Planning, Review and
Budget Council
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Room 405, bld. 400
3:00-5:00 PM
Minutes
Attendees:
Noell Adams, Jim Matthews, Yvonne Wu-Craig, Jeremy Wilson, Catherine Powell,
Laurie Dockter, Laura Alarcon, Carolyn Arnold, Mark Stephens, K Metcalf and
Deonne Kunkel, Donna Gibson, President Sperling
Minute Taker:
Christine Herrera
Welcome and Approval of March 2nd Minutes
 Called to order 3:08 p.m.
 Minutes from the March 2nd meeting were approved by consensus with
edits
Vote on Strategic Plan Goal and Strategic Plan Initiatives:
 Student tracking in English and Math began in 2012 and just starting to see
completions at the end of 2015, at the same time verifying Pathways and providing
information and support
 All the initiatives and activities that have come out of PRBC
 Normally there are objectives and goals, but decided to have only this one goal
which is like an objective because it is measurable, simplifying and focusing on this
one goal
 The task is to discuss and decide if we want to continue the strategic plan goal the
one goal and to discuss and to develop what we are going to do for 2016-17
 Continue the strategic plan goal because we are tracking and will have better
measures to keep track of the same goal
 Question can there be more than one strategic goal, yes but this current goal
combines several goals
 One of the most brilliant decisions this college made by having one goal because it is
so focused on what the college actually needs to do, fits in with each one of the
initiatives, you can see progress and it energizes the college, very success and should
continue with this goal for the next two years
1








Suggestion to add or modify at the end also disproportionate impact among student
groups and have something measurable but make equity measures more intentional
and integrated with the overall college strategic plan
Master Plan and Strategic Plan complement each other very well, strategic plan is
more detail and direct
Lots of ways to measure successes, example, are we physically getting more
students into college level courses
College-wide initiatives moving towards individual projects, best practices for all
students
All about completion, college has autonomy
The highest number ever of faculty know what our goal is
Carolyn Arnold moved to approve with addition of creating equitable outcome,
approve for three years, seconded by Jim Matthews to continue for 2016-2019.
Carolyn will word-smith the additional language with Deonne and Yvonne.
Approved by consensus with the understanding that initiatives will be reviewed.
Discussion of College-wide Framework for Facilities needs
 During the discussion of this item keep the following in mind to guide the discussion:
o The key question I believe how the college will most effectively organize the
process of assessing and updating our facilities master plan for the upcoming
bond should it be successful?
 Yvonne Wu-Craig went over the draft statement as to how it was developed and
where the majority of the information came from which was the Strategic plan
under development for 2014-15. It was crafted by summarizing the major
initiatives, clarifying pathways, providing information to students about pathways
and processes, support services and info structure support. The indicators that
should see affected by these improvements would be those being currently
measured by the Strategic plan
 Facilities master plan from 2012, the bare bones are good, going forward what this
statement will address is helping during the planning process to think well ahead
and out of the box
 The planning reflects large initiatives and can model the way facilities plans
 Add student group facilities, student centers
 Gathering spaces, question how are they kept safe and managed, do we have an
obligation as an institution
 PRBC setting the standards and showing the interest in pushing Facilities planning to
go to support the goal is really worthwhile, very useful and the Facilities committee
2
















will welcome this. Also forces to think carefully about student needs and faculty
needs and come up with innovative solutions
Suggestion to add to the how this translates section to add increasing access,
example large lecture rooms along with updated technology (software etc.)
Facilities believes it would really help planning for future to have the VP’s and
Dean’s identify what programs will need, future needs and trends
Build in a process to add needs other than program review, there can be a special
process to add due to growth
Short term issue which is how do we in the next couple of months have an updated
Facilities plan for the new Bond measure
How to make this a college-wide discussion, where should this larger discussion take
place
Review of the Facilities Master plan 2012, there are a lot of things that are still good,
what new things do we need to add
Mark Stephens will give a list of things that needs to be addressed
Where is the student input in this planning there is a student representative from
SSCC on the Facilities Committee
When student initiatives are brought to Facilities they are of a high concern and are
taken into consideration greatly
Conversations to begin with divisions, survey’s to allow individual users to weigh in
on certain needs in their area and then up to administrative leadership
Suggestion for process, combined PRBC and Facilities meeting a teaching moment as
to each committees responsibilities and validation process
Bring to students at their Town Hall
Best way forward, as a shared governance could be a model of the resource
allocation planning that the senate has been working on focused on how do we link
strategic planning as a college community with resource allocation. This is the heart
of it all but one of the greater parts of the matter is how facilities can meet our
educational needs
How we are going to do this so central to everything else, what we are thinking
about and the answer to this is going to teach us a lot to linking resource allocations
to planning. We have to do this better than the last time, upwards of 20% of bond
resources went to creating an exquisite athletics area and a gutted first floor of the
100 building but yet no 21st century Biology facilities how do you end there with a
good process of planning and resource allocation, where is the balance
We have momentum, we have learned from mistakes if we allocate and plan well
our user groups and process will get us some great stuff, we need to not look back
Do we have the facilities to teach our students because we do expect growth
3










First step, discussion at division meetings, next combined Facilities and PRBC
meeting, college-wide survey, and reach out to student senate
Survey to students and faculty/staff
Mark stated that the Facilities committee would be willing to meet at 3:00 on a
Wednesday, April 20th to make it more convenient for members of PRBC
Survey should include a list and ranking of importance
Survey can have the link to the Facilities Master Plan
Suggestion to send out college-wide, all agree
Survey to be developed by Mark Stephens, Yvonne Wu-Craig, Donna Gibson and
Carolyn Arnold
Mark will make contact with Student Senate
Suggestion to get the statement to divisions prior to their division meetings to
review
Requesting to have the statement updated by April 7th for division meetings
Evaluate and set Institutional Effectiveness Indicators
 Required to set goals, rolling five year average
 There are two places we have to set our goals which are for
o ACCJC annual report – Due March 30th
o Institutional Effectiveness – Due Early April
 To have a more supportive method of choosing goals there are two ways
o Compare yourself to yourself in the past and where we want to be
o How are we compared to other people, state and other colleges
o Who are the right colleges to compare ourselves too
 Carolyn Arnold identified which colleges in the state are our peers
o Twelve student and local demographics with ranges that indicate a close
match to Chabot, ordered by number of matches with Chabot
o Should some categories be weighed more than others
o Financial aid should be a focus and the API high school test scores
o Full time relates to success rate
o Weight the race and age at a less percentage
 Support for the decision rule, if we are below average we have the goal being
average in our peer group and if we are average our goal would be to be in the top
quarter
 Target to be average
4
Discussion and vote for the co-chairs positions
 At the last meeting there was a discussion and appointment for the co-chairs
positions. There was a concern raised that there were not enough members present
to vote on this decision
 Laura Alarcon asked do we feel we have enough people in the room to have this
conversation once again and to appoint and vote to fill the two co-chair positions
 Question asked does anyone in the room want to be co-chair for PRBC
 The appointment of the co-chairs is only be for the spring semester of this year
 Laura Alarcon stated she is willing to serve
 Carolyn Arnold would like to reaffirm to accept Laura Alarcon’s gracious offer to
serve as co-chair for PRBC for this semester and Ken Grace to serve as co-chair for
the Program Review/Curricunet portion of PRBC, Mark Stephens seconded,
approved by consensus
Meeting Adjourned @ 4:55
5