service payment over the life of the loan, prorated to state appropriations provided for this purpose.
(27) Student Achievement Initiative Pool Community and technical college base budgets are reduced by approximately $1.5 million. Reductions have been allocated to colleges based on each institution's proportionate share of state appropriations. Excluded from the basis for the cut are the following provisoed and earmarked funds: Basic Skills Enhancement, Job Skills Program, Opportunity Grants Program, Worker Retraining. This is a permanent adjustment to base budgets. Funds will be allocated in Fall 2012 based on net gain in student achievement points earned in the 2011‐12 academic year compared to 2010‐11. This is a permanent reduction to base budgets.
(28) Customized Training Program A proviso in the 2012 Supplemental Budget requires $1.8 million of existing resources to be used for the customized training program. The reduction from base budgets is taken in step 34.
(29) Jefferson Education Center (30) Workforce Training/ Aerospace The Jefferson Education Center currently receives funding from the soon to be defunct HECB, via Peninsula College. Through a proviso in the 2012 Supplemental Budget, the Legislature is requiring that $100,000 of community and technical college base funding be used to fund the JEC; funding will no longer come from the HECB. The $100,000 comes from system base budgets and is included in Step 33 ‐ FY 13 Permanent Budget Reduction.
Funding is provided for the implementation of 2SHB 2156. The legislation requires the State Board, in cooperation with other aerospace and advance materials manufacture training providers, to coordinate statewide aerospace training efforts.
(31) (32)
Reserves FY 13 Permanent Budget Reduction
Reserve balances are adjusted to align with state appropriations.
The FY 13 permanent budget reduction includes $3.5 million for efficiency savings passed in the 2011‐13 biennial budget and $100,000 to fund the Jefferson Education Center. Reductions have been allocated to colleges, SBCTC, and future allocations based on each institution's proportionate share of state appropriations. Excluded from the basis for the cut are the following provisoed and earmarked funds: Basic Skills Enhancement, Job Skills Program, Opportunity Grants Program, Worker Retraining, and System‐wide Investments (e.g. eLearning contracts, tranformation funds, revolving funds, reserves).
(33) General One‐Time Reduction (34)
One‐Time Reduction for Customized Training Program The FY 13 general one‐time reduction includes $4.234 million for year one and an additional $4.724 million for year two passed in the 2011‐13 biennial budget. The FY 12 reduction was put back to base budgets in Step 1 and the FY 2013 amount of $8.958 million is allocated to colleges and SBCTC admin based on each institution's proportionate share of state appropriations. Excluded from the basis for the cut are SBCTC program funds, future allocations, and the following provisoed and earmarked funds: Basic Skills Enhancement, Job Skills Program, Opportunity Grants Program, Worker Retraining, and System‐wide Investments (e.g. eLearning contracts, tranformation funds, revolving funds, reserves).
The 2012 Supplemental Budget requires CTCs to divert $1.851 million from current appropriations to fund the Customized Training Program. This reduction has been allocated to colleges only based on each institution's proportionate share of state appropriations. Excluded from the basis for the cut are SBCTC admin, SBCTC program, future allocations, and the following provisoed and earmarked funds: Basic Skills Enhancement, Job Skills Program, Opportunity Grants Program, Worker Retraining, and System‐wide Investments (e.g. eLearning contracts, tranformation funds, revolving funds, reserves). This is a one‐time reduction.
(35)
Temporary 3% Salary Reduction Funding for institutions of higher education is reduced to reflect a 3 percent cost savings in employee salaries beginning FY 2012, excluding employees earning less than $2,500 per month and student employees. Funding for the FY 2012 reduction was restored in Step 1 and the FY 2013 reduction is distributed here based on FY 2011 salaries. The reduction is temporary through the 2011‐13 biennium only.
(36)
Total FY 2013 Initial Allocation
The totals of columns 24 through 35.
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
5/2/2012
Washington State Community and Technical Colleges
FY 2013 Use of Funds Statement
1.
2.
DISTRICT ALLOCATIONS
Unrestricted Base
498,125,372
Earmarks and Provisos in Base:
Aerospace Apprenticeships
Alt. Finance Project Debt Svc.
Applied Baccalaureates
BS in Nursing/UCNPS
Centers of Excellence
Disability Accommodations
Employment Resource Center
Gateway Center
Jefferson Education Center
Labor Education & Research Center
Opportunity Grants
Students of Color
University Contracts
Worker Retraining Base
Workforce Training/Aerospace
Workplace‐Based Instructional Programs
323,828
4,018,000
1,610,721
1,783,754
1,200,000
1,752,910
1,147,639
68,483
100,000
164,000
11,624,000
1,018,662
949,175
24,369,135
131,000
45,655
Adjustments to Base:
Facilities M&O Carryforward
Leases and Assessments
PERS/TRS Pension Rate Changes
Suspend PERS/TRS Plan 1 COLA
PEBB Funding Rate Reduction
Student Achievement Initiative Pool
Workers Compensation
FY 13 Permanent Budget Reduction
208,518
6,000
1,378,225
(1,093,315)
(7,855,773)
(1,496,552)
(341,700)
(3,455,448)
One‐Time Allocations:
General One‐Time Reduction
One‐Time Reduction for CTP
Temporary 3% Salary Reduction
(8,729,374)
(1,851,000)
(14,799,460)
TOTAL DISTRICT ALLOCATIONS
510,402,455
SBCTC ADMIN
Unrestricted Base
14,053,154
Earmarks and Provisos Included in Base:
Aerospace Apprenticeships
Hospital Employee Education & Training
Job Skills Program
Opportunity Grants
Technology Transformation
5,894
43,074
55,000
118,300
1,009,271
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
TAB 7
Attachment D
4/27/12
3.
4.
Worker Retraining Base
398,230
Adjustments to Base:
PERS/TRS Pension Rate Changes
Suspend PERS/TRS Plan 1 COLA
PEBB Funding Rate Reduction
Workers Compensation
FY 13 Permanent Budget Reduction
19,775
(15,685)
(92,227)
(2,300)
(90,499)
One‐Time Allocations:
General One‐Time Reduction
Temporary 3% Salary Reduction
(228,626)
(215,540)
TOTAL SBCTC ADMIN
15,057,821
SBCTC ‐ PROGRAM
ABE Enrollments
Customized Training Program
DOC Compensation
Job Skills Program
Opportunity Grants
Worker Retraining Base (PCS)
153,771
1,851,000
597,309
2,670,000
700,000
1,526,400
TOTAL SBCTC PROGRAM
7,498,480
FUTURE ALLOCATIONS
Aerospace Apprenticeship
Aerospace Training
Alt. Finance Project Debt Service
Basic Skills Enhancement
Centers of Excellence Peformance Funding
Facilities M&O
Hospital Employee Education & Training
Opportunity Grants
Student Achievement Initiative
Transformation Fund
Worker Retraining Variable
Workforce Development Projects
2,392,921
1,515,400
4,756,000
3,469,574
349,851
870,387
1,997,233
57,700
1,813,104
2,000,000
13,465,335
554,547
Future Allocations Subtotal
RESERVES
Revolving Funds
Supplemental Retirement Payments
Ongoing Reserves
Reserves Subtotal
TOTAL FUTURE ALLOCATIONS AND RESERVES
Total Use of Funds FY 2013
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
TAB 7
Attachment D
33,242,052
5,482,051
125,000
1,380,141
6,987,192
40,229,244
573,188,000
4/27/12
TAB 7
Attachment E
Washington State Community and Technical Colleges
Enrollment Allocations ‐ Base
Districts
General &
High Demand
Worker Retrng
(Base)
FY 2013 Base Enrollments
Earmarked Enrollments
Aerospace
Applied
University
Apprenticeship Baccalaureates
Center
Bates
Bellevue
Bellingham
Big Bend
Cascadia
Centralia
Clark
Clover Park
Columbia Basin
Edmonds
Everett
Grays Harbor
Green River
Highline
Lake Washington
Lower Columbia
Olympic
Peninsula
Pierce
Renton
Seattle
Shoreline
Skagit Valley
South Puget Sound
Spokane
Tacoma
Walla Walla
Wenatchee
Whatcom
Yakima Valley
4,444
7,011
1,750
1,622
1,455
2,110
6,746
3,995
4,557
4,824
4,714
1,622
5,220
5,708
2,765
2,458
4,525
1,495
5,358
3,594
13,902
4,919
3,709
3,360
13,400
4,288
2,731
2,377
2,377
3,901
279
254
37
53
30
123
134
196
246
196
133
171
295
224
126
49
191
167
183
215
647
161
112
79
247
212
282
120
39
84
20
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
5
‐
13
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
6
6
‐
‐
‐
5
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
43
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
40
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
40
‐
35
40
‐
‐
82
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
District Total
130,937
5,285
SBCTC Program
34
Allocated Total
University
Contracts
Total
Base
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
310
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
15
‐
‐
40
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
30
10
70
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
4,743
7,308
1,787
1,675
1,485
2,233
6,895
4,191
4,848
5,060
5,170
1,793
5,515
5,932
2,931
2,507
4,781
1,712
5,611
3,815
14,637
5,080
3,821
3,439
13,652
4,500
3,013
2,497
2,416
3,985
55
280 310
165
137,032
400
‐
‐ ‐
‐
434
130,971
5,685
55
280 310
165
137,466
Aerospace Apprenticeship
Hospital Empl Educ & Trng
Worker Retraining Original Var
Worker Retraining New Variabl
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
75
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
75
‐
‐
‐
System Total
130,971
5,685
130
280 310
165
137,541
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
5/2/2012
TAB 7
Attachment E
Washington State Community and Technical Colleges
Enrollment Allocations ‐ Growth & Variable
Districts
FY 2013 Growth and Variable Enrollments
Earmarked Enrollments
Hospital Empl
Worker Retrng
Worker Retrng
Educ & Trng
Orig. Variable
New Variable
Bates
Bellevue
Bellingham
Big Bend
Cascadia
Centralia
Clark
Clover Park
Columbia Basin
Edmonds
Everett
Grays Harbor
Green River
Highline
Lake Washington
Lower Columbia
Olympic
Peninsula
Pierce
Renton
Seattle
Shoreline
Skagit Valley
South Puget Sound
Spokane
Tacoma
Walla Walla
Wenatchee
Whatcom
Yakima Valley
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
4,743
7,308
1,787
1,675
1,485
2,233
6,895
4,191
4,848
5,060
5,170
1,793
5,515
5,932
2,931
2,507
4,781
1,712
5,611
3,815
14,637
5,080
3,821
3,439
13,652
4,500
3,013
2,497
2,416
3,985
District Total
‐
‐
‐ ‐
137,032
SBCTC Program
‐
‐
‐ ‐
434
Allocated Total
‐
‐
‐ ‐
137,466
Aerospace Apprenticeship
Hospital Empl Educ & Trng
Worker Retraining Original Var
Worker Retraining New Variab
‐
50
‐
‐
‐
‐
1,751
‐
‐
‐
‐
970
‐
50
1,751
970
75
50
1,751
970
System Total
50
1,751
970 2,771
140,312
Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office
Total
Growth/Variable
FY 2013
FTE
Allocations
5/2/2012
TAB 7 Attachment F 2012‐13 Enrollment Rules Purpose The Enrollment Rules are established as a method to ensure legislative targets are met and resources are deployed systematically within the CTC system. 

The rules are set by which colleges will: o Be eligible for additional general purpose enrollments (provided through the budget) o Be subject to budget rebasing when enrollment targets are not met o Be allowed to count excess enrollments in periods of over‐enrollment The rules provide parameters and definitions for the specific types of FTEs to be included or excluded in monitoring of state and other enrollments. Parameters and Definitions for enrollment types Running Start students are not included in the monitoring of allocated state enrollments. International Contract students cannot be counted toward the allocated state enrollment. State Enrollment Rules The following rules apply to State enrollments allocated by the State Board: 1. A college district will be eligible to receive general growth enrollments if the district’s prior two year average actual enrollment was at least 100 percent of its prior two year average allocated enrollment. 2. A district will be in enrollment recovery status if its prior two year average enrollment is less than 96 percent of its prior two year average allocated enrollment. 3. If, in the enrollment recovery year, a district’s actual enrollments are less than 96 percent of its allocated enrollments, in the subsequent year the district’s allocated enrollments and associated funding will be reduced by the difference between the recovery year’s actual enrollment and 96 percent of the recovery year’s allocated enrollments. 4. Actual enrollments above 100 percent of a district’s current year allocated enrollment will be counted as excess enrollments. Worker Retraining Enrollment In addition to the rules above, the following rule applies to worker retraining enrollment allocations: College districts that fail to meet 100 percent of their worker retraining enrollment allocation for two consecutive years will have their worker retraining enrollment allocation and associated funding in the subsequent year reduced by 75 percent of the difference between the allocated and actual enrollment in the second year. Earmarked Enrollments The funding for the following types of enrollments has been earmarked by the State Board and must be spent on these programs: TAB 7 Attachment F 
Aerospace Apprenticeships 



Health Employee Education and Training University Center of North Puget Sound University Contracts Applied Baccalaureate Programs Actual enrollments in earmarked programs will be tracked against allocated enrollments and will be reviewed quarterly. Districts are expected to enroll at allocated enrollment levels. Colleges under‐enrolled in an earmarked program may be subject to a reduction in earmarked enrollments and associated funding. Other Monitored Enrollments Districts are expected to maintain strong commitment to the following types of enrollments: 


Adult Basic Education Apprenticeships I‐BEST Tab 7 Attachment G Questions and Answers: 2013 Tuition 1. Has the state funding reduction in the 2011‐13 biennial budget been made up with the FY 2012 12% tuition increase? No. The reduction in state funding from FY 2011 to FY 2013 is about $110 million. The colleges received about $32 million in new revenue from this year’s 12% tuition increase. Another 12% tuition increase in FY 13 would provide another $29 million in new revenue to the colleges. Two 12% tuition increases will offset about $61 million of the $110 million FY 2013 reduction. 1. 1 Tab 7 Attachment G 2. How has the state’s share of funding for CTCs changed in the past 10 years? CTC State and Tuition as a percent of total funding
90%
Since 2003, CTC students continue to pay a larger share of their education
77%
80%
70%
63%
60%
50%
40%
37%
30%
20%
23%
BUDGETED
10%
0%
STATE
TUITION
3. How much has Community and Technical College tuition been increased in recent years? Percent increase in CTCs full time tuition and fees each year and the annual cost for tuition and fees at 15 credits per quarter
Tuition and Fees
% Tuition Increase
$4,500
14%
$4,000* $4,000
12%
12%
$3,542 $3,500
$3,135 $3,000
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
12%
$1,983 $1,743 6%
$2,142 7%
$2,313 $2,445 $2,586 $2,676 $2,730 $2,925 10%
8%
7%
7%
5%
12%
7%
6%
4%
5%
$1,000
$500
2%
2%
2%
$‐
0%
2001‐02 2002‐03 2003‐04 2004‐05 2005‐06 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13
*FY 2012‐13 tuition levels if a 12% increase were approved. 2 Tab 7 Attachment G 4. How do annual full‐time costs for CTC students compare to Washington’s public universities? 5. How much are the 4‐year institutions authorized to increase tuition?  The 4‐year institutions have tuition setting authority and can exceed legislative targets. Increasing above the legislative recommendation requires them to divert an additional one percent tuition towards financial assistance for needy students. i. The University of Washington increased their 2012 tuition by 20%. The remaining universities stayed at legislative targets, which continue for FY 2013 as:  UW, Washington State, and Western: 16%  Central and The Evergreen State College: 14%  Eastern: 11% 3 Tab 7 Attachment G 6. How does tuition compare between the CTCs, University of Phoenix, Western Governor’s University‐
Washington (WGU), and StraighterLine.  Students earning an Associate’s degree from University of Phoenix will pay more than triple ($24,000 vs. $7,000) what they would have paid for the same Associates degree from a community and technical college.  The only program that both a CTC and WGU offer is a Bachelor’s degree in Nursing (RN to BSN). WGU is estimated to cost $9,750, while Olympic College would cost about $7,000. WGU charges by the term, not credit load, and they have estimated the RN to BSN degree to take 3 terms.  StraighterLine is an online college that offers classes, but not degrees. They have arrangements with 28 partner online colleges and universities that would accept the classes and award credits. Some of the colleges charge a fee to award the college credit. 7. What have our enrollments levels been? Full Time Equivalent (FTEs) Enrollments: 2000‐2011
180,000
100,000
151,150 147,738 136,512 136,045 130,933 138,205 131,489 110,000
122,532 120,000
119,709 130,000
133,966 140,000
139,897 150,000
Projected
162,328 160,000
160,805 Actuals
154,241 170,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
4 Tab 7 Attachment G 8. What is happening to enrollments this year (FY 2102)?  FY 2012 enrollments are trending downward. Monitoring for Fall and Winter quarters shows that actual FTEs are down by 4.8% and 5.3%, respectively.  Final FY 2012 FTEs are projected to end up at 154,200, 5% below 2011 enrollment levels.  Even with 5% fewer enrollments, the system will still be a 111% of the legislative enrollment targets of 139,237 FTES.  The decline was predicted by State Board staff engaged in budget deliberations, when asked to quantify the impact of funding reductions and tuition increases enacted in the 2011‐13 budget. 9. What is driving the lower enrollments this year?  The ebb and flow of enrollments in the community and technical college system is very difficult to pin to one independent variable. Essentially it is a balance of supply and demand.  SUPPLY: Or access, is controlled by the colleges and is determined by how many courses (or sections) can be offered with the mix of resources they have available. i. 2012 Class offerings from all funding sources are down 6% from the previous year (fall to fall).  Workforce – 7% reduction  Academic – 4% reduction  Pre‐college – 1.3% reduction  Basic Skills – 15% reduction ii. It was anticipated that colleges, when faced with $100+ million in annual reductions in state funding for the 2011‐13 biennium, would reduce the number of course sections.  Instruction represents 55% of college state and tuition expenditures.  Colleges had already cut non‐instructional programs in response to previous budget reductions. iii. Largest changes are in course categories with highest cost or lowest revenue generation  DEMAND ‐ Conversations with Colleges indicate that wait lists are being carried for FY 2012, anecdotal evidence that demand exceeds supply. i. Result of survey question regarding this topic will be provided at the Board meeting to clarify current wait list status. ii. Other potential drivers of demand include:  The state of the economy. The Great Recession pushed enrollments to peak levels. As the economy improves enrollment pressure is anticipated to lighten. While unemployment rates have improved slightly (from 10.2% in early 2010 to 8.3%) they remain high and are therefore not likely to be a significant factor in the current enrollment decline.  Change in price. In economic theory, price is traditionally viewed as a variable that can influence demand for existing supply. However, there is little indication that increased CTC tuition has resulted in decreased demand. 5 
Tab 7 Attachment G a. Very little research is available regarding elasticity of tuition as a revenue source at Community Colleges. b. We continue to be the low‐cost provider, compared to all other institutions of higher education in Washington, by a sizeable margin. Other factors continue to make the CTCs attractive (e.g., flexibility of program schedule, location for place‐bound students). 10. For the 2012‐13 school year, what is the projected value of a 12% tuition increase?  For each 1% increase to tuition, system‐wide college revenue is estimated to increase by $3.2 million. After adjustments for Innovation Account set‐asides, a 12% increase is estimated to increase college revenue by $29 million in the 2012‐13 school year. 11. What will $29 million in tuition revenue buy?  For purposes of example: the revenue anticipated from the 12% tuition could provide… i. …4,600 student FTEs funded at an annual average per student investment of $6,300.  Another example: the revenue anticipated from the 12% tuition might provide… i. …4,347 – Number of additional course sections per year if a faculty member earns $60,000 per year and teaches three sections per quarter for three quarters. 12. What are we as a system doing to relieve financial burdens on students?  The State of Washington is recognized as a national leader in exploring and implementing innovations to make the educational experience of the student more effective and efficient. i. The system is dedicated to shortening the amount of time, and therefore tuition, required to achieve program completion.  Programs like I‐BEST provide environments geared toward accelerating the student’s experience, with integrated student supports and blended educational pathways. ii. The statewide commitment to E‐Learning has provided additional access for students who have difficulty reaching the courses they need in their physical location, saving travel costs and lost time. iii. The system has recently committed to lowering students costs for educational materials and books. The Open Course Library, in early expansion mode, provides course materials and books at low or no cost to the student. 13. Will financial aid awards increase to cover another 12% tuition increase in the 2012‐13 school year?  Yes. To minimize the impact of tuition increases on the most vulnerable students, the Legislature increased funding for the State Need Grant (SNG) to keep pace with the tuition increases authorized by the Legislature. However, this year not all students eligible for SNG received awards. Preliminary estimates for this school year are that 18,000 CTC students who were eligible for SNG did not receive awards due to lack of funding, but continued to attend college. 6 Tab 7 Attachment H
WASHINGTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE TUITION AND FEE RATES
2011‐12
RESIDENTS
2012‐13
NONRESIDENTS
Assumes 15 Credits per Quarter
RESIDENTS
NONRESIDENTS
Assumes 15 Credits per Quarter
ANNUAL
Operating Fee
Building Fee
S & A Fee Maximum
Total
$2,849.10
$330.60
$362.70
$3,542.40
$7,683.75
$730.95
$362.70
$8,777.40
$3,217.05
$373.35
$409.65
$4,000.05
$8,051.85
$773.70
$409.65
$9,235.20
QUARTERLY
Operating Fee
Building Fee
S & A Fee Maximum
Total
$949.70
$110.20
$120.90
$1,180.80
$2,561.25
$243.65
$120.90
$2,925.80
$1,072.35
$124.45
$136.55
$1,333.35
$2,683.95
$257.90
$136.55
$3,078.40
PER CREDIT
Operating Fee
Building Fee
S & A Fee Maximum
Total
PER CREDIT
Operating Fee
Building Fee
S & A Fee Maximum
Total
EXCESS CREDIT SURCHARGE
Operating Fee Only
1‐10 Credits
$77.31
$9.54
$9.54
$96.39
$236.31
$22.54
$9.54
$268.39
1‐10 Credits
$85.68
$10.58
$10.58
$106.84
$244.68
$23.58
$10.58
$278.84
Average Incremental Increase for Each Credit between 11 and 18 $35.32
$39.63
$2.96
$3.65
$5.10
$5.10
$43.38
$48.38
Average Incremental Increase for Each Credit between 11 and 18 $43.11
$47.43
$3.73
$4.42
$6.15
$6.15
$52.99
$58.00
19+ Credits
19+ Credits
$86.85
$258.85
$96.26
$268.26
UNGRADED COURSES ‐ per credit fees ‐ Operating Fees deposited to Fund 149
2011‐12
Apprenticeship
50% waiver
(Clock hour equivalent)
Parent Ed
ABE, ESL, GED
Other ungraded courses
OTHER WAIVERS
Athletic waiver
Other statutory waivers
2012‐13
Per Credit Fee Comments
$48.00
Comments
50% waiver
$3.16
The board will take action on this waiver in June 2012
Colleges may waive the $25 charge for students who are unable to pay
College Option
$25 per student per quarter
Colleges may waive the $25 charge for students who are unable to pay
Per Credit Fee $53
$3.49
$25 per student per quarter
College Option
Maximum for 11‐12 is $295/quarter Maximum for 12‐13 is $333/quarter College Option
College Option
Technical colleges may increase the 2012‐13 operating fee rates by no more than the percentage increase authorized for community colleges by the State Board, or fully adopt the tuition fee charge schedule adopted by the State Board for community colleges, as provided by 2ESHB 1087, Section 604(4).
Trustees of the technical colleges are authorized in 2ESHB 1087, Section 604(5), to increase building fees by an amount judged reasonable in order to progress toward parity with the building fees charged students attending the community college, for academic years 2011‐2012 and 2012‐2013. The technical colleges can reach parity with the community college building fee schedule in four years by charging $6.54 per credit for the first ten credits, $3.91 per credit for eleven through eighteen credits and no additional building fee for credits over eighteen for the 2012‐13 academic year.
Colleges are authorized to charge tuition to Running Start students when the student’s choice of credit load exceeds the level that will be reimbursed by the school district.
Tab 7 Attachment H
Washington Community Colleges
FY2012‐13 Tuition Schedule (per quarter)
FY2012‐13 Resident
# of Credits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Operating Fees
$85.68
$171.36
$257.04
$342.72
$428.40
$514.08
$599.76
$685.44
$771.12
$856.80
$899.91
$943.02
$986.13
$1,029.24
$1,072.35
$1,115.46
$1,158.57
$1,201.68
$1,297.94
$1,394.20
$1,490.46
$1,586.72
$1,682.98
$1,779.24
$1,875.50
FY2012‐13 Non‐Resident
Total Tuition (Operating, Building and Maximum S&A Max S&A Building Fees
Fees
Fees)
$10.58
$21.16
$31.74
$42.32
$52.90
$63.48
$74.06
$84.64
$95.22
$105.80
$109.53
$113.26
$116.99
$120.72
$124.45
$128.18
$131.91
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$10.58
$21.16
$31.74
$42.32
$52.90
$63.48
$74.06
$84.64
$95.22
$105.80
$111.95
$118.10
$124.25
$130.40
$136.55
$142.70
$148.85
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$106.84
$213.68
$320.52
$427.36
$534.20
$641.04
$747.88
$854.72
$961.56
$1,068.40
$1,121.39
$1,174.38
$1,227.37
$1,280.36
$1,333.35
$1,386.34
$1,439.33
$1,492.32
$1,588.58
$1,684.84
$1,781.10
$1,877.36
$1,973.62
$2,069.88
$2,166.14
Operating Fees
$244.68
$489.36
$734.04
$978.72
$1,223.40
$1,468.08
$1,712.76
$1,957.44
$2,202.12
$2,446.80
$2,494.23
$2,541.66
$2,589.09
$2,636.52
$2,683.95
$2,731.38
$2,778.81
$2,826.24
$3,094.50
$3,362.76
$3,631.02
$3,899.28
$4,167.54
$4,435.80
$4,704.06
Total Tuition (Operating, Building and Maximum S&A Max S&A Building Fees
Fees
Fees)
$23.58
$47.16
$70.74
$94.32
$117.90
$141.48
$165.06
$188.64
$212.22
$235.80
$240.22
$244.64
$249.06
$253.48
$257.90
$262.32
$266.74
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$10.58
$21.16
$31.74
$42.32
$52.90
$63.48
$74.06
$84.64
$95.22
$105.80
$111.95
$118.10
$124.25
$130.40
$136.55
$142.70
$148.85
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$278.84
$557.68
$836.52
$1,115.36
$1,394.20
$1,673.04
$1,951.88
$2,230.72
$2,509.56
$2,788.40
$2,846.40
$2,904.40
$2,962.40
$3,020.40
$3,078.40
$3,136.40
$3,194.40
$3,252.40
$3,520.66
$3,788.92
$4,057.18
$4,325.44
$4,593.70
$4,861.96
$5,130.22
Tab 7 Attachment H
Washington State Community Colleges
FY2012‐13 Tuition Schedule for Upper Division Courses in Applied Baccalaureate Degree Programs
12 percent across the board increases in the operating fee for resident students and operating fee held constant for nonresident students.
(Per Quarter)
FY2012‐13 Resident
Credits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Applied Baccalaureate Operating Fee
$224.29
$448.58
$672.87
$897.16
$1,121.45
$1,345.74
$1,570.03
$1,794.32
$2,018.61
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,242.90
$2,477.77
$2,712.64
$2,947.51
$3,182.38
$3,417.25
$3,652.12
$3,886.99
CTC Building Fee
$10.58
$21.16
$31.74
$42.32
$52.90
$63.48
$74.06
$84.64
$95.22
$105.80
$109.53
$113.26
$116.99
$120.72
$124.45
$128.18
$131.91
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
$135.64
CTC Maximum S&A Fee
$10.58
$21.16
$31.74
$42.32
$52.90
$63.48
$74.06
$84.64
$95.22
$105.80
$111.95
$118.10
$124.25
$130.40
$136.55
$142.70
$148.85
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
FY2012‐13 Nonresident
Applied Baccalaureate Tuition Fees
$245.45
$490.90
$736.35
$981.80
$1,227.25
$1,472.70
$1,718.15
$1,963.60
$2,209.05
$2,454.50
$2,464.38
$2,474.26
$2,484.14
$2,494.02
$2,503.90
$2,513.78
$2,523.66
$2,533.54
$2,768.41
$3,003.28
$3,238.15
$3,473.02
$3,707.89
$3,942.76
$4,177.63
Applied Baccalaureate Operating Fee
$564.26
$1,128.52
$1,692.78
$2,257.04
$2,821.30
$3,385.56
$3,949.82
$4,514.08
$5,078.34
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$5,642.60
$6,230.44
$6,818.28
$7,406.12
$7,993.96
$8,581.80
$9,169.64
$9,757.48
CTC Building Fee
$23.58
$47.16
$70.74
$94.32
$117.90
$141.48
$165.06
$188.64
$212.22
$235.80
$240.22
$244.64
$249.06
$253.48
$257.90
$262.32
$266.74
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
$271.16
CTC Maximum S&A Fee
$10.58
$21.16
$31.74
$42.32
$52.90
$63.48
$74.06
$84.64
$95.22
$105.80
$111.95
$118.10
$124.25
$130.40
$136.55
$142.70
$148.85
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
$155.00
Applied Baccalaureate Tuition Fees
$598.42
$1,196.84
$1,795.26
$2,393.68
$2,992.10
$3,590.52
$4,188.94
$4,787.36
$5,385.78
$5,984.20
$5,994.77
$6,005.34
$6,015.91
$6,026.48
$6,037.05
$6,047.62
$6,058.19
$6,068.76
$6,656.60
$7,244.44
$7,832.28
$8,420.12
$9,007.96
$9,595.80
$10,183.64
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 8
May 10, 2012
Discussion
Action
Topic
Parenting Education Waiver WAC Change
Description
Currently, parenting education students who are simultaneously participating in cooperative
preschool programs are provided a mandatory 85 percent tuition waiver established in WAC
131-28-026 (4) (b). This agenda item initiates a process for the Board to consider
recommendations from the college presidents to modify the Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) pertaining to the Parenting Education Tuition Waiver (see Attachment A: WACTC
Parenting Education Proposal). Parenting education is one of only three ungraded waiver
courses where the waiver rate is set by the State Board, rather than the colleges. (Basic Skills
and Apprenticeships are the other two programs.)
Key Questions
•
•
•
How might potential changes to WAC 131-28-026 (4) (b) positively or negatively impact
parenting education programs provided by the community and technical colleges?
Should the current mandatory waiver become a permissive waiver allowing the colleges to
independently determine the waiver rate for parenting education students?
Should the WAC be changed to include all parenting education students, rather than just
those participating in cooperative preschools?
Analysis
Parenting Education Waiver
Parenting education students are provided a mandatory waiver established in WAC 131-28026(4) (b), which states:
(4) The waiver amounts for the following ungraded courses shall conform with
the following schedule:
(b) Parent education involving a cooperative preschool program:
Eighty-five percent reduction from the standard per credit tuition and
services activities fee charge.
Student Enrollments
In 2010-11, many more students participated in state-funded parenting education classes
offered at preschool cooperative programs (98 percent) than on-campus classes or classes
provided at other venues (non-cooperative preschool classes).
Tab 8, Page 2
Some school districts, municipal courts, and the Department of Social and Human Services
contract with several colleges to provide parenting education courses to high school students
and clients. These colleges reported an additional 351 parenting education enrollments in nonstate-supported (contract) classes last year.
Over the last three years the number of students enrolling in state-funded cooperative preschool
parenting education courses has decreased slightly while total FTES have increased slightly;
indicating that a few cooperative preschool students are taking more classes within an
academic year than in the past. The trend for students participating in other types of parenting
classes showed a slight decrease in the number of students enrolling in these classes
corresponding to a decrease in FTES.
State-funded Parenting Education FTES
Preschool Cooperatives
Other Types of Delivery
2008-09
1,792
13
2009-10
1,650
8
2010-11
2,125
3 year
% Change
18.6%
6
-53.8%
State-funded Parenting Headcount
Preschool Cooperatives
Other Types of Delivery
3 year
% Change
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
12,775
11,720
11,816
-7.5%
274
217
161
-41.2%
Student Demographics
While both groups of parenting education students demonstrate similar demographic
characteristics, those participating in preschool cooperative programs tend to be less diverse
than those enrolled in other types of parenting classes. Student demographic information has
been rolled up for the last three academic years (2008-09, 2009-10, and 2010-11) and is
presented in the following four charts:
Age Groups
Under 20
20-29
30-39
40 or above
Not reported
Cooperative Preschools
2%
20%
55%
21%
2%
Other Types of Delivery
3%
36%
46%
14%
1%
Tab 8, Page 3
Gender
Female
Male
Not Reported
Cooperative Preschools
85%
12%
3%
Other Types of Delivery
80%
20%
0%
Cooperative Preschools
9%
2%
2%
9%
1%
77%
Other Types of Delivery
6%
11%
5%
7%
1%
70%
Race
Asian-Pacific
Black
Native Amer.
Latino
Other
White
Socio-Economic Status (based on a valid Washington address)
Cooperative Preschools
Other Types of Delivery
Highest
36%
36%
Higher
21%
21%
Middle
16%
15%
Lower
14%
13%
Lowest
13%
15%
Fiscal Impacts of the Waiver
Students enrolled in parenting education courses delivered at a cooperative preschool receive
an 85 percent waiver on tuition and fees. Approximately ninety-five percent of all cooperative
preschool parenting education students take 1-3 credits per quarter. These students are
charged $14.46 per credit this year. Students who don’t receive the waiver pay $96.39 per
credit. Approximately $3 million per year is waived for parenting education.
In addition to tuition and fees, students participating in a cooperative preschool program pay a
separate fee to the preschool for their children that typically ranges from $300 to $750 per
quarter. This fee covers the preschool lab instructor salaries, facility rental, and insurance.
They are also required to support the overall operation of the preschool by providing in-kind
services such as assisting teachers as classroom aides, cleaning, arranging and supervising
field trips, organizing fundraising events, and purchasing supplies and materials for the
preschool.
A list of colleges providing parenting education programs and those colleges that have closed
their programs within the past five years is listed in Attachment B: 2011-12 Community and
Technical College Parenting Programs.
WAC Change Procedure
The Washington State Office of the Code Reviser requires all state agencies to file
documentation pertaining to proposed changes to a Washington Administrator Code (WAC) to
provide the public with the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes. The
CR 102 form for Proposed Rule Making was submitted (see Attachment C: Code Revisers
Office CR-102 – WAC 131-28-026 Proposed Language).
Tab 8, Page 4
The following is a summary of the Code Reviser’s filing process:
Form CR 101 is filed
2/22/12.
Published 3/7/12.
30-day waiting period.
Charlie Earl provided an
update during the State
Board meeting on
3/29/12.
Form CR 102 is filed
before 5/2/12.
Published 5/16/12.
20-day waiting period.
Discussion is scheduled
for State Board meeting
on 5/10/12.
Public hearing and
possible State Board
action 6/21/12.
Required public
hearing may proceed
on or after 6/5/12.
Form CR 103 is filed
after State Board
action.
New WAC becomes
effective 31 days after
filing CR 103.
Background Information
Attachment A: WACTC Parenting Education Proposal
Attachment B: 2011-12 Community and Technical College Parenting Programs
Attachment C: Code Revisers Office CR-102 – WAC131-28-026 Proposed Language
Attachment D: Organization of Parenting Education Programs (OPEP) - Statement on Proposal
to Change Parenting Education Tuition Waiver
Recommendation/Outcomes
Staff will provide a brief overview of the current mandatory waiver, parenting education
enrollment trends and student demographics. The overview will be followed by a panel
discussion between college presidents and board members regarding recommended changes
to WAC 131-28-026(4) (b) (see Attachment A). The presidents’ discussion will be followed by a
second panel discussion with representatives from the college parenting education directors
regarding potential impacts to parenting programs if changes are approved by the board (see
Attachment D: Organization of Parenting Education Programs - Statement on Proposal to
Change Parenting Education Tuition Waiver). Staff recommends scheduling a public hearing on
proposed changes to the parenting education waiver and followed by possible board action at
the next State Board meeting in June.
Prepared by: Kathy Goebel, 360-704-4359, kgoebel@sbctc.ed
Tab 8
Attachment A
DATE:
December 28, 2011
REVISED February 12, 2012
TO:
Washington Association for Community and Technical Colleges
FROM:
Ed Brewster, Chair WACTC Operating Budget Committee
RE:
Parenting Education Proposal
On December 21, 2011 a group of presidents and designees met via telephone to
discuss options to continue parenting education programs during this time of extreme
fiscal constraints. Participating on the telephone were representatives from:
• Bates Technical College
• Bellevue College
• Bellingham Technical College
• Centralia College
• Clark College
• Grays Harbor College (acting as discussion facilitator)
• Olympic College
• Seattle Central Community College
• North Seattle Community College
• Shoreline Community College
• South Puget Sound Community College
• Spokane District
• Walla Walla Community College
• Whatcom Community College
• SBCTC staff members
Current Program Status
Parenting education programs served approximately 1,580 FTES and 11,000 students
in 20010-2011.
Parenting Education students are provided a mandatory waiver established in WAC
131-28-026(4) (b), which states:
(4) The wavier amounts for the following ungraded courses shall conform with
the following schedule:
(b) Parent education involving a cooperative preschool program: Eightyfive percent reduction from the standard per credit tuition and services
activities fee charge.
In addition to the reduced tuition paid to the college, parents participating in cooperative
preschools pay a separate fee to the preschool ranging from between $300-$450 for
1
Tab 8
Attachment A
two-day/week classes to $500-$725 for four-day classes/week each quarter. They are
also required to support the overall operation of the preschool by providing in-kind
services such as assisting teachers as classroom aides, cleaning the facility, arranging
field trips, organizing fundraising events, and purchasing supplies and materials.
Parenting Education is one of only three ungraded waiver courses where the State
Board, rather than the colleges, set the waiver rate. Typically students take two to five
credits of parenting education each quarter and are not enrolled in other college
courses. As a result, the community and technical college system waives
approximately $3 million per year for parenting education.
Discussion
College representatives stated their support for parenting education in their
communities. However, representatives expressed four major concerns related to
parenting education programs:
1. Institutional cost of the program. Under the mandatory waiver, the reduced
college tuition revenue may constrain colleges as they try to make budget
decisions that best serve their communities and the needs of their students;
2. Parenting education cooperative pre-school program enrollments do not
represent the demographics of communities. Because of the hands-on nature of
the cooperative pre-schools, parenting education programs disproportionately
serve parents who do not work or have flexible work schedules -- middle class,
European American women and their families;
3. Limits on institutional flexibility. The mandatory waiver limits local ability to
balance shrinking resources to meet student and community needs;
4. Colleges may wish to expand tuition waiver opportunities for parenting classes
outside the traditional cooperative pre-school model currently required in the
WAC.
Proposal
The group stated an interest in developing a proposal to change the waiver from
mandatory to a local college option and to expand the permissive waiver definition to
include all delivery modes for parenting education classes to better meet community
needs. This proposal would require a change to the Washington Administrative Code.
2
Tab 8
Attachment B
2011-12 Community and Technical College Parenting Education Programs
Current College Providers
Bates Technical College
Bellevue College
Bellingham Technical College
Centralia College
Clark College
Edmonds Community College
Green River Community College
Lake Washington Institute of Technology
North Seattle Community College
Olympia College
Peninsula College
Pierce College Puyallup
Seattle Central Community College
Shoreline Community College
Skagit Valley Community College
South Puget Sound Community College
South Seattle Community College
Community Colleges of Spokane – Institute for Extended Learning
Walla Walla Community College
Whatcom Community College
College Programs Closed Within the Past Five Years
Big Bend Community College
Clover Park Technical College
Columbia Basin College
Everett Community College
Pierce Fort Steilacoom College
Yakima Valley Community College
1
Tab 8
Attachment C
CR-102 (June 2004)
PROPOSED RULE MAKING
(Implements RCW 34.05.320)
Do NOT use for expedited rule making
Agency: State Board for Community & Technical Colleges
Preproposal Statement of Inquiry was filed as WSR 12-05-119; or
Expedited Rule Making--Proposed notice was filed as WSR
Proposal is exempt under RCW 34.05.310(4).
Title of rule and other identifying information: (Describe Subject)
; or
Original Notice
Supplemental Notice to WSR
Continuance of WSR
WAC131-28-026 Tuition charges for certain ungraded courses.
Hearing location(s): Clover Park Technical College
4500 Steilacoom Blvd. SW
Tacoma, WA 98499-4098
Date:
June 21, 2012
Time:
Submit written comments to:
Name: Kathy Goebel
Address: PO Box 42495
Olympia, WA 98504-2495
e-mail
kgoebel@sbctc.edu
fax
(360) 704- 4359
by (date)
8:00 a.m.
June 1, 2012
Assistance for persons with disabilities: Contact
Julie Walter by June 1, 2012
Date of intended adoption:
June 21, 2012
TTY (
(Note: This is NOT the effective date)
or (360) 704-4313
)
Purpose of the proposal and its anticipated effects, including any changes in existing rules:
The WAC proposed changes will result in two effects:
1) The mandatory waiver of an eighty-five percent reduction from the standard per credit tuition and services activities fee charge
will become a local option for each community and technical college. The individual college boards of trustees will have
authority to determine whether or not to establish a waiver for parenting education classes. They will also have authority to
set the rate of the waiver and eligibility requirements for students receiving the waiver.
2) The waiver option will be expanded to all delivery modes for parenting education classes and not limited to a cooperative
preschool model currently required in the WAC, to better meet community needs.
Reasons supporting proposal: The proposed WAC change will provide community and technical colleges with added flexibility to
make fiscal decisions that best serve their communities and the needs of their students. The proposed change allows the colleges
to develop budgets that respond to current economic conditions to create sustainable parenting programs. Under the current WAC,
community and technical colleges are constrained in offering tuition and fee waiver opportunities to students participating in
parenting classes outside the traditional cooperative preschool model. The proposed change in WAC 131-28-026 will allow the
community and technical colleges to potentially offer waivers to more students.
Statutory authority for adoption: Chapter
Is rule necessary because of a:
Federal Law?
Federal Court Decision?
State Court Decision?
If yes, CITATION:
28B.15.069
Statute being implemented:
CODE REVISER USE ONLY
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
DATE
April 26, 2012
NAME (type or print)
Beth Gordon
SIGNATURE
TITLE
Executive Assistant, Agency Rules Coordinator
1
Tab 8
Attachment C
Agency comments or recommendations, if any, as to statutory language, implementation, enforcement, and fiscal
matters:
None
Name of proponent: (person or organization) State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
Private
Public
Governmental
Name of agency personnel responsible for:
Name
Office Location
Phone
Drafting............... Kathy Goebel
1300 Quince Street SE, Olympia, WA 98504-2495
(360) 704-4359
Implementation.... Kathy Goebel
1300 Quince Street SE, Olympia, WA 98504-2495
(360) 704-4359
Enforcement..........Kathy Goebel
1300 Quince Street SE, Olympia, WA 98504-2495
(360) 704-4359
Has a small business economic impact statement been prepared under chapter 19.85 RCW?
Yes. Attach copy of small business economic impact statement.
A copy of the statement may be obtained by contacting:
Name:
Address:
phone (
fax
(
e-mail
)
)
No. Explain why no statement was prepared.
No small business impact
Is a cost-benefit analysis required under RCW 34.05.328?
Yes
A preliminary cost-benefit analysis may be obtained by contacting:
Name:
Address:
phone (
)
fax
(
e-mail
)
No: Please explain: No additional costs.
2
Tab 8
Attachment C
AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending WSR 05-14-070, filed 6/30/05,
effective 7/31/05)
WAC 131-28-026 Tuition
charges
for
certain
ungraded
courses. (1) The state board shall designate ungraded courses.
These courses may be offered at tuition rates that differ from
the standard rates set by WAC 131-28-025.
Ungraded shall mean
courses not categorized by level of instruction and may be
assigned degree credit or letter grades.
(2)
Ungraded
courses
shall
meet
the
following
qualifications:
(a) The course has a specialized purpose in that it is
intended to meet the unique educational needs of a specific
category or group of students.
(b) The course is offered for the purpose of providing the
individual student with a discrete skill or basic body of
knowledge that is intended to enhance potential for initial or
continued employment, parenting skills or retirement.
(c) The course cannot be administered as a contract course
pursuant to WAC 131-28-027, 131-32-010, or 131-32-020.
(d) The course is not one specifically or primarily
intended to satisfy requirements for receiving a high school
diploma.
(3) Colleges may establish the amount of waiver for the
following ungraded courses:
(a) Farm management and small business management;
(b) Emergency medical technician and paramedic continuing
education;
(c) Retirement;
(d) Industrial first aid offered to satisfy WISHA and
approved by the department of labor and industries;
(e) Journeyperson training in cooperation with joint
apprenticeship and training committees;
(f) Parenting education including, but not limited to,
cooperative preschool programs.
(4) The waiver amounts for the following ungraded courses
shall conform with the following schedule:
(a) Adult basic education, English as a second language,
GED preparation:
An amount to be established by the state
board.
(b) ((Parent education involving a cooperative preschool
program:
Eighty-five percent reduction from the standard per
credit tuition and services activities fee charge.
(c))) Courses offered for the purpose of satisfying related
or
supplemental
educational
requirements
for
apprentices
registered with the Washington state apprenticeship council or
federal Bureau of Apprenticeship and Training: A college shall
3
Tab 8
Attachment C
waive one-half of the standard per credit tuition and services
and activities fee.
The college may convert the credit hour
charge to a rounded amount per clock hour. Colleges may deduct
the tuition owed from training contracts with apprentice
organizations.
(5) Students taking both regular and ungraded courses will
be charged separately for the courses.
(6) Application of this section shall be subject to
administrative procedures established by the state director with
respect to maximum credit values of such ungraded courses,
curriculum, or any unique circumstances related to enrollment in
such courses.
(7) Ungraded course fees received pursuant to this section
shall be accounted for and deposited in local community college
operating fee accounts established in RCW 28B.15.031.
(8) Ungraded course fees may be paid by the sponsoring
entity rather than an individual student.
4
Tab 8
Attachment D
Organization of Parenting Education Programs (OPEP)
Statement on Proposal to Change Parenting Education Tuition Waiver
(4/23/12 draft)
The Organization of Parenting Education Programs (OPEP) submits the following statement in
regard to the possible revision of WAC 131-28-026 (4) (b) (Parenting Education and Mandatory
Waivers).
Background on Parenting Education Programs
•
•
•
•
•
•
Approximately 11,000 students (1,580 FTEs) enroll each year in CTC Parenting Education
Programs.
Parenting Education Programs provide parents and caregivers with necessary skills and
knowledge to help children thrive at home and in school.
Parenting Education Programs teach parents to build stronger and healthier families as they
guide their children. Research clearly demonstrates that when children develop abilities to
plan, make decisions, use self-control and think creatively, they are more likely to succeed
in school and to form healthy relationships.
Parenting Education Programs teach adults essential skills for balancing work and careers
with family responsibilities. Communication, problem-solving, time management, the
ability to work cooperatively with diverse people and to organize activities are all skills that
are valuable both in the home and in the workplace.
Parenting Education Programs provide training in leadership skills through participation on
preschool boards and committees. These leadership skills are then utilized in local
communities and schools after parents complete Parenting Education Programs.
Parenting Education Programs strengthen communities within the college and beyond
through development of partnerships across the community and a presence within the
community.
OPEP Concerns about Change in Tuition Waiver to Local Control
While OPEP understands the college presidents’ rationale for requesting a change from a
mandatory to a permissive tuition waiver for Parenting Education classes, OPEP asks that the
State Board consider the possible ramifications of this change, as well as other factors:
1. Access to high quality Parenting Education Programs will be reduced statewide if local
tuition waivers are reduced. For 2012-13, tuition (at the current 85% waiver) is projected to
go up by 12%, from $14/credit to $16/credit. If local colleges reduce the waiver to 80%,
tuition would increase to $21/credit (a further increase of 31%). If local colleges reduce the
waiver to 75%, tuition would increase to $27/credit (a further increase of 69%). Increases
1
Tab 8
Attachment D
of this magnitude will result in reduced enrollment in Parenting Education programs.
2. If local tuition costs are set at variable rates, it may become more difficult for Parenting
Education Programs to compete in their local markets. This, in turn, may result in fewer
students being served by Parenting Education Programs.
3. Efficiencies have been gained at many colleges over the past three years to reduce
institutional costs of programs, such as reducing the number of sections offered. Class
sections have enrolled more students, ensuring that classes are utilized at full capacity. This
has resulted in significant savings in local college budgets. The goal of Parenting Education
Programs across the state is to contain costs and to reallocate resources to help more
students participate in Parenting Education classes.
4. While parents enrolled in Parenting Education courses pay reduced college tuition, they pay
registration and lab fees directly to the cooperative preschool, relieving the college from
the responsibility of bearing the expense of the student lab (preschool classroom). These
fees cover the cost of lab instructor salaries (in most cases), rent, insurance, supplies and
equipment.
5. High quality short term Parenting Education certificates, with measurable learning
outcomes, are being created by many colleges. These certificates demonstrate that our
students are gaining valuable knowledge and skills that not only make them better parents,
but transfer to the workplace and community.
OPEP Support for Expansion of Waiver
OPEP supports the presidents’ recommendation that the tuition waiver be expanded beyond
traditional parent cooperative preschools. This will allow programs to serve a wider student
demographic and to continue to enroll students from underserved populations (e.g. lowincome families, families of color, and families whose native language is not English).
Many colleges already exercise the option to apply the waiver to other kinds of parenting
education classes. However, reducing the tuition waiver at the same time as expanding options
for the waiver will make it financially challenging for low-income families to enroll in our
programs.
Parenting Education classes represent an increasingly diverse population of students in local
communities. One college reports that more than 1/3 of Parenting Education students are
receiving scholarship dollars to participate in classes. A survey is currently being implemented
2
Tab 8
Attachment D
to gather exact numbers. It is unlikely that these low-income parents will be able to afford a
tuition increase.
OPEP Recommendations
•
We recommend that the State Board consider the Parenting Education tuition waiver along
with all other waivers, rather than as a separate issue. The State Board has been directed
by the Legislature to do a study of all tuition waivers by December 1, 2012. We believe that
it makes sense to include the Parenting Education waiver in this study.
•
We recommend that if the decision is made to change the tuition waiver for Parenting
Education classes from a mandatory to a local college option, this change not be made until
the 2013-14 academic year. Families have already begun enrolling for Fall 2012 preschool
classes, and registration for 2012-13 will be completed by many preschools this spring.
Families have already budgeted for a 12% increase in tuition; to increase tuition further
after they have already registered will create an unexpected financial burden for them.
OPEP is well aware of the budget constraints that our colleges are facing, and we are fully
committed to working with our presidents to address these issues. We are convinced that by
continuing to serve our parents and families, we are supporting our colleges’ missions as well.
3
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM
TAB 9
May 10, 2012
Discussion
Action
Topic
Student Achievement Initiative Update
Description
When the State Board adopted the Student Achievement Initiative in 2006 it called for a review
after five years. In the December 2011 Board meeting, the Board reviewed the draft work plan
for a review being led by WACTC and tasked to a Student Achievement Advisory Group. The
Board requested regular updates on the review.
In April, the Group met to conclude its work on possible changes to the metrics and to shift their
focus to a review of the funding model.
Key Questions
•
What direction and input does the Board want to give to the Student Achievement Initiative
Advisory Group regarding the metrics that the group is bringing forward and the Group’s
background work on the funding model?
Analysis
The Community College Research Center (CCRC) Quantitative Study of The Student
Achievement Initiative and the work of the Student Achievement Advisory Group both identify
the need to focus more on measuring retention and progression of students.
In March the Advisory Group identified some possible changes for measuring basic skills and
pre-college education. In addition the group identified new points for 45 college credits and a
retention point for continuing students. The initial changes we studied suggested that the
change to basic skills in particular would shift the focus of Student Achievement to college
points and progression for more college-ready students, and it would diminish focus on the
basic skills mission as well as at-risk students.
For basic skills, any changes need to be viewed in the context of access for undereducated
adults and the challenges to colleges in their recent budgets. The Community College
Research Center Quantitative Study found that the basic skills achievement point has played an
important role in encouraging enrollment to underserved, undereducated populations. The
Advisory Group has heard that for many basic skills programs Student Achievement has been
critical to maintaining support of this mission area, which is the only mission that is serving
fewer FTES than it did 5 years ago. The Group is concluding its review of the Achievement
Point metrics in April.
The Student Achievement Initiative relies on two policy levers. The first lever is what is
measured in the point metrics. The second lever is performance funding.
Tab 9
Page 2
Also in April, the Group is starting its review of the funding model. In the current model, each
college is awarded funding for their total annual point gain. This change in points is meant to
reward continuous improvement rather than colleges competing against each other. The
funding model is based upon a set of funding principles developed by the Student Achievement
Task Force that designed the initiative.
The CCRC study found that different ways to apply the metrics could yield different college
results. For example, although the current model is not meant to be a ranking system, total
points would suggest a different ordering of college performance. Other metrics such as points
per FTES or points per student show efficiency results. Since the Student Achievement
Initiative, intermediate milestones like 15 college credits have become broadly adopted and
applied to funding in other state and national accountability systems.
Background Information
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Proposed Changes to Student Achievement Metric Framework
Funding Principles for Student Achievement
Advisory Group Problem Statement and Issues for Review of Funding Model
CCRC Executive Summary Findings
Recommendation/Outcomes
The Board with authority to set policy direction for the system, and the college Presidents
leading the System Advisory Group will discuss the Initiative’s principles and purposes. They
will discuss the issues and questions that have been raised about Student Achievement in the
Advisory Group for the Board to provide its feedback to the start of the Group.
Prepared by: David Prince, dprince@sbctc.edu, (360) 704-4347
Tab 9
Attachment A
Current Student Achievement Framework and Proposed Changes
Increase
Basic Skills
Current
Framework
Proposed
Changes
st
Become College Readiness
Multiple points
Multiple Points awarded
Measured from
incrementally for each level
Test Score
completed in English and math
Gains
No change
st
1 15
Credits
1 30
Credits
Quantitative/
College Math
1st 45 Credits
Single count for
completing at tipping
point (45 college
credits and any short
certificate) or beyond
Single count for each achievement point
reached
Multiple points awarded upon
completion of highest level
course in English and math.
Additional point for completing
college level course in each
area.
No change
Completion
Single count
Single count as
above, but 45 credit
point for prof tech is
the minimum floor
Transition
Beyond
Basic Skills
A single count is added to every achievement point beyond basic skills that is earned by all current or prior year basic skills students
Retention
Progression
A single count is added to every student continuing from the previous year who makes 1 or more achievement gains in the measurement year
1
Tab 9
Attachment A
Summary of Current Framework and Proposed Change Details
Basic Skills
Point
College
Readiness
Point
st
1 15 college
credit
st
1 30 college
credit
Quant Point
Current Framework
Multiple gains counted. Point
was structured to assure that
all mission areas are
accounted for in framework.
Level gains in both precollege math and pre-college
English are counted
One time as a proxy for
matriculation
One time. 30 credits was
chosen as an appropriate
metric achievable by both full
and part-time students
For completing college math
1st 45 college
credit
New
Tipping Point
45 college credits + a short
cert or long certificate,
degree, apprenticeship
New
Progression/
Retention
Point
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Proposed Change to Current Framework
No change made to this point. It remains the principle metric for measuring achievement within
basic skills.
However, both current and prior basic skills students are counted twice for each point they
achieve beyond basic skills. This is meant to incentivize the progression and transition for basic
skills students. Transition is viewed as an on-going process that is awarded for every
achievement point a current or prior basic skills student reaches that is beyond basic skills.
This point is measured after the highest level pre-college course is completed. Colleges are
rewarded 3 and 2 points for math and English respectively. This increases attention for
completing more quickly by restructuring and redesigning levels and placement.
For many students there can still be a gap between completing the highest level and completing
the associated college level course. If the college level course is completed within the year of the
pre-college course, an additional point is added to the pre-college gain in this subject area.
Basic skills students count for an additional transition point.
No change to core point.
Basic skills students count for an additional transition point.
No change to core point.
Basic skills students count for an additional transition point
o No change to core point.
o Basic skills students count for an additional transition point.
o Pre-college math students who also complete the college course within the year are counted
with an additional pre-college point.
o To account for work beyond the 1st 30 credits and shift more points to the completion side of
the framework.
o Requires specific courses for either transfer or prof tech programs.
o Basic skills students count for an additional transition point.
o Conforms with the workforce 45 credit point criteria.
o Basic skills students count for an additional transition point.
o Single count awarded to students continuing from the prior year who increase their achievement
in the current year.
2
Tab 9
Attachment B
Student Achievement Initiative Principles
Overall Principles:



The initiative leads to improved educational attainment for students, specifically the goal
of reaching the “tipping point” and beyond.
The initiative allows colleges sufficient flexibility to improve student achievement
according to their local needs.
The initiative results in the identification and implementation of successful practices to
improve student achievement system-wide.
Principles for Measurement:




Performance measures recognize students in all mission areas and reflect the needs of the
diverse communities served by colleges.
Performance measures must measure incremental gains in students’ educational progress
irrespective of mission area.
Measures are simple, understandable, and reliable and valid points in students’
educational progress.
Measures focus on student achievement improvements that can be influenced by colleges.
Principles for Incentive Funding:





Colleges are rewarded for improvements in student achievement.
Funding is structured so that colleges compete against themselves for continuous
improvement rather than competing with each other.
Funding is stable and predictable, and cumulative over time.
Incentive funding rewards student success and becomes a resource for adopting and
expanding practices leading to further success.
New funds provide the greatest incentive.
Source: State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, September 2007 Resolutions
TAB 3 Attachment A
http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/_a-agendasminutesresolutionsarchive.aspx
Tab 9
Attachment C
Student Achievement Advisory Group
Problem Statements and Issues for the Review of Student Achievement Funding Model
January 20, 2012
Problem Statements for Funding Model
The funding model shifts some funding away from enrollments to progress and completion.
Once awarded, funds stay in the college’s base with no requirements for how they can be used.
The model has not been broadly accepted as meeting initial funding principles because funding
is too small; the source of funding is now acting as a re-basing of college budgets; small
enrollment colleges perceive they are at a disadvantage with the metric used; not all students
are equal in the cost of moving colleges forward. Overall colleges need more predictability and
transparency in the funding model.
1. Do the funding principles still align with the purposes of performance funding?
2. What funding model best promotes the purposes of Student Achievement?
3. What funding metric(s) should be the basis for determining rewards?- point change,
points per student? Other point calculation?
4. Does the funding model allow for meaningful rewards relative to a college’s base?
5. Are there unintended consequences for “high performing” colleges?
6. What funding rules should be in place for college predictability?
7. What funding rules should be applied to enrollment changes that may influence a
college’s results?
8. Should all points be rewarded equally, or should point rewards be weighted to promote
certain policy goals?
Themes Raised by Advisory Group Regarding the Funding Model
•
The amount dedicated to performance funding needs to be enough to incentivize
colleges.
•
The amount needs to be considered in a context of budget cuts and that the current
source of funds is the college’s base allocation. What will future funding sources be?
•
The fact that rewards are unrestricted and stay in the college’s base are important. How
this happens needs to be more transparent. How colleges use their rewards needs to be
shared.
•
Current weighting of the points (more points earnable for basic skills and pre-college)
may not take into account the cost of educating students after the first year- moving
them to completion.
•
Are there other funding metrics besides change in total points? - Rate of growth for
example that can be additional components of the funding model?