REVISED

3:00 p.m.

3:15 p.m.

3:45 p.m.

5:00 p.m.

5:30 p.m.

March 29

7:30 a.m.

8:15 a.m.

8:20 a.m.

8:40 a.m.

March 28

1:00 p.m.

1:05 p.m.

1:45 p.m.

2:00 p.m.

REVISED

State Board Office, Olympia

1300 Quince Street SE ● Olympia, WA 98504

4 th Floor, Cascade Room A & B

Study Session:

Business Meeting:

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Thursday, March 29, 2012

8:15 a.m. – 12:35 p.m.

Study Session Agenda

Call to Order and Welcome

Sharon Fairchild, Chair

Review ctcLink Milestones and Discuss Key Issues

Mike Scroggins

Break

Mission Study Recommendation: Promote the adoption of web-based and mobile technology tools for eLearning and online student services.

Mike Scroggins and Connie Broughton

Break

Legislative Update

Deb Merle

Student Achievement Initiative Review Update

Jan Yoshiwara and David Prince

Adjourn

Dinner for State Board and Executive Director

Water Street Café, Alcove Dining Room

Discuss ctcLink

Regular Business Meeting Agenda

Continental Breakfast with State Board Members and SBCTC

All Staff

Cascade Room, 4 th

Floor

Call to Order and Adoption of Agenda


Executive Directors Report

Charlie Earl

Approval of Consent Agenda a. SBCTC Meeting Minutes, February 2, 2012 b. Peninsula College Local Expenditure Authority – Fort Warden

Building 202 Renovation

Resolution12-03-02 c. Pierce College Local Expenditure Authority – Science Dome

Resolution 12-03-03 d. Green River Local Expenditure Authority – Lindbloom Student

Center Design

Action

Discuss

8:45 a.m.

9:45 a.m.

10:00 a.m.

11:30 a.m.

11:50 a.m.

12:20 p.m.

12:35 p.m.

SBCTC Meeting Agenda

March 28-29, 2012

Page 2

Resolution 12-03-04 e. Lake Washington Local Expenditure Authority – HVAC and

Welding Improvements

Resolution 12-03-05 f. Clover Park Technical College – Property Exchange and Sale

Resolution 12-03-08

2013 Budget Allocations and Tuition Preview

Denise Graham and Nick Lutes

Break

2013-15 Operating Budget Development

Denise Graham and Nick Lutes

Request for Proposal for ctcLink


Mike Scroggins

Centralia College Applied Baccalaureate degree in Applied

Management


Kathy Goebel

Chair’s Report


 Trustees’ Association Report

Tom Malone, TACTC President

 Presidents’ Association Report

Gerald Pumphrey, WACTC President

 Parking Lot

Charlie Earl

Adjournment

Next Meeting: May 9-10, 2012 ~ Big Bend Community College

Discuss

3/27/12

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

ctcLink

STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEM

March 28, 2012

Discussion Action

Topic

Review ctcLink milestones and discuss key issues.

Description

The Board has been and continues to be actively engaged in the system’s direction related to technology from both the direct benefit to students and improved effectiveness in helping colleges serve students. The Board will have the opportunity to review milestones and actions taken from the adoption of the Strategic Technology Plan to the proposed issuance of the RFP, and to discuss acquisition and implementation issues before us.

Key Questions



Are we ready with the acquisition approach and financing?



What key issues are before us?

Major Technology Milestones



Completion of the Strategic Technology Plan



Ending the Rehosting Project (2003 – 2008)



SBCTC Assuming Responsibility for System Information Technology



Completion of the Go Forward Study Identifying Future System Technology Options



Completion of the Lift and Shift Project Stabilizing the Existing Software Systems



System Adoption of the ERP Project Principles



Completion of the ERP Readiness Assessment



Branding of the ERP Project ctcLink



Legislature Establishes Innovation Account to Finance ctcLink



ctcLink Implementation Planning Phase Begins



Pending ctcLink COP Financing Plan in Legislature



Proposed Release of the ctcLink Request for Proposal

ctcLink, Page 2

Background Information

With the ending of the Rehosting Project in 2008 the system core technology was five years behind where it expected to be. The State Information Services Board directed the SBCTC to engage outside expertise to review the stability of the existing systems and options for long term modernization. Additionally the Information Services Board with their statutory oversight authority reduced the system’s information technology acquisition authority to a maximum of

$50,000 until a direction was identified and approved. The “Go Forward” study as it was dubbed identified options and SBCTC staff recommended to the presidents and the Board a two prong approach. The Lift and Shift Project to stabilize the current systems and the purchase of an “off the shelf” commercial ERP as directed by the Strategic Technology Plan. The

Information Services Board approved this direction and restored the system’s information technology acquisition authority to $1M. Unique to this approach was the parallel process of the two prongs that allowed the recoupment of a major portion of the time lost by the Rehosting

Project.

The Lift and Shift Project was successful within the SBCTC current funding level and completed on time. At the same time a funding and financing strategy was identified for the modernization

(ERP) prong, a system Readiness Assessment was completed, functional requirements identified, and a formal Request for Proposal developed.

Recommendation/Outcomes

The Board will be given the opportunity to review and discuss the ctcLink and system technology strategy.

Prepared by: Michael Scroggins, 360 704-4377, mscroggins@sbctc.edu

Washington State Community and Technical College System ctcLink (ERP)

PROJECT PRINCIPLES

1.

This is an educational service and business process reform project, supported by information technology. This project will provide the technological infrastructure upon which educational tools and services of tomorrow will be built.

2.

ERP customization at the system and campus level must be minimized and will be considered only as mandated by statutory requirement or a business case that benefits the system as a whole.

3.

Systems that replicate information and processes of the ERP should be eliminated. The creation of new systems and updating of formerly existing systems are outside the scope of this project.

4.

All options that can reduce overall one‐time and recurring costs for the ERP system must be considered.

5.

Colleges and the SBCTC will commit the necessary human resources to architect, implement and test the system in a timely and efficient manner, with the understanding that it will require the dedication of many of their best “key” staff members.

6.

Our project leaders, steering committee members, executive sponsors, and other participants in the ERP project will be chosen wisely and will be empowered to make necessary decisions.

7.

Consistent data structures are required.

8.

Processes and procedures may not need to be identical on each campus; however, processes and procedures must be sufficiently similar to remain within the common academic and business services framework of the Community and Technical College

System.

9.

ERP system implementation will require employees to acquire new software tools and business skills, making it possible for them to work at a different and possibly higher skill level.

Communications and awareness will be geared toward a broad range of constituents



Topic

Mission Study Recommendation: Promote the adoption of web-based and mobile technology tools for eLearning and online student services.

Description

At the December Board meeting, the Board asked for a review of the Mission Study recommendations and discussions about policy options to move the recommendations forward for Board consideration. SBCTC staff and colleges have used the Strategic Technology Plan to implement the Mission Study recommendations on technology. This agenda item highlights progress in the activities in the Strategic Technology Plan and also includes policy recommendations. These recommendations are to continue to build on the success of the

Strategic Technology Plan, to work with colleges to develop policies that clarify and advance use of open resources, and to consider the learning management system a core technology.

Key Questions



What are the next steps in promoting the adoption and use of web-based and mobile technology tools, eLearning and online student services?



Is the learning management system now a core technology for our system colleges?

Analysis



SBCTC staff in collaboration with community and technical college staff have procured common eLearning tools, student management system interfaces, and professional development for faculty and staff. By purchasing centrally, we have been able to negotiate cost-effective contracts with vendors.



Open resources and related policies provide more flexible learning content and save students money.



SBCTC funds the WashingtonOnline shared learning management system that is available to all system colleges. Currently, the 22 colleges that use the shared system pay SBCTC $4 per active user per quarter, which is much less than they would pay under an individual license. The other colleges use and fund their own learning management systems. SBCTC staff, working with system groups and representatives from Washington public four-year institutions, is just completing a process to choose a new learning management system.



The lack of a single universally used learning management system means that students who attend multiple colleges and faculty who teach at multiple colleges often have to learn multiple systems and use different logins and passwords for each of them. It also makes it more difficult to share programming, professional development, library resources and open content.

Tab 1, Page 2

Policy Options:

SBCTC staff recommend three policy options for the Board’s consideration:

1. Continue to build on the existing successful strategies of the Strategic Technology Plan.

Common technology purchasing and management have resulted in more access for students and lower cost to colleges.

2. Work with colleges to develop model policies that clarify and advance use of open resources.

Open resources provide more flexible learning content, and they save students money.

Clear policies on the use of open resources will increase their use. The Board adopted an open policy for content developed with competitive SBCTC funds in June 2010.

However, faculty are asking for clarity on open policies at their local institutions. SBCTC staff will work with local colleges to develop model policies to advance the use of open resources.

3. Encourage the use of a common learning management system.

The current fees that colleges pay to use the shared learning management system are a barrier to use by some colleges. A common system will be easier for students and will provide opportunities to complete activities in the Strategic Technology Plan. As we write a contract with a new provider, SBCTC staff will explore with colleges how to restructure the college fee to maximize use of the common system.


This Strategic Technology Plan is identified in the Mission Study as a critical component to ensure that all students have access to the technology they need. The Strategic Technology

Plan was the product of an intense 18-month analysis completed in November 2008 and conducted by the Technology Transformation Task Force of the SBCTC. The Task Force examined the role and impact of web-based learning and the use of information technology in higher education throughout Washington, across the U.S., and around the world. Task Force members listened carefully to the experiences and opinions of Washington students, faculty, and staff. It quickly became apparent that this was an exercise in measuring the growing distance between what is and what ought to be.

The Task Force’s work dealt with three major areas of technology deployment: student learning, student services, and administration. In all three areas, the Task Force found a need for greater uniformity across the 34 colleges in the system and with our partners in the broader

P-20 education system.

What emerged from the Task Force’s work was a clear vision of how the CTC system can transform our use of technology to help meet the urgent educational needs of our citizens and our state. The college system has made significant progress implementing the actions outlined in the Strategic Technology Plan.

Tab 1, Page 3

Related Materials:



Mission Study Report http://www.sbctc.edu/general/a_missionstudy.aspx

.



Strategic Technology Plan http://www.sbctc.edu/general/a_strategictechplan.aspx

.



eLearning http://www.sbctc.edu/college/d_elearningdata.aspx

.



ctcLink http://www.sbctc.edu/college/_i-ctclink.aspx

.



Strategic Technology Plan Report March 2012 (Attachment A).



2011 Annual Report on Broadband in Washington http://broadband.wa.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2011BBAnnualRptFINAL.pdf

.


The Board will have an opportunity to discuss and review the strategies and actions of the

Strategic Technology Plan as it applies to the Mission Study recommendation to promote the adoption of web-based and mobile technology tools for eLearning and online student services.


and

Connie Broughton, 360-704-4334, cbroughton@sbctc.edu

.

Tab 1

Attachment A

Strategic

Technology

Plan

Goals

Strategy I: Create a single system ‐ wide suite of online teaching and learning tools

Action

Action

Action

Action

Action

Action

1:

2:

3:

4:

5:

elearning

Free textbooks

Library Resources ePortfolio

Online

suite tutoring

Progress to Date

ANGEL, Collaborate, Tegrity, etutoring, 24x7 tech support



23 colleges use WAOL

ANGEL and 24x7 tech support



34 colleges use Collaborate



33 colleges use Tegrity

Open Course Library—42 courses developed; 40 courses under development

Next Steps?

All tools are available to colleges at no additional cost except the learning management system.

Recommendation: Make the LMS a core technology available to colleges at no additional cost.

Ask

All

24/7—

34

colleges use this

Individual colleges need open policies to clarify ownership of learning material developed with state funds.

What policies support adoption and use of open resources?

What can bookstores and student groups do to lower student costs?

Create database of open resources.

Work with colleges to choose and support a common ILS so users can search and share across colleges.

Expand to other institutions

Available in ANGEL, little used

SBCTC manages the NW eTutoring

Consortium, which has 38 institutions in 6 states; 24 are system colleges.

Some colleges use vendor products.

Action 6: Technology proficiency—create assessments and tutorials

Action 7: Access to laptops and broadband for students

Action 8: Universal Design

Washington

Public

OCL is

Computer requires creating

State

Broadband

Center universal materials to

design be

and shared with other course developers.

and

initiatives.

The challenge

State broadband

for

Broadband

the Washington

Office stakeholders

(WSBO),

and makers will be to capitalize on improvements made to

Washington’s broad band infrastructure.

Share materials created for OCL and DOL projects.

policy

1

Tab 1

Attachment A

Strategy II: Create a seamless P ‐ 20 system for personalized online student services

Action

Action 1: Online advising

Action 2: Student relationship management

Action 3: Course catalog— single catalog

Action 4: Electronic Direct

Deposit


Core Online advising will be included in the ctcLink Project.

Core SRM functionality will be included in the ctcLink Project.

This will be included in the ctcLink project.

The SBCTC has contracted with

HigherOne on behalf of the system to provide direct deposit of financial checks for students.

Next Steps?

Will be included in ctcLink



Strategy III: Create a system of lifelong learning and change management for faculty, staff and college leadership

Action

Action 1: Professional development


Online and face ‐ to ‐ face training, weekly webinars, annual conferences, Leading from the

Classroom.

Action 2: Time to Learn— make learning technology a part of job descriptions

Action 3: Learning opportunities to aggregate colleges’ purchasing power

Sloan online

Matters

courses available to

and all

Quality colleges.

Action 4: Course redesign Quality Matters used for both face ‐ to ‐ face and online courses.

Action 5: IT staff professional development

Action 6: Support innovation by funding projects

Faculty Learning Communities—

SBCTC eLearning funded 15 faculty learning communities in 2011 ‐ 12.

Next Steps?

Maintain this effort

Colleges need to manage this



Colleges manage this

2

Tab 1

Attachment A

Strategy IV: Use data to drive continuous improvement in both student success and administrative efficiency.

Action

Action 1: Administrative software

Action 2: Business intelligence


The ctcLink project will replace our aging legacy administrative software—such as our Financial Management System (FMS) our Student Management System (SMS) and our Personnel/Payroll Management

System (PPMS)—with a set of interconnected commercial software modules to help us streamline and standardize many of the things we do at our colleges today.

Core SRM functionality will be included in the ctcLink Project.

Next Steps?



Strategy V: Treat information technology as a centrally funded, baseline service in the system budget

Action

Action 1: Line item funding

Action 2: Technical infrastructure (rewiring, laptops, wireless coverage)

Action 3: P ‐ 20 integration


HB1909 created the CTC innovation account to implement the SBCTC's strategic technology plan.

100% of college buildings have some degree of wireless access.

Next Steps?

Make the LMS a core technology

Colleges manage this

Education Research & Data Center

(ERDC)

The ERDC was created by RCW in the

Office of Financial Management to develop longitudinal information spanning the P ‐ 20 system in order to facilitate analyses, provide meaningful reports, collaborate on education research, and share data.

3


TAB 2

March 28, 2012

Topic

Legislative Wrap Up

Description

The Legislature adjourned the 2012 regular session on March 8 th

without agreement of the supplemental budgets. The Governor convened the first special session of 2012 on March 12,

2012. By law, special sessions may not exceed 30 days.

Staff will brief the Board on the status of bills that impact the system.

Key Questions:

 Are the policy changes being contemplated by the Legislature consistent with the Board’s

System Direction Goals?

Analysis

At the time of this write-up, the special session has just begun and Lawmakers continue negotiations on the operating and capital budgets. By agreement among leadership in both houses, the focus of the special session will be the budgets. Legislators have been asked to not introduce new policy legislation or reintroduce policy bills that did not pass during the regular session.

Policy bills impacting our system that have passed the Legislature and have been sent to the

Governor include:

E2SHB 2156 (Kenney): Workforce Training/Aerospace

Requires SBCTC to facilitate coordination of aerospace training programs including: conducting annual evaluations of certain programs for completion and job placement results, and developing budget recommendations specific to training programs. Makes Renton Technical

College students eligible for aerospace training loans.

SHB 2259 (Zeiger) : Regarding Higher Education Reporting

Eliminates State Campus Safety Reporting requirements for colleges.

2SHB 2452 (Wylie) : Regarding State Procurement of Goods and Services

Gives Department of Enterprise Services (DES) clearer authority over higher education purchasing and contracting. DES shall account for differentiation in procurement practices and needs among state agencies and establish policies, standards and procedures to promote greater efficiency. Higher Education is clearly defined as a state agency. Higher Education

"non-state" funds are exempt from sole source requirements.

Beginning July 2013, state agencies must require employees responsible for developing, executing or managing procurements or contracts to complete DES approved training or certification programs. Beginning July 2015, no agency employee may execute or manage contracts unless the employee has met the training or certification requirements set by DES.

TAB 2, Page 2

E2SHB 2483 (Seaquist) : Student Achievement Council

Creates the Student Achievement Council (SAC) to replace the Higher Education Coordinating

Board (HECB) effective July, 2012.

The SAC is composed of nine members: five citizens appointed by the Governor (one a student) and one representative each from the public baccalaureate system, the two-year system, the K-

12 system, and the Independent Colleges of Washington. The executive director is appointed by the Governor from a list of three names submitted by the SAC. Once hired, it takes a majority of the SAC to terminate the executive director.

Among its duties, SAC must: develop a strategic roadmap, develop performance plans; conduct system reviews; research with Education Research and Data Center barriers to educational attainment and transitions; track progress toward goals and disseminate results; encourage students to prepare for college and career; coordinate sectors; administer Financial Aid.

Requires SBCTC to assess whether any of the “complete to compete” metrics should be used as performance measures for CTCs.

Creates Joint Higher Education Committee comprised of eight legislators (two from each caucus) to monitor the work of the SAC.

E3SHB 2585 (Springer): Creating Efficiencies for Institutions of Higher Education

Exempts institutions of higher education from certain competitive contracting requirements for goods and services purchases or personal services contracts of $100,000 or less; authorizes institutions of higher education to make advance payments for up to 5 years for equipment maintenance services, require payments of salaries using direct deposit or payroll cards, and purchase travel in the most cost-effective way possible. Directs higher education institutions to make expenditures from state funds and operating fee funds proportionately throughout the year to preserve state funds. Requires a report about savings and how savings were used to promote academic success, due January 2017.

SSB 5217 (Shin) : Student on Board of Trustees

Local college boards may establish a 6th trustee position to be held by a student. The student will be appointed by the governor, selected from a list submitted by the student body. Each student will serve a one-year term.

SB 6371 (Shin) : Customized Training Program

Extends the customized training program for five years.

Other bills that have less direct impact to the system that have passed are summarized in

Attachment A under “other bills”.


Attachment A: Bill Summary

2012 Legislative Update (February 2012): http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/admin/Tab_6_Legislative_Update_Feb_2012.pdf

2012 Legislative Agenda (December 2011): http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/admin/November_December_2011_Complete_Agenda_Packe t.pdf

2012 Legislative Session Outlook (October 2011): http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/general/admin/TAB_6_2012_Leg_Session_Outlook.pdf

Prepared by: Deb Merle, 360-704-4348, dmerle@sbctc.edu

E2SHB 2156 (Kenney)

Workforce Training/Aerospace

SHB 2259 (Zeiger)

Higher Education Reporting

2SHB 2452 (Wylie)

State Procurement of Goods and

Services

E2SHB 2483 (Seaquist)

Governor’s Request

Creating the Office of the Student

Achievement Council

TAB 2, Attachment A

State Board for Community and Technical Colleges

As of March 20, 2012

Watch List Bills Delivered to Governor

Signed March 19

Awaiting Signature

Requires SBCTC to facilitate coordination of aerospace training programs including: annual evaluations of certain programs for completion and job placement results, and budget recommendations specific to training programs. Makes Renton Technical

College students eligible for aerospace training loans.

Eliminates State Campus Safety Reporting requirements for colleges.

Awaiting Signature

Awaiting Signature

Gives Department of Enterprise Services (DES) clearer authority over higher education purchasing and contracting. DES shall account for differentiation in procurement practices and needs among state agencies and establish policies, standards and procedures to promote greater efficiency. Higher Education is clearly defined as a state agency. Higher Education "non-state" funds are exempt from sole source requirements.

Beginning July 2013, state agencies must require employees responsible for developing, executing or managing procurements or contracts to complete DES approved training or certification programs. Beginning July 2015, no agency employee may execute or manage contracts unless the employee has met the training or certification requirements set by DES.

Creates the Student Achievement Council (SAC) to replace the HECB July, 2012.

Executive Director (ED) appointed by the Governor from list of three names submitted by SAC. Termination of ED requires majority of board. SAC composed of nine members: five citizens appointed by the Governor (one a student); and one representative each from the public baccalaureate system, the two-year system, the

K-12 system, and the Independent Colleges of Washington.

Among its duties, SAC must: develop strategic roadmap; develop performance plans; conduct system reviews; research with Education Research and Data Center barriers to educational attainment and transitions; track progress toward goals and disseminate results; encourage students to prepare for college and career; coordinate sectors; administer Financial Aid.

Requires SBCTC to assess whether any of the “complete to compete” metrics should be used as performance measures for CTCs.

Creates Joint Higher Education Committee – eight legislators (two from each caucus).

1

E3SHB 2585 (Springer)

Creating Efficiencies for Institutions of

Higher Education

Awaiting Signature Exempts institutions of higher education from certain competitive contracting requirements for goods and services purchases or personal services contracts of

$100,000 or less; authorizes institutions of higher education to make advance payments for up to 5 years for equipment maintenance services, require payments of salaries using direct deposit or payroll cards, and purchase travel in the most costeffective way possible. Directs higher education institutions to make expenditures from state funds and operating fee funds proportionately throughout the year to preserve state funds. Requires a report about savings and how savings were used to promote academic success, due January 2017.

Local college boards may establish a 6th trustee position to be held by a student. The student will be appointed by the governor, selected from a list submitted by the student body. Each student will serve a 1-year term.

Extends the customized training program for 5 years.

SSB 5217 (Shin)

Students on Board of Trustees

SB 6371 (Shin)

Customized Training Program

Awaiting Signature

Signed March 16

SHB 2254 (Carlyle)

Foster Care Outcomes

SHB 2313 (Zeiger)

Higher Education / Board Meetings

SHB 2352 (Reykdal)

Higher Education Institutions / Fees

ESHB 2592 (Roberts)

Extended Foster Care

SHB 2673 (Clibborn)

Transportation Workforce

Bills that passed the Legislature (other bills)

Awaiting Signature

Awaiting Signature

Awaiting Signature

Extends the Passport to College Promise program through 2022; requires that foster youth be automatically enrolled in the college Bound Scholarship program; requires colleges to explain on registration materials that there may be financial and support services available for students formerly in foster care.

Restates the requirement that governing boards of higher education institutions follow procedures for open public meetings and provide time for public comment at meetings. Four-year college governing boards must their proposals for tuition and fee increases public 21 days before consideration.

Requires Services and Activities (S&A) fee committees at institutions of higher education to post S&A fee expenditure information on the institution’s Web site.

Signed March 19

Awaiting Signature

Authorizes DSHS to provide extended foster care services to youth ages 18-21 to participate in or complete a postsecondary or vocational program.

Requires WSDOT to spend .005% of funds apportioned to the state under a federal program on services to increase diversity and prepare individuals for the highway construction workforce. WSDOT will coordinate with the Apprenticeship Council to provide services and report to the Legislature.

2

ESSB 5991 (Kohl-Welles)

Child Abuse Reporting

SSB 6121 (Frockt)

Financial Aid Counseling

ESB 6141 (Kilmer)

Lifelong Learning Program

Awaiting Signature

Signed March 7

Signed March 7

Administrative, academic and athletic department employees, including student employees, of institutions of higher education must report if they have reasonable cause to believe that a child has suffered abuse or neglect. The report may be made to either law enforcement or DSHS. All other employees must report suspected abuse or neglect immediately to the individual designated by the institution. Higher education institutions must ensure that all employees know of their reporting responsibilities.

By July 2013, the Office of Student Financial Assistance must provide a financial aid counseling curriculum to higher education institutions participating in the State Need

Grant program. The curriculum must be available via Web site and made know to students by referencing or linking to the Web site on the Conditions of Award statement provided to each recipient.

The Lifelong Learning Program is established at the Workforce Board to allow employees to create Lifelong Learning Accounts (LiLAs). These voluntary, employeeowned savings accounts may be used to pay education and training expenses. The

Board may partner with financial institutions and nonprofits to develop operating procedures, program policies and system options.

3


March 28, 2012

Topic

Student Achievement Initiative Review

Description

When the State Board adopted the Student Achievement Initiative in 2006 it called for a review after five years. At the December 2011 Board meeting, the Board reviewed the draft work plan for a review with WACTC. The Board requested regular updates on the review.

In February the Board and college presidents serving on the Advisory Group discussed the principles behind the Student Achievement Initiative. The Board also reviewed problem statements that the Advisory Group developed for the metrics and the funding model.

The Advisory Group began to review the metrics for the issues identified in the problem statements in March. The review has focused on both possible new achievement points and revisions to existing points in order to strengthen the focus on retention and progression. All potential changes are being discussed and analyzed in the context of the original guiding principles, which were re-endorsed by both the Board and the Advisory Group in their February discussion.

At the March 19 th

Advisory Group meeting, the group became more focused regarding revisions to basic skills and pre-college, support for new retention and transition points as well as adding a measure beyond 30 college credits. At the same time, we are still discussing the balance needed for measuring achievement from students in all mission areas.

Also in March, the Community College Research Center (CCRC) completed Part I of its evaluation. This part is a quantitative analysis of the points. The findings confirm the direction that the Advisory Group is taking to improve and strengthen the Student Achievement metrics.

Key Questions



What input does the Board want to give to the Student Achievement Initiative Advisory

Group regarding the Student Achievement performance metrics?

Analysis

The original Student Achievement framework describes in a simple and straightforward way increases in achievement in basic skills and pre-college, first year college achievement, college math and subsequent overall completion. Since the start of Student Achievement, total completions have risen 42 percent. The framework and the points by category describe the total effort that has gone into that increase across all three mission areas.

In the problem statement for the metrics the Advisory Group identified several areas for review to strengthen and foster student transitions from basic skills and pre-college to college-level as well as to foster progress and retention for all students.

TAB 3, Page 2

A number of points were introduced as possible revisions at the group’s March 19 th

meeting.

These points included revisions to the basic skills and pre-college points, a new 45 credit point, a new retention point and a revision to the existing tipping point. They are intended to strengthen the focus on progress, transitions and retention in the existing framework.

Analysis of these new points suggests that they would shift the focus of Student Achievement to college points and progression for more college-ready students, and would diminish focus on the basic skills mission and pre-college as well as at-risk students.

The CCRC evaluation found that the principles upon which Student Achievement is based are being met in the current initiative. Furthermore, the way the points are measured has balanced the role of the missions and removed disincentives for serving more at risk students. Much of this is due to the incremental gains measured within the basic skills and pre-college points.

However, at the same time the report notes that many students are still not progressing far and fast enough and this is particularly true for students beginning less than college-ready.


Attachment A: Student Achievement Metrics Principles

Attachment B: Student Achievement: Current and Potential Framework Changes

Attachment C: Analysis of Potential Changes

Attachment D: CCRC Executive Summary

Outcomes

Board members will have an opportunity to discuss with Advisory Group members and staff the kinds of revisions to the Student Achievement metrics being considered, how they conform (or not) to the principles and how the Board chooses to use Student Achievement as a policy lever.

Prepared by: David Prince, 360-704-4347, dprince@sbctc.edu.

Tab 3

Attachment A

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.

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 3

Attachment B

Increase Basic Skills

Current

and

Potential

Changes

to

Student

Achievement

Points

Framework

Become College Ready Earn

1st 15

College

Credits

Earn

1st 30

College

Credits

Earn 5 college credits in college level computation

Earn 1 st

45 College

Credits

Advancement to tipping point and beyond

(certificates degrees)

Multiple-every time a student makes a significant test gain in math, listening or reading on

CASAS or earns a GED/HS diploma.

Advancing and Transitioning from Basic Skills

Advancement includes:



Subject improvement that starts with the student’s weakest subject (threshold for other subject gains to be counted).



Level Advancement: a) From lower to middle or upper b) from middle to upper

(counted for each subject)



Transition to first precollege or college-level course



Earns a GED or HS

Diploma

Multiple-every time a student completes a level in pre-college

English and/or math with the college’s minimum grade necessary to advance.

Advancing Pre-College to

College-Level

Advancement includes:



In the current or previous year a student was: a) Enrolled in pre-college math and

Successfully completed the

Quant point or b) Enrolled in pre-college

English/reading and



Successfully completed 5 college credits in English

The first time each point is achieved.



Transfer

Students meet the criteria for transfer ready-

45 credits or



Professional

Technical students meet the criteria when they earn

45 credits for at least 30 college level prof tech + up to 15 other college-level credits

Single count for earning degree, certificate or completing apprenticeship during the year.

Certificates counted if 45 or more credits also earned.

Advancement to tipping point and beyond

(certificates degrees)

Advancement includes meeting one of the following criteria: a) earned a degree b) completed an apprenticeship c) earned a certificate of less than one year in length and earned at least 45 prof tech credits (can include 15 other college-level credits) d) earned a certificate at least one year in length (45 college-level credits) or longer .

Additional point that can be earned by students who are continuing from the previous year:

Progression / Retention Point--Single count if continuing student increases their achievement in the current year in any category.

3/20/2012-DRAFT

Tab 3

Attachment C

How

do

the

proposed

metrics

change

Student

Achievement

results

by

category

compared

to

current

metrics

used

in

2010

‐

11?

Total

Headcount

Basic

Skills

College

Readiness

1st 15

Credits 1st 30 Credits

Quantitative

Point 45 Credits

Tipping

Point

Retention and

Progression

Total

Points

Points per

Student

2010 ‐ 11

Points

(Current)

2010 ‐ 11

Points

(Proposed)

Percent

Difference

486225

486225

97640

43921

90288

42963

71393

71393

56503

56503

41792

41792 na

43996

32684

31526 na

101758

390300

433852

0.80

0.89

0% ‐ 55% ‐ 52% 0% 0% 0% ‐ ‐ 4% ‐ 11% 11%

Notes:

1.

Basic Skills proposed are based upon equal value effort for every advancement a student makes.

Basic Skills current are based upon multiple points for incremental gains judged equal value because they require equal test score improvement.

Difference in points suggests that points require much greater effort (2 times) in proposed measure than current measure.

2.

College readiness proposed ‐ Students are categorized into upper and lower level pre ‐ college based upon first course attempted in the current or previous year.

Advancement to college course is awarded 2 points for lower level and 1 point if from an upper level start in this total.

This is to not penalize colleges that are focusing on acceleration.

3.

45 credits proposed ‐ includes 15,926 earned in prof tech and 28,070 earned in transfer ready.

1

Tab 3

Attachment C

Points

as

a

Percent

of

Total

Points

Basic Skills

College

Readiness

1st 15

Credits

1st 30

Credits

Quantitative

Point

2010 ‐ 11

Points

(Current)

2010 ‐ 11

Points

(Proposed)

25% 23% 18% 14%

10% 10% 16% 13%

Note:

9%

of

the

progression

metric

is

due

to

basic

skills.

11%

10%

45 Credits

Tipping

Point

Retention and

Progression Total Points na

10%

8%

7% na

23%

390300

433852

2

Tab 3

Attachment C

How

do

the

proposed

changes

affect

students

in

the

different

missions?

Type of Student

2010 ‐ 11

(N=372,370, or 77% of Total Headcount)

18%

35%

Transfer

Workforce

Basic Skills

47%

Kind of Students Who Earn Points:

Current Metrics: 2010 ‐ 11

(377,524, or 97% of Total Points)

Kind of Students Who Earn Points:

Proposed Metrics: 2010 ‐ 11

(N=414,063 , or 95% of Total Points)

15%

29%

38%

Transfer

Workforce

Basic Skills

44%

Transfer

Workforce

Basic Skills

41%

33%

3

How

do

the

proposed

metrics

affect

students

by

race

and

ethnicity

in

the

missions?

Students

by

Race

Ethnicity

(Workforce,

Transfer

and

Basic

Skills

Combined)

Headcount

Students

(Workforce,

Transfer,

Basic

Skills

combined)

vs

Total

Points

in

Current

and

Proposed

Metrics

2010

‐

11

Tab 3

Attachment C

63.1%

59.6%

64.0%

10.8%

12.4%

11.6%

8.0% 8.0%

7.4% 2.9% 2.7% 2.6%

13.2%

14.9%

12.2%

2.1% 2.4% 2.2%

Asian/Pacific

Islander

African American Native American Hispanic Other, Multiracial White

% of Students % of Points for Current Metrics % of Points for Proposed Metrics

4

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM TAB 4b

March 29, 2012

Consent Item Action (Resolution 12-03-02)

Topic

Peninsula College – Local Expenditure Authority (Fort Worden Building 202 Renovation)

Description

Peninsula College is seeking approval to use an additional $500,000 in local funds for their Fort

Worden Building 202 Renovation project. The Peninsula College President has delegated authority from the Board of Trustees for this and has approved the request. Capital projects over $400,000 require State Board authorization.

Major Considerations



The college has sufficient local funds dedicated for this project.



The college received $2,000,000 match from the State in the 2011-13 budget.



The college has raised $2,500,000 locally for this project.



The project is part of the college’s facility master plan.

Analysis

Building 202 on the Fort Worden campus will be renovated to provide a responsive, instructional environment for higher education. The space will include four general classrooms, a science classroom, a studio/art room, a learning lab, a workforce training room, student study space, reception and advising areas and faculty offices. The Washington State Legislature appropriated $2,000,000 matching funds in the 2011-13 budget (ESHB 2020) to Peninsula

College towards a $4,000,000 project to renovate Building 202 at Fort Worden State Park. The design is complete and the project is now estimated to cost $4,500,000. State Parks has transferred $2,000,000 of their appropriated funds for this project to the college. In addition, the

City of Port Angeles, through the Fort Worden Lifelong Learning Center Public Development

Authority has committed $500,000 for this project. Peninsula College is requesting approval to use the additional $500,000 raised on this renovation.


Section 5101 of ESHB 2020: http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/lbns/1113Cap2020-S.SL.pdf

Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-03-02, allowing Peninsula College local expenditure authority to use the additional $500,000 for the renovation of Building 202 at Fort

Worden State Park.

Prepared by: Wayne Doty, 360-704-4382, wdoty@sbctc.edu

Tab 4b

STATE OF WASHINGTON

STATE BOARD FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES

RESOLUTION 12-03-02

A resolution relating to Peninsula College’s local expenditure authority for the renovation of

Building 202 at Fort Worden State Park.

WHEREAS, the Legislature appropriated $2,000,000 matching funds to Peninsula

College for a $4,000,000 project in the 2011-13 budget (ESHB 2020) for renovating Building

202 at Fort Worden State Park; and

WHEREAS, the design is complete and the project is now estimated to cost $4,500,000; and

WHEREAS, the college has raised $2,500,000 in local funds for the project;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the State Board for Community and Technical

Colleges authorizes Peninsula College local expenditure authority for the additional $500,000 for the renovation of Building 202 at Fort Worden State Park.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED on March 29, 2012.

ATTEST:

Charles N. Earl, Secretary

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM TAB 4c

March 29, 2012


Topic

Pierce College – Local Expenditure Authority (Science Dome)

Description

Pierce College is seeking approval to use $450,000 in local funds for completion of the science dome portion of the Rainier Science Building project. The Board of Trustees of District Eleven has approved the request. Capital projects over $400,000 require State Board authorization.







The design and construction of the Rainier Science Building was funded through state appropriations starting in 2003 (ESSB 5401).



The project is part of the college’s facility master plan.

Analysis

Pierce College’s Science and Technology Building project 20042694 (Rainier Building) plans include space for a science dome learning environment. Because the project was undertaken during a time of rapidly escalating construction costs the college chose to postpone completion of the science dome until other construction costs were finalized. The college has estimated it will incur an additional $250,000 in equipment and $200,000 in construction costs to complete the science dome above the funding provided by the State. The Board of Trustees of

Community College District 11 has approved $150,000 of Tech Fee funds, plus up to $300,000 from reserves to complete the project.




Predesign funding in Section 810 of ESSB 5401: http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/lbns/1113Cap2020-S.SL.pdf



Design funding in Section 788 of ESSB 6094: http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/lbns/2005-07Cap6094-S.SL.pdf



Construction funding Section 5174 of ESHB 1092: http://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/budget/lbns/2007-09Cap1092-S.SL.pdf

Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-03-03, allowing Pierce College local expenditure authority to use the $450,000 in local funds for the Rainier Building project.


Tab 4c




A resolution relating to Pierce College’s local expenditure authority for the Rainier Building project.

WHEREAS, Pierce College’s Science and Technology Building (Rainier Building) plans include space for a science dome learning environment, but the project was undertaken during a time of rapidly escalating construction costs which delayed completion; and

WHEREAS, the college has estimated it will incur an additional $450,000 in equipment and construction costs to complete the science dome above the funding provided by the State; and

WHEREAS, the district has Tech Fees and reserves to cover the additional costs;


Colleges authorizes Pierce College local expenditure authority, not to exceed $450,000, for the science dome portion of the Rainier Building project.


ATTEST:


REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM TAB 4d

March 29, 2012


Topic

Green River Community College – Local Expenditure Authority (Lindbloom Student Center

Design)

Description

Green River Community College is seeking approval to use $2,500,000 in local funds for their

Lindbloom Student Center Design project. Capital projects over $400,000 require State Board authorization.







The college has collected $3,736,000 in student fees since the 2007-08 academic year, in order to replace the Student Life portion of the facility.



The project was approved by College Trustees in 2007, when student fees were approved.

Analysis

The Lindbloom Student Center (LSC) provides Student Services and Student Life support for

Green River Community College students and programs. The 36-year-old facility is poorly configured to meet growing program needs and is unable to provide services beyond the minimal customer service standards. The inability of the LSC to support Student Life activities resulted in a vote by the student body in May 2007 for a self-imposed fee to replace the Student

Life portion of the facility in 2013.

A building fee of $20/quarter was assessed on all students at the beginning of the 2007-2008 academic year to be used to fund design and permit costs through bid opening. This fee increases in $5 increments each year and will be capped at $45/quarter in 2013 when it will continue to cover the debt service on a COP for the new Student Life Building. To date

$3,736,000 has been collected.

A preliminary assessment of replacement spaces included: the bookstore, food service operations, meeting rooms and staff spaces for student government, intramurals, recreation, conference services, and athletics. New space will be added to include a fitness center. This preliminary review indicates a need for 33,000 net square feet, resulting in a 55,000 gross square foot facility.

A preliminary estimate of total project costs indicate that it will be approximately $26,200,000. A more detailed estimate will be completed at the end of schematic design. The college is requesting authorization from the SBCTC Board to utilize up to $2,500,000 of the collected fees to cover the design and permit for the new Student Life portion of the LSC.

TAB 4d, Page 2

Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-03-04, allowing Green River Community College local expenditure authority to use up to $2,500,000 of the collected fees to cover design and permit for the Student Life portion of the Lindbloom Student Center.


Tab 4d




A resolution relating to Green River Community College’s local expenditure authority for the design and permit of the Student Life portion of the Lindbloom Student Center.

WHEREAS, the 36 year-old Lindbloom Student Center is poorly configured to meet growing program needs and is unable to provide services beyond the minimal customer service standards; and

WHEREAS, the inability of the Lindbloom Student Center to support Student Life activities resulted in a vote by the student body in May 2007 for a self-imposed fee to replace the Student Life portion of the facility in 2013. A building fee was assessed on all students at the beginning of the 2007-2008 academic year, to be used to fund design and permit costs through bid opening. To date $3,736,000 has been collected; and

WHEREAS, a preliminary estimate of total project costs indicate that it will be approximately $26,200,000 and the college is requesting authorization from the SBCTC Board to utilize up to $2,500,000 of the collected fees to cover design and permit for this new facility;


Colleges authorizes Green River Community College local expenditure authority, not to exceed

$2,500,000, for the design and permit of the Student Life portion of the Lindbloom Student

Center design.


ATTEST:


REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM TAB 4e

March 29, 2012


Topic

Lake Washington Institute of Technology – Local Expenditure Authority (HVAC and Welding

Improvements)

Description

Lake Washington Institute of Technology is seeking approval to use $850,000 in local funds for their HVAC and Welding Improvements. The Institute’s Board of Trustees has approved the request. Capital projects over $400,000 require State Board authorization.




The Institute has sufficient local funds dedicated for this project.



The project is part of the Institute’s facility master plan.

Analysis

In the 2009 Facility Condition Survey, a special concern was identified pointing out the deficiencies with the Welding Lab ventilation system in the East Building, primarily with the make-up electric duct heater and pressurization with respect to adjacent areas. As a result, the deficiencies in the ventilation system were creating exposure for the faculty and students to welding fumes in the lab. The Department of Labor & Industries performed an air monitoring consultation and determined that under certain conditions, students could be exposed to particulates that exceeded the DOSH regulated permissible limits. It was further recommended that the Institute implement better exhaust controls to lower the students’ exposures.

The Institute worked with a mechanical engineer to determine the scope of work necessary to address the poor air quality. The total project cost is estimated to be $850,000, including architectural design and project management services, construction, electrical metering, permits, testing, and contingency.

Recommendation

Staff recommends approval of Resolution 12-03-05, allowing Lake Washington Institute of

Technology local expenditure authority to use $850,000 for their HVAC and Welding

Improvements.


Tab 4e




A resolution relating to Lake Washington Institute of Technology’s local expenditure authority for the HVAC and Welding Improvements.

WHEREAS, the 2009 Facility Condition Survey and subsequent testing identified deficiencies with the Welding Lab ventilation system in the East Building resulting in unsatisfactory air quality for the faculty and students when welding in the lab; and

WHEREAS, the Institute determined the cost of the work to address the air quality issues to be $850,000, which reflects the cost for the air units and the overall complexity of the project as identified.


Colleges authorizes Lake Washington Institute of Technology local expenditure authority, not to exceed $850,000, for the HVAC and Welding Improvements.


ATTEST:


REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM TAB 5

(March 29, 2012)


Topic

Implementing the 2012-13 Operating Budget and Tuition Schedules

Description

As of March 15 th

, the outcome of the 2012 supplemental budget remains unknown, as the legislature ended its regular session on March 8th and resumed under a Governor requested special session the following Monday, March 12 th

. 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. At this meeting, staff will provide context and information relevant to those upcoming decisions. The Board will provide direction to staff on FY 2013 allocations and on tuition increases for resident and non-resident students (See Attachment A

– Budget Allocation and Tuition Schedule Decision Points).

Key Questions



Should general budget reductions continue to be allocated based on share of state funding?



Should the State Board office budget reduction be discounted to reflect the absence of tuition and fee revenues to offset the cuts?



Should resident tuition be increased by 12%, the maximum allowed by the 2011-13 operating budget?



Should tuition be increased differentially across credit loads to decrease the current premium paid by part-time students?



Should nonresident tuition be increased by the same percentage or the same dollar amount as resident tuition?



Should current enrollment rules be maintained for FY 2013?



Should the $2.0 million used in FY 2012 for CTCLink planning be redeployed for a new

Transformation Fund?

Analysis

Background

In FY 2009, before the cuts began, the community and technical colleges received $750 million in state appropriations. Under the budget passed last year, our FY 2013 funding is $585 million, a 22 percent reduction from FY 2009. Enrollments are expected to drop by 12,000 full-time equivalents (FTEs) to a projected 151,150 in FY 2013, from a peak of 162,000 FTEs in FY

2009. While student demand remains strong in most districts, colleges have had to cut course sections and professional/technical programs to balance budgets, resulting in decreased access for students.

TAB 5, Page 2

The original enacted biennial budget reduces system funding by 1.2 percent from FY 2012 to

FY 2013.

The legislature was unable to pass an updated operating or capital budget during the regular

60-day session and is currently in a special 30-day session called by the Governor. See

Attachment B – SBCTC 2012 Supplemental Budget Proposals for a summary of the current plans from both chambers.

As of March 15 th

, the proposed House budget contains no specific general reductions to higher education budgets. There are two provisos included which require funding within existing appropriations. The first is $2.0 million to support additional STEM enrollments. Existing resource within each college will be repurposed for the expansion of STEM Enrollments.

Colleges will be given STEM enrollment targets based proportionately on current STEM enrollments. The second is $100,000 in funding for the Jefferson Education Center (JEC). The funding for the JEC will require a reduction to college budgets on the same basis as general reductions allocated in FY 2012.

The proposed Senate budget contains no general reductions to higher education. There is a proviso which dedicates $1.851 million of the system base for enhancing the customized training program. This shift will be distributed through college budgets on the same basis as general reductions allocated in FY 2102.

Neither of the budget proposals change the underlying tuition authority provided in the initial

2011-13 biennial budget. The Board has the authority to increase tuition for resident community and technical college students by an average of 12% in FY 2013 and unlimited authority to increase non-resident tuition.

Allocations

The State Board will approve fiscal year 2013 funding allocations to the colleges after the enactment of the 2012 supplemental operating budget in a few weeks. State Board staff makes the following recommendations for the Board’s consideration:



General Budget Reductions : Allocate budget reductions based on proportionate share of state funding. Do not discount the reduction to the State Board office to recognize the absence of tuition and fee revenues.



Student Achievement : Allocate based on student achievement points.



Transformation Fund : The FY 2012 allocation included a $2 million assessment of the colleges to complete the planning for the CTCLink. Originally considered one-time, these funds could be redirected to create a flexible, discretionary funding source available to the Board to promote and expand practices that advance system direction goals and mission study strategies. The WACTC has voted to recommend to the Board that the $2.0 million be returned to the colleges directly rather than redeployed for the

Transformation Fund.



Earmarks : Continue to earmark the allocations listed in Attachment C - Draft FY 2013

Earmarks and Provisos. For FY 2012, most earmarks were reduced proportionately to the general ongoing reductions taken by colleges, however the following earmarks were protected from reductions: Basic Education Enhancement funding, Opportunity Grants, and Worker Retraining.

TAB 5, Page 3

Financial Aid: The 2011-13 biennial budget expanded funding for the State Need Grant (SNG) to keep up with tuition increases. Overall funding was not increased, however, to cover the

26,000 students who qualified for SNG this year but did not receive funding. The current House and the Senate proposals do not make changes to funding or eligibility levels for the SNG or the

Work Study program. The federal Pell grant will stay at the current funding level, which provides a maximum grant of $5,550. In addition, the American Opportunity Tax Credit (up to

$2,500 credit) has been extended through tax year 2012.

Tuition Schedules

Full-Time: The State Board has the authority to increase resident tuition by up to 12%, which represents an average increase across all credit loads. If the increases were applied equally to all credit loads, annual tuition and fees for a full-time (15 credits) student would increase from

$3,542 in the current year to $3,967 in FY 2013. While these levels remain low compared to

Washington four years institutions, in the last year tuition levels in Washington CTCs have crept above the national average (See Attachment D - 2010-11 National Community and Technical

Average Fees by State). As part of the decision to raise or lower tuition, state statute (RCW

28B.15.067) requires the State Board to “consult with existing students association or organization…regarding the impact” of tuition changes. Three students have been invited to this meeting and are available to answer any questions you may have of them regarding tuition.

(See Attachment E , 2011-12 Baccalaureate and CTC Tuition and Fees.)

Part-time Tuition Premium: It is also possible to apply the increases differentially across credit loads. Since 2003, the State Board has used this practice to reduce the disparity between the costs of attaining a degree for part-time vs. full-time students. Prior to 2002, parttime students paid 50% more per credit than 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, the “part-time premium” has gradually been reduced from

50% to 25% in FY 2008. Last year the Board resumed this policy, reducing the premium to

22%. (See Attachment F , Part-time Premium History)

Why reduce the part-time tuition premium? Many (30%) of our student are parents, many (44%) are working with another 28% looking for work. Attending college part-time is the only option for many of these students. Of the students who pay resident tuition, almost half (45%) are enrolled for 10 or fewer credits. The choice, for most students, is between part-time attendance or no attendance, rather than a choice between part-time and full-time.

In March 2011, the Presidents requested their Business Affairs Commission to examine the part-time premium and make recommendations for an ongoing policy to govern the premium.

The recommendation is currently being discussed through the WACTC and will be included in the final tuition recommendations in May.

Reducing the part-time premium further can be accomplished by increasing full-time tuition more than part-time tuition. For example, if the Board were to increase full time tuition 13% and part time tuition 11%, it reduces the premium by approximately two percentage points, while maintaining and average 12% increase statewide. (See Attachment G – Scenarios for

Reducing the Part-time Premium).

Non-Resident Tuition: Non-resident full-time students pay $8,750 in tuition a year, over 2.5 times more than resident students. 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

TAB 5, Page 4 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 nonresident tuition rates by the same dollar amount, rather than the same percentage, as resident tuition.

If increased 12%, annual nonresident tuition for a full-time student would increase from the current $8,570 to $9,600, an increase of over $1,000. Alternatively, if increased by the same dollar amount as resident tuition, and resident tuition increased by 12%, nonresident tuition would be about $8,750, an increase of about $380.

Applied Baccalaureate Tuition: The State Board has the authority to increase tuition in 2013 for applied baccalaureate programs at the same rate as resident tuition. There is also an additional statutory requirement that tuition for upper division applied baccalaureate courses at two year colleges 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 (see Attachment H - 2011-12 Tuition and Fees,

Regional Universities and Community College Upper Division Applied Baccalaureate). A 12% increase for the 2013 academic year would result in an annual tuition of $7,505.

Differential Tuition: Authority was provided last year in HB 1795 to allow the Board to pilot or institute differential tuition models and “define scale, scope, and rationale for the models.” The

House and Senate proposals temporarily suspended this authority for the 2011-13 biennium and provide time to study the impact differential tuition will have on the GET Program and potential solutions.

Enrollment Rules

The Legislature assigns enrollment targets for the community and technical college system through the operating budget. Typically, the budget act contains a total enrollment target and an enrollment target for the Worker Retraining Program. Targets for enrollment growth in specific mission or program areas may also be called out in the budget act or assigned through published budget notes when new enrollment funding is provided.

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.

This year the WACTC Board of Presidents, through its Business Affairs Commission (BAC), examined the existing enrollment rules and the policies governing enrollment reporting.

Concurring with the BAC, the Board of Presidents is recommending the continuation of enrollment rules as they currently exist. The recommendation also calls for the inclusion of a purpose statement and the memorialization of policies governing what is excluded from state supported enrollment monitoring.

The recommended Enrollment Rules are shown in Attachment I - State Enrollment Rules for

FY 2012. Briefly stated, the rules are:

TAB 5, Page 5



All Allocated State Enrollments: Districts must maintain 100% of their allocated enrollment targets in order to qualify for growth enrollment funding in the following year Districts must maintain a two-year average target attainment of 96% or risk losing allocated enrollments and associated funding after a recovery year.



Worker Retraining Enrollments: Districts must maintain a two-year average target attainment of 100% or lose a portion of their funding and allocated enrollments in the following year.



Earmarked Enrollments: Districts that do not meet enrollment targets for earmarked enrollments may be subject to a reduction in funding and allocated enrollments. Earmarked enrollments are enrollments associated with funding that has been earmarked by the State

Board for specific programs. In FY 2012 they include: Aerospace Apprenticeships, Health

Employee Education and Training, University Contracts, University Center of North Puget

Sound, and the applied baccalaureate programs.



Monitored Enrollments: Districts are expected to maintain strong commitments to the following types of enrollments: Adult Basic Education, Apprenticeships, and I-BEST.

Finally, there was also acknowledgement from the BAC and the Presidents that our system is weathering unprecedented budget times by the following statement in the BAC recommendation:

Federal and State policy makers are placing more and more emphasis on student success. State resources continue to decline to levels where the state allocations will not be adequate to cover the cost of generating enrollment targets. This changing landscape for higher education may very well make our current methodology of resource allocation obsolete. A more comprehensive analysis that includes Presidents and members of the

Instructional and Student Services commissions may be necessary to prepare for the future. Any enrollment policy or methodology must help develop rational decisions, promote sound business practices, and avoid inefficiencies.

State Board staff recommends retaining current enrollment rules for all allocated state enrollments, Worker Retraining enrollments, and earmarked enrollments.

Innovation Account Funding

Authorized last year in 2SHB 1909, the Board can dedicate up to 3% of operating fee revenues

(a portion of tuition) to the new Community and Technical College Innovation Account. Funds in the account are to be used to implement the Board’s strategic technology plan. The system is currently in the process of planning the replacement of its legacy administrative systems with a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. The first project to be funded from the

Innovation Account will be the ERP replacement, known as ctcLink. For FY 2012 the Board authorized 2% of operating fee revenue to be dedicated to the new account.

Capital budget proposals in the House and Senate authorize the issuance of $50 million in certificates-of-participation to fund a portion of the ctcLink project. Estimates indicate the cost of the ERP replacement to be approximately $100 million; the remaining portion would be funded from cash reserves that accumulate in the Innovation account.

To provide sufficient revenue for the Innovation Account to cover 2013 expenditure projections,

3% of operating fee collections must be dedicated to the account.

TAB 5, Page 6


Attachment A: Budget Allocation and Tuition Schedule Decision Points

Attachment B: SBCTC 2012 Supplemental Budget Proposals

Attachment C: FY 2013 Earmarks and Legislative Provisos

Attachment D: 2010-11 National Community and Technical College Average Fees by State

Attachment E: 2011-12 Baccalaureate and CTC Tuition and Fees

Attachment F: Part-time Tuition History

Attachment G: Scenarios for Reducing the Part-time Premium

Attachment H: 2011-12 Tuition and Fees, Regional Universities and Community College Upper

Division Applied Baccalaureate

Attachment I: 2013 Proposed Enrollment Rules


The Board will provide direction to staff on allocation methodologies, tuition increases, Running

Start tuition/fee, and enrollment rules.

Prepared by: Nick Lutes, (360) 704-1023, nlutes@sbctc.edu

TAB 5

Attachment A

FY 2013 Budget Allocation and Tuition

Schedule Decision Points

Operating

Budget

Allocation

Methodologies



General Budget Reductions

 Recommendation: Allocate based on proportionate share of state funding.

 Recommendation: Do not discount State Board office reduction to recognize absence of tuition and fee revenue.



STEM Enrollments

 Recommendation: Existing resource will be repurposed for the expansion of

STEM Enrollments.

Colleges will be given STEM enrollment targets based proportionately on current STEM enrollments.



Student Achievement

 Recommendation: Allocate based on achievement points.



Transformation Fund

 Recommendation: Shift resources dedicated to CTCLink planning in FY 2012, to a reserve account for use by the Board as a flexible, discretionary funding source to promote and expand practices that advance system direction goals and mission study strategies.



Earmarks (Attachment C) ‐ Recommendations

 Maintain current earmarks.

 Reduce most earmarks by general budget reduction.

 Do no reduce Basic Skills Enhancement, Opportunity Grants, Worker Retraining



Customized Training Program

 Recommendation: Allocate impact to college budgets based on proportionate share of state funding.

Tuition



Average percentage increase

 Recommendation: 12%



Part ‐ time tuition premium (Attachment G)

 Recommendation: Reduce from 22% to 20%



Non ‐ resident tuition increase

 Recommendation: Increase by same dollar amount as resident.

SBCTC ‐ 1 ‐ March 29, 2012



Applied Baccalaureate tuition increase

 Recommendation: 12%

Enrollment

Rules

(Attachment

I)

‐

Recommendations



General state supported enrollments

 Retain current rules



Worker Retraining Enrollments




Earmarked Enrollments




Other Monitored Enrollments


Innovation

Account

Funding



Percentage of tuition for Innovation Account

 Recommendation: Dedicate 3% of operating fee.

TAB 5

Attachment A

SBCTC ‐ 2 ‐ March 29, 2012

SBCTC 2012 Supplemental Budget

Budget Proposals

$s in Thousands

2011-13 Biennial Budget

Current Appropriation

FY 2012 FY 2013

$ 592,112 $584,711 $

Total

1,176,823

FY 2012

$ 592,112

House Proposed

FY 2013 Total

$584,711 $ 1,176,823

Senate Proposed

FY 2012 FY 2013 Total

Biennial Difference from Governor to House to Senate 2011-13 Budget Changes

2012 Supplemental Budget Reductions and Adjustments

Maintenance and Operations for Instructional Space

Customized Training Program

STEM Degree Production

Jefferson Education Center Proviso

Reduce Higher Ed State Funding

Subtotal Budget Reductions and Adjustments

-

-

2,000

100

(2,100)

-

-

200

2,000

100

(2,100)

-

(200)

-

1,851

(1,851)

-

-

2,051

-

-

(2,051)

-

-

2,000

100

73,559

75,364

-

-

-

73,608

TAB 5

Attachment B

Technical and Pass-Through Funding Changes

PEBB Funding Rate

Pension Reform

Revolving Fund Changes

Workers Compensation

Technical Corrections

Subtotal Technical and Pass-Through Funding Changes

(132)

(34)

(166)

(7,948)

(635)

(52)

(8,635)

(7,948)

(767)

(86)

-

(8,801)

(91)

(34)

(125)

(7,948)

(4,364)

(184)

(52)

(12,548)

-

(7,948)

(4,364)

(275)

(86)

-

(12,673)

(3,974)

(403)

(215)

(7,442)

(3,974)

89

(215)

(126)

Total Changes to 2011-13 Budget (166)

Total Proposed State Funding 591,946

Proposed fiscal years, percent change from year one to year two

% changes EXCLUDING Pass-Through changes

From FY 2013 Enacted

From FY 2012 Enacted 0.0%

(8,635)

576,076

-2.7%

0.0%

-1.2%

(8,801) (125)

1,168,022 591,987

0.0%

(12,548) (12,673)

572,163

-3.3%

1,164,150

67,922

59,829

0.0%

-1.2%

64,050

55,957

In the underlying enacted 2011-13 budget, the state resource base for FY 2013 is 1.25% smaller than in FY 2012. With the Governor's 2012 Supplemental budget, the proposed reduction went to 14.7%. In the House Floor budget, the proposed reduction is 2.7% and for the Senate Floor, 4.8% (This percentage change includes the impact of the Technical and Pass-Through items listed above).

Prepared by SBCTC Operating Budget Office 3/20/2012

TAB 5

Attachment C

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 BS in Nursing / University Center

15 University Center of North Puget Sound

16 University Contracts

17 Worker Retraining Earmarks

18 Workforce Development Projects

19 Workplace‐Based Instructional Programs

Total Earmarks

FY 2013 Provisos

1 Job Skills Program

2 Student Achievement

3 Worker Retraining Proviso

4 Alt. Finance Project Debt Svc.

Total Provisos

Current Reduce

Earmark

$ 2,739,319

-0.7%

$ (19,175)

1,525,935

1,610,721

$ (10,682)

$ (11,275)

3,469,574

1,552,283

1,752,910

1,147,639

68,483

$

$

$

-

(10,866)

(12,270)

$ (8,033)

$ (479)

2,054,490

164,000

12,500,000

1,018,662

1,016,287

144,271

1,639,483

949,175

6,498,100

558,402

45,655

$

$

(14,381)

$

$

$

$

$

(1,148)

$ -

(7,131)

(7,114)

(1,010)

(11,476)

$ (6,644)

$ -

(3,909)

$ (320)

House

Revised

Earmark

$ 2,720,144

1,515,253

1,599,446

3,469,574

1,541,417

1,740,640

1,139,606

68,004

2,040,109

162,852

12,500,000

1,011,531

1,009,173

143,261

1,628,007

942,531

6,498,100

554,493

45,335

$ 40,455,389 $ (125,913) $ 40,329,476

$ 2,725,000

1,813,104

33,261,000

4,018,000

$ 41,817,104

$ -

-

-

-

-

$ 2,725,000

1,813,104

33,261,000

4,018,000

41,817,104

Senate

Reduce

-1.0%

$ (27,393)

$ (15,259)

$ (16,107)

$ -

$ (15,523)

$ (17,529)

$ (11,476)

$ (685)

$ (20,545)

$ (1,640)

$ -

$ (10,187)

$ (10,163)

$ (1,443)

$ (16,395)

$ (9,492)

$ -

$ (5,584)

$ (457)

Revised

Earmark

$ 2,692,751

1,499,994

1,583,339

3,469,574

1,525,894

1,723,111

1,128,130

67,319

2,019,564

161,212

12,500,000

1,001,344

999,010

141,818

1,611,612

933,039

6,498,100

548,909

44,878

$ (179,878) $ 40,149,598

$ -

-

$ 2,725,000

1,813,104

33,261,000

4,018,000

41,817,104

Grand Total $ 82,272,493 $ (125,913) $ 82,146,580 $ (179,878) $ 81,966,702

Prepared by the SBCTC Operating Budget Office 3/20/2012

Attachment D

TAB 5

Attachment E

2011-12 Undergraduate Tuition and Fees *

Colleges and Universities

Estimated Tuition and

Fees (Resident)

Estimated Tuition and

Fees (Non-resident)

Research Universities

University of Washington

Washington State University

$10,223

$9,886

$28,009

$21,164

Comprehensive Universities

Central Washington University

Eastern Washington University

The Evergreen State College

Western Washington University

Community & Technical

Colleges

$7,125

$6,794

$6,909

$7,048

$3,542

$17,721

$16,368

$18,090

$16,815

$8,777

* Includes tuition (operating and building fees) and services and activities fees.

Source: HECB http://www.hecb.wa.gov/research/issues/tuition.asp

10,000

9,000

8,000

TAB 5

Attachment F

Part-time Tuition Policy: History of the gap between Full time and Part time students when paying for 90 credit hours

In April 2002, the State Board adopted a tuition policy that began charging tuition for credits 11 through 15. The additional amount paid by part-time students has gone from 50% to 22% as of 2012. Part time enrollment has remained stable over the same period, however the economy has shifted the level somewhat.

62%

% of headcount at PT

70%

60%

56%

7,000

50% 50%

6,000

The first year credits

11-15 pay tuition

40%

5,000

30%

4,000

22%

3,000

20%

2,000

10%

1,000

0

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

0%

Scenarios for reducing the Part-time tuition premium

Resident Tuition Per Quarter

Options for Increasing Resident Tuition by 12% and decreasing the PT premium to 20% or 18%

Credit 1 thru 10 15 Credits

Options PT Premium

Per Credit

$ Inc. Per

Quarter

Per Credit

Total Per

Quarter

$ Inc. Total

Charge Per

Quarter

FY 2011-12 rates 22% $96.39

$78.72

$1,180.80

Increase PT and FT by 12% 22% $107.96

$11.57

$88.17

$1,322.50

$141.70

Increase PT by 11% and FT by 13%

Increase PT by 10% and FT by 14%

20% $106.83

18% $105.82

$10.44

$9.43

$88.88

$1,333.25

$89.53

$1,342.92

$152.45

$162.12

TAB 5

Attachment G

Prepared by SBCTC Budget Office

2011-12 Tuition and Fees

Regional Universities and

Community College Upper Division Applied Baccalaureate

(Cost of 15 Credits for Three Quarters)

Central Washington University

Eastern Washington University

The Evergreen State College

Western Washington University

Unweighted Average

Community Colleges Upper

Division Applied Baccalaureates

Resident

$7,125

$6,794

$6,909

$7,048

$6,969

Non-Resident

$17,721

$16,368

$18,090

$16,815

$17,249

Difference from Regional Average

$6,701

$268

-4%

$18,021

-$773

4%

TAB 5

Attachment H

TAB 5

Attachment I

Enrollment Rules

Purpose The Enrollment Rules are established as a method to ensure legislative targets are met and that 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:



Aerospace Apprenticeships

TAB 5

Attachment I



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 by the Board 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


March 29, 2012


Topic

2013-15 Operating Budget Development and Framework

Description

The 2013-15 biennium operating budget submittal is due to the Office of Financial Management

(OFM) September 2012. At its February meeting the Board received a presentation on the status of our fiscal environment to ground your discussions about priorities in the new biennium.

(See Attachment A – Context for 2013-15 Budget Development). Between now and

September of this year, the Board will develop its 2013-15 operating budget. (See Attachment

B : SBCTC 2013-15 Operating Budget Development Timeline). At this meeting the Board will hold a round-table discussion with stakeholders on the primary themes to be explored for consideration in SBCTC’s 2013-15 biennial budget request.

Key Questions



Does the Board wish to reaffirm the Mission Study as the primary driver for the 2013-15 operating budget request?



Do the priorities identified in the 2011-13 biennial budget development process continue to reflect the long-term and emergent needs of the system?



Are there additional, critical questions or issues that need to be addressed as the system embarks upon the 2013-15 budget development process?

Analysis

At its February meeting the Board received a contextual update for the coming 2013-15 biennium, and briefly discussed approaches to establishing priorities during the coming planning cycle.

During the development of the 2011-13 budget, the Board used the then recently completed

Mission study to help define their budget requests. Those focal points were:



Serve People;



Close the Skills gap for technically trained workers;



Increase funding for ABE;



Strengthen role in bachelor’s degrees;



Use performance measures and funding to increase student achievement;



Invest in Faculty and Staff.

(See Attachment C – 2011-13 Budget Items identified from the Mission Study Implementation

Plan).

TAB 6, Page 2

During their March meeting, the presidents will begin discussing priorities for the coming biennium. The outcome of those conversations will be represented by the presidents participating in the round-table discussion at this Board meeting.


Attachment A: Context for 2013-15 Budget Development

Attachment B: SBCTC 2013-15 Operating Budget Development Timeline

Attachment C: 2011-13 Budget Items identified from the Mission Study Implementation Plan

Attachment D-1: List of Round-table Participants

Attachment D-2: Students Participating in 2013-15 Budget Development – Bios

Outcomes

The Board will provide direction to staff on the primary framework and priorities for the 2013-15 operating budget request.

Prepared by: Nick Lutes, 360-704-1023, nlutes@sbctc.edu

Context for 2013-15

Budget Development

2001-03 to 2011-13

SBCTC Operating Budget Office

February 1, 2012

TAB 6

Attachment A

Higher Education is shrinking as an overall investment for discretionary state resources.

2

Changes in State funding for Higher Education can’t be viewed in isolation.

3

Tuition increases have mitigated losses in state funds,…

4

…which has lead to lower overall reductions for all of higher education.

5

The result? Institutions of Higher Education are becoming increasingly reliant on tuition.

6

For CTCs, diminishing reliance on state is magnified further when all funding sources are included…

7

…And within our system, dependence on state resources varies greatly from college to college

FY 2011

8

Reductions in state support impact students because…

• …Colleges are reducing the number of course offerings, which leads to…

– Fewer enrollment opportunities, which…

– Impacts completions, and…

– Slows the rate in which students fill job gaps.

• …Colleges are increasing tuition, which

– Increases financial burdens for the student.

9

Fewer

enrollment

opportunities

for

students.

The Great Recession generated record enrollments, however the reduction in state investments is anticipated to reduce future enrollments

10

Fewer

enrollment

opportunities

for

students.

Will we have the capacity to meet our twenty year enrollment goals?

11

Increased

financial

burdens

for

student.

Students using financial aid are increasing their use of student loans to fund their education

12

What are Colleges doing to absorb budget reductions?

• Reduce Services

– Fewer counseling FTEs

– Reduced hours in libraries and tutoring centers

– Closure of child care facilities

– Fewer FTEs for financial aid

• Emphasize accelerated learning

– IBEST

– Running Start

• Change our service delivery

– Shift to High Demand programs

• 560 programs eliminated, replaced with 213 new high demand

– Expand On-line learning

• Now 19% of enrollments

– Expand Open Course

Library

• Material for 42 classes currently on-line

• 39 being developed

13

What do the fiscal waters look like for 2013-15?

• The Office of Financial Management’s Six Year

Outlook (assuming the Governor’s Supplemental)

– Revenue growth is approximately 4.5% per year

– Expenditure growth is approximately 11%

14

Our Priorities: The Mission Study

1.

Serve more people, including groups who have been underserved in the past

2.

Close the statewide skills gaps for technically trained workers

3.

Increase funding for adult basic skills programs

4.

Contribute more to the production of baccalaureate degrees

5.

Work with P-20 partners to create seamless, easy-tonavigate pathways for all students

6.

Use performance measures and funding as incentives to improve student achievement

7.

Invest in sustaining faculty and staff excellence

8.

Build a 21 st century learning infrastructure

9.

Promote the adoption of webbased and mobile technology for eLearning and online services

10. Devote a larger share of system resources to teaching and promoting efficiencies in college district governance

15

Next Steps

• Three more Board meetings between now and end of June

• Four WACTC meetings

• Goal: Receive adequate direction for staff to begin drafting

11-13 budget request in June for approval in

September 2012.

• QUESTIONS

16

TAB 6

2013

‐

15

SBCTC

Operating

Budget

Development

Timeline

State Board Meeting February 1 ‐ 2, 2012

This is the initial discussion on 2013 ‐ 15 operating budget development.

Outcome: Direction to staff on potential board priorities and themes, and the budget development process.

 Activities between February and March Board meetings:



WACTC meetings



February 23 ‐ 24

 March 22 ‐ 23

 Feb.

16 Revenue Forecast – first look at 2013 ‐ 15

 Legislative 2012 supplemental budgets released (enacted)

 60 ‐ day legislative session adjourns March 9

State Board Meeting March 28 ‐ 29, 2012

Outcome: Direction to staff on budget request themes and priorities and potential items to include in the request.

 System activities between March and May Board meetings:

 April 26 ‐ 27 ‐‐ WACTC meets

State Board Meeting May 9 ‐ 10, 2012

Outcome: Final identification of potential items to include in budget request, before approval in

June

 System activities between May and June Board meetings:



May 31, June 1 WACTC meets



TACTC Spring Convention and TACTC Legislative Steering Committee Meetings

State Board Meeting June 20 ‐ 21, 2012

Outcome: Direction to staff on list of items to include in request and direction to staff complete the request

 System activities between June and September Board meetings



WACTC Retreat

State Board Meeting September 2012

Outcome: Board finalizes and approves budget request, directs staff to submit to Governor

TAB 6

Attachment C

2011-13 Budget Request Items

Aligned with Mission Study Category

$ in millions

Item in Priority Order

1.

2.

Retain Worker Retraining

Student Achievement

Initiative

3.

Restore Adult Basic

Education

4.

Enrollment - Fund Projected

Levels

5.

Technology: ERP

6.

Compensation Increases

$ Requested

$35.1

Close the Skill Gap

$10.8

Mission Study Category Outcome

Fund Student

Achievement

$31.2

Increase ABE Funding

$9.0 - in new funding ($4.5 per year)

$5.0 - Provisoed;

No new funding

No new funding

$90.7

Serve More Students No new funding

$2.0

Technology Tools

Not funded in budget. $2.0 -

Internal decision to fund from base

$20.0

Invest in Faculty and Staff No new funding

Total Request $189.8

Note: The projected beginning two year base for 2013-15 is $1,170 million.

Prepared by SBCTC Operating Budget Office March 29, 2012

TAB 6

Attachment D ‐ 1

2013 ‐ 15 Budget Development

List of Round ‐ table Participants

Students

Nathan Fitzgerald, North Seattle Community College

Jonathan Russell, Clover Park Technical College

Matthew Schrader, South Puget Sound Community College

Presidents

Gerald Pumphrey, South Puget Sound Community College, President WACTC

Ed Brewster, Grays Harbor College

Denise Yochum, Pierce College – Ft.

Steilacoom

David Beyer, Everett Community College

Tom Keegan, Skagit Valley College

Christine Johnson, Spokane District

Labor

Carla Naccarato ‐ Sinclair, Washington Education Association

Wendy Rader ‐ Konofalski, Washington Education Association

Bernal Baca, Washington American Federation of Teachers

Tom Gaskin, Washington American Federation of Teachers

Trustees

Tom Malone, Seattle District

Tim Douglas, Whatcom Community College

Dan Altmayer, Highline Community College

Students Participating in 2013-15 Budget Development

TAB 6

Attachment D-2

Jonathan Russell

Clover Park Technical College

My name is Jonathan Russell and I am enrolled in the computer network security program at Clover Park Technical College. I am currently in my fourth quarter of six and plan to graduate this summer.

This past year I enrolled in college and it has transformed my life. I have made an effort to be more involved at every opportunity at my college. I have served as the President of the Computer Networking

Information Systems Security extracurricular club, Club Shield. I am the Student Body President at Clover Park Technical College and was recently voted into the Presidency of The Washington State Community and Technical

College Student Association. I have grown to love these jobs but have found true passion for helping others and standing up for those without a voice. I have worked for system wide LGBTQ demographics at the CTC level. My hopes and dreams are to finish my college education and be a valuable team member as an IT Network Administrator where I can work hard and flourish while starting my own family.

Matthew Schrader

South Puget Sound Community College

Matthew Aaron Shrader is currently serving his second year on South

Puget Sound Community College’s Student Senate, serving as Senator for Legislative Affairs for the 2011-2012 school year.

Shrader uses his administrative skills and his ability to motivate, encourage, and engage others as well as his innovation to see projects accomplished both at SPSCC and state-wide. Shrader was chosen to lead the Washington State CTC Student Coalition for

LGBTQ Demographics, a state-wide coalition of students who sought to have Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, & Queer (LGBTQ) demographics added to the CTC uniform application. Currently WSSSC has formed a task force to answer technical questions on implementing these demographics, and asked Shrader to serve on this task force.

Academically Shrader dropped out of high school, earned a GED, and had the motivation to start taking college classes to make something of himself. Shrader has flourished at SPSCC both academically and personally. He will graduate in June. Currently Shrader serves as the

Secretary on the Mpowerment Advisory Committee, a local non-profit that does HIV/AIDS prevention work and encourages young gay men to have healthy relationships. Most of

Shrader’s free time is spent with Capital City Pride, in which he serves as the youngest Co-

Chair in the organizations 22 year history.

Page 2

2013-15 Budget Development Work Group Students

Nathan Fitzgerald

North Seattle Community College

Nathan Fitzgerald is a passionate student leader and organizer at

North Seattle Community College. Over the past legislative session

Nathan has helped established a strong student voice in Olympia.

He has championed student concerns as they relate to opportunity, accessibility and quality of education.

As a first generation college student, Nathan has a deep understanding on the importance of a college education in today’s economy. His wide range of life experience, including military service, professional boxing, living out of a car, owning a small business, being a husband, and father, has allowed him to see many sides of society. It is through his diverse experience that he gained an understanding of the social and individual benefits of education. It is his understanding of personal struggle which drives him to increase access and opportunity to college education, knowing firsthand how education can change one’s life.

In response to the continued cuts in state support to the CTCs, Nathan founded Student

Advocates For Education (S.A.F.E.) and the Research and Advocacy Committee (RAC); a new branch of NSCC Student Government. Both student groups are dedicated to advocating for student needs and concerns on campus, in Olympia and throughout Washington State. He has also been integral in working towards statewide CTC representation while serving on the executive board of the Washington Community and Technical College Student Association

(WACTCSA). Nathan has spoken at student rallies, been a contributor to the Seattle Times, is a published writer, worked alongside Senators and Representatives in crafting bills, and currently serves as a student representative on several issue driven campaigns.

Nathan’s academic plans include transferring to the University of Washington in the summer of

2012 and double majoring in Political Science and Philosophy. He is a member of Phi Theta

Kappa Honor Society. It is Nathan’s goal to attend Seattle University School of Law and work in public service.

Tab 7

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ITEM

March 29, 2012

Discussion Action (Resolution 12-03-06)

Topic

Approve the ctcLink Project Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Request for Proposal (RFP)

Phase.

Description

The Washington State Community and Technical College ERP Project (ctcLink) will replace a wide variety of computer systems across 34 colleges. The ERP will provide improved student services, comprehensive financial aid services, a unified view of human resources, integrated financial management and controls, and robust reporting and research capabilities. The ERP will be the template to align college and system business processes.

A process has been underway since last summer lead by State Board staff and the Gartner consultancy to identify functional, technical, and business process requirements. Several focus groups and hundreds of college participants were involved in the documentation and development of these requirements. Vendors will be asked to respond in their proposals as to how their software and approach address the State Board and college requirements. The next phase is to release the request for proposals, evaluate the vendor responses, select an apparent successful vendor, and negotiate and sign contracts.

The office of Chief Information Officer (OCIO) has statutory authority over all state information technology projects. Prior to last year the information technology board had this authority.

SBCTC has been working with OCIO staff in the development of the ctcLink RFP. Based on input from the OCIO we’ve included multiple response options for vendors.

Key Questions



How can the ctcLink RFP process ensure innovative competitive proposals?



How can ctcLink RFP ensure the best technology for the CTC system?

Analysis



Two million dollars in state funding for detailed ERP planning and vendor selection was set aside for FY2012.



State Board staff working with college staff has reviewed, documented, and developed functional, technical, and business process requirements needed from a commercial ERP system.



These requirements will be included in the formal solicitation for proposals from the vendor community scheduled for April with a 60 day response period.

Tab 7, Page 2



A vendor evaluation and selection team (VEST) using predetermined criteria will score the responses and determine the finalists eligible for the on-site demonstrations.



The VEST team will make a recommendation to the State Board Executive Director as to the apparent successful vendor.



The recommendation and justification will be brought to the State Board for final approval.


The current CTC administrative systems are COBOL and use database reporting tools from the early 1980s. These systems are customized around current business practices and were developed in-house. Best practices were not considered in the original design of these systems. The hardware will be sustainable for several years due to the Lift and Shift Project however the COBOL still poses a substantial barrier to adapting to the needs of colleges and students and is a barrier to implementing efficiencies recommended by the Mission Study.

These systems will lack flexibility until replaced by new commercial ERP software. Students depend on these systems to access their teaching and learning functions, colleges use these systems to administer student records, process financial transactions, award financial aid, and pay faculty and staff. The COBOL technology renders the level of service required for students, faculty, staff, and the public costly and inefficient.

At the June 23, 2011, State Board meeting resolution 11-06-32 was passed delegating the

Executive Director authority to enter into a contract with the apparent successful vendor and to take the steps necessary to perform the detailed ERP planning for the Washington State community and technical college system.


The Board will have an opportunity to discuss the ctcLink RFP and the overall ctcLink project.

Staff recommends adoption of Resolution 12-03-06 delegating authority to the Executive

Director to release the RFP and solicit vendor responses. The approval of the financing request by the legislature and the approval of the OCIO is required prior to release of the RFP.


TAB 7




A resolution relating to College Administrative Computer Applications Enterprise Resource

Planning (ERP) ctcLink Project Request for Proposals (RFP).

WHEREAS, Washington’s 34 Community and Technical Colleges have shared common administrative computer applications that provide a wide range of administrative functionality to the colleges; and

WHEREAS, the administrative computer applications that have served the community and technical colleges well for decades are past the end of useful life; and

WHEREAS, a need exists to replace the current administrative computer applications environment; and

WHEREAS , through a competitive process an apparent successful vendor to perform detailed ERP project planning will be identified;


Colleges delegates to the Executive Director the authority to take the steps necessary to release a RFP, evaluate responses, and recommend an apparent successful vendor for the

Washington State community and technical college system.


ATTEST:



March 29, 2012

Discussion Action (Resolution 12-03-07)

Topic

Approval of Centralia College’s Bachelor of Applied Science Degree in Applied Management.

Description

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.

Centralia College completed an initial step in the approval process when college administrators met with State Board members on October 26, 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 or denial of the college’s application to offer the proposed Bachelor of

Applied Science degree. If approved, Centralia College’s application moves to the Higher

Education Coordinating Board for consideration.

Key Questions



Does Centralia College’s application for a Bachelor of Applied Science Degree in Applied

Management meet criteria established by the State Board for Community and Technical

Colleges and the Higher Education Coordinating Board?

Analysis

The Applied Management degree program is targeted to those individuals needing baccalaureate-level knowledge and skills in the theory and practices of business management.

The proposed program is similar to Applied Management programs offered at Peninsula College and Columbia Basin College; however, it is designed to meet the specific needs of the local region. Currently, Lewis County is suffering the highest jobless rate in the state, but there is reason for optimism as new businesses move into the county. Occupations in the small business sector are projected to be in demand. Unfortunately, higher educational attainment is very low in the county. This results in the inability to meet current and projected employer needs for managers and supervisors and contributes to high rates of small business failure.

The Applied Management program will fuel economic recovery in a county that has struggled with its shift from an agricultural-, timber-, and mining-based economy to a service-based economy.

Tab 8, Page 2

To enhance instructional effectiveness, Centralia College has intentionally used a hybrid model to structure the program. Each course will include weekly, two-hour, face-to-face class sessions where students can interact directly with their instructors. The remainder of the instruction will be delivered online, providing working students with more flexibility. Students will have the option to complete the program in two or three years. The cohort model was selected for the

Applied Management program for several reasons. First, individuals in both public and private organizations are expected to work as team members. The cohort model puts emphasis on this collaborative environment. Second, the cohort model provides a strong social support system for students as they move through the program. Third, a growing body of literature in educational research supports the theory that the cohort model provides students with enriched collective learning experiences that enhance knowledge and skill building. As with Centralia

College’s associate degree earners, most of the Applied Management program graduates are expected to stay in the region after completion of their degrees.

Centralia College’s application for a Bachelor of Applied Science in Applied Management affords place-bound students an opportunity to transfer an associate degree or a technical associate degree into a Bachelor of Science in Applied Management degree. Students seeking admission to the program will be required to possess an associate degree from an accredited college or university with a minimum GPA of 2.0. Students must also have a minimum of six months full-time equivalent work experience. Successful candidates for the program will demonstrate they have completed a five-credit English Composition course and a five-credit math class at the 100 level or higher. Other general education distribution course requirements not met as part of an associate degree must be completed prior to graduation.

Students will complete eleven five-credit core program courses for a total of 55 quarter credits and an additional twelve five-credit general education courses for a total of 60 quarter credits.

Six of the general education courses are applied management courses. Most of the curriculum is comprised of courses focused on the role of a manager in business and supervisory settings.

Students will complete courses in project management, economics, organizational theory and behavior, finance, and a practicum that will introduce them to city and county government, law enforcement, media, legislators and educational institutions. In addition, students will complete an internship that will allow them to gain a deeper understanding of management within their chosen field.

The proposed program will enroll 25 FTES annually, with a second year targeted size of 45

FTES. Centralia College’s applied baccalaureate degree program will be self-supported through tuition and fees and will not require state funds. Tuition will be charged at the same rate as the existing applied bachelor’s degree programs at other community colleges.

Washington’s community and technical colleges currently offer nine Bachelor of Applied

Science programs at seven different colleges. This will be Centralia College’s first applied baccalaureate degree program.

Legislation

Legislation passed in 2010 recognizes the State Board and Higher Education Coordinating

Board as the state’s authorities for approving all Applied Bachelor’s programs offered by community and technical colleges. Applications for applied baccalaureate degree programs are reviewed and approved employing objective criteria, including, but not limited to:



The college demonstrates the capacity to make a long-term commitment of resources to build and sustain a high quality program;

Tab 8, Page 3



The college has or can readily engage faculty appropriately qualified to develop and deliver a high quality curriculum at the baccalaureate level;



The college can demonstrate demand for the proposed program from a sufficient number of students within its service area to make the program cost-effective and feasible to operate;



The college can demonstrate that employers demand the level of technical training proposed within the program, making it cost-effective for students to seek the degree; and



The proposed program fills a gap in options available for students because it is not offered by a public four-year institution of higher education in the college’s geographic area.

Future Baccalaureate Needs

The HECB 2011 Regional Needs Analysis Report analyzed higher education needs in regions across Washington State. The summary of the report findings includes:



Higher education capacity (especially at the graduate level) is highly concentrated in King

County and, to a lesser extent, Spokane and Pullman. There is an increasing need for higher education expansion beyond these regions of the state.



The strongest statewide demand for degree holders are in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM fields); health sciences (nursing, allied health, medicine, biosciences); science and mathematics education; and in the areas of business management and accounting. Many of these occupations require employees to hold a baccalaureate degree.



Washington is not producing enough degree holders to meet high demand occupation areas

– especially in STEM fields. For every 100 baccalaureate degree holders Washington produces, it imports 76. A 2009 HECB study on The Role of Transfer in the Attainment of

Bachelor Degrees at Washington’s Public Baccalaureate Institutions found that students tend to enroll in colleges and universities that are nearby. This has resulted in an enrollment increase at branch campus, university center, or distance learning programs over a five year period.

Approval Process

The Centralia College application is consistent with the criteria and format established by the

SBCTC and HECB. After submitting a Statement of Need and meeting with the State Board to discuss their proposal to offer another Applied Bachelor’s degree, Centralia College submitted a program approval application in December, 2011. The application addressed ten criteria:

1. Support of the statewide strategic plans (SBCTC System Direction and Mission Study goals and Higher Education Coordinating Board Strategic Master Plan);

2. Program not offered by public, four-year institution in geographic area;

5. Rigorous curriculum at baccalaureate level;

7. Qualified faculty and staff;

8. Quality student services plan;

9. Plan for assessing student achievement and program assessment;

10. Plan for admissions consistent with an open door institution.

Consistent with the new approval process, the application has been reviewed by a community and technical college system committee comprised of a college president, vice president of instruction, vice president of finance, a representative from the Workforce Training and

Tab 8, Page 4

Education Coordinating Board, a representative from a regional public university, one staff member from the Higher Education Coordinating Board and one staff member from the State

Board for Community and Technical Colleges.

The committee unanimously recommends approval of Centralia College’s Bachelor of Applied

Science Degree in Applied Management.


HECB System Design Plan at http://www.hecb.wa.gov/news/newsreports/documents/ReportSystemDesign-FINAL2010.pdf

SBCTC System Direction at http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/docs/sbctc_system_direction_final.pdf

SBCTC Mission Study at http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/docs/sbctc_mission_study-interactiveweb.pdf

Applied baccalaureate degree approval process at http://www.sbctc.ctc.edu/college/education/applied_baccalaureate_degree_process.pdf

HECB Regional Needs Analysis Report at http://www.hecb.wa.gov/news/newsreports/documents/RegNeedsAnalysis-Binder.pdf

2009 The role of Transfer in the Attainment of Bachelor Degrees at Washington’s Public

Baccalaureate Institutions http://www.hecb.wa.gov/boardmtgs/documents/TAB5.RoleofTransferExecutiveSummaryfinal.pdf

Recommendation

Staff recommends State Board action on Resolution 12-03-07, approving Centralia College’s application for a Bachelor of Applied Science in Applied Management degree program.

Prepared by: Kathy Goebel, 360-704-4359, kgoebel@sbctc.edu

Tab 8




A resolution to approve Centralia College’s application to offer a Bachelor of Applied Science in

Applied Management based upon recommendations of the Community and Technical College

Applied Bachelor’s Degree Review Committee.

WHEREAS, RCW 28B.50.810 recognizes the State Board for Community and Technical

Colleges and the Higher Education Coordinating Board as the state’s authority for approving all

Applied Bachelor’s degree programs offered by community and technical colleges; and

WHEREAS, consistent with the Washington State Legislature’s requirement, the State

Board developed objective criteria for the selection of Community and Technical College

Applied Bachelor’s degrees; and

WHEREAS, the Community and Technical College Applied Bachelor’s Degree Review

Committee found that Centralia College’s application provided evidence that met or exceeded all objective selection criteria and will expand bachelor degree capacity in the state;


Colleges approves the recommendation of the Review Committee to authorize Centralia

College to pursue their Bachelor of Applied Science in Applied Management approval through the Higher Education Coordinating Board and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and

Universities.


ATTEST:
