AP 4021 Task Force Report:
Fire Technology Program (FT)
Fall 2013
Task Force Members
Rusty Goodlive
Ruth Moon
Ron Waters
Task Force Co Chairs
Bob Brown, Academic Senate Co-President, Faculty Athletics
Jeff Cummings, Executive Dean Academic Affairs
A recommended course of action
The committee voted unanimously to revitalize the Fire Technology program with
qualifications.
Qualifications of the recommendation
The committee recognized the high cost associated with fully implementing this
program that would need to include degree and certificate options as well as the
Firefighter I Academy. Furthermore the committee agreed that a revitalization of this
program would need the focus and time of a full time faculty member with program
coordination as part of their assignment. Classified support hours would also need to
be dedicated to the program.
The factors used to make the recommendation
a. a summary of the data
Initially the program showed strong numbers in enrollments with 143
enrollments in 4 sections in 09/10. Enrollments have declined to 92 in 5
sections in 12/13. Retention rates are very high for the district and success
rates are at or above average. This data is for Fire Science Technology
courses (AS degree) only and not for any Fire Academy I course load since
the academy has never materialized as part of the planned program.
b.an analysis of the data
The declining enrollment trend can be attributed to many factors not related
to a decline in student or labor market demand. The committee concluded
that this decline is in direct correlation with the lack of a full time faculty
member to coordinate and build the program. Data sets are very small and
should not be relied on heavily for this program. The strong and consistent
demand for Fire Technology programs at other Northern California
Community Colleges is a better indicator of program potential.
A detailed assessment of the recommendations’ impact on the college’s overall
educational program and budget, impact on students, faculty, and staff involved
The cost to operate a fully functioning Fire Technology program is very high but can
generate significant returns as well. The initial impact on the district’s budget would
be the hiring of a full time faculty member and a substantial cadre of associate
instructors. In addition, it was estimated that an annual budget for supplies and
equipment along with maintenance of approximately $50,000 or more would be
necessary. The assignment of classified support would need to come from the
reallocation of hours of current staff.
Details specific to the recommendation
a. A plan of action to enhance the performance and effectiveness of an existing
program.
Prioritize and hire a full time faculty member to build and organize the
program. Because this program is heavily immersed in industry partnerships,
those relationships and agreements would have to be established and
maintained. The Fire Fighter I academy is normally a 21-25 unit program
which can demand 700-800 contact hrs. per student. That single course alone
has the potential to generate up to $280,000 per semester. That is above and
beyond the AS degree and certificate enrollments that would also be offered.
A budget for equipment and maintenance would need to be established.
Local fire departments and districts have indicated strong interest in
collaborating with CR and in supporting the program with shared resources.
b. Training/professional development for faculty and/or curriculum
changes/updates.
Program curriculum is current for the AS degree courses and many of those
could be further developed to be offered on-line. The Fire Fighter 1 course
curriculum is well established at the State Fire Marshal’s office but would
have to be adopted at CR. Training and professional development would be
annual and on-going to ensure our faculty, staff, and training meet industry
standards.
c. Reallocation of resources.
District resources have not been identified to support this program. However,
a substantial amount of equipment and supplies needed for the program have
already been purchased in recent years. The estimate is $150,000 of Perkins
grant funding has been expended to support the start-up of this program.
A timeframe for resolution.
The committee would recommend a full time faculty member be hired for the
2014/15 academic year.
Addendum – all distributed and discussed documentation and meeting notes
AP 4021 Addendum
Fire Tech
College of the Redwoods
Fire Tech Revitalization Task Force Meeting
Wednesday, October 17, 2013
Agenda
1. Introduction
A. Overview/Review of the AP 4021 Process
B. Expectations/objectives of the Task Force Committees
2. Review of Appendix B-Quantitative Data
3. Review of Appendix C-Qualitative Data
4. Scheduling Second and Third Meetings (1st and 3rd weeks of November)
College of the Redwoods Fire Tech Revitalization Task Force Meeting Thursday, October 17, 2013 Summary Notes Present: Jeff Cummings, Bob Brown, Rusty Goodlive, Ron Waters, Ruth Moon, Crislyn Parker‐support 1. Introduction  This is an interim AP; evaluation of the process will inform the permanent policy/process A. Overview/Review of the AP 4021 Process:  Step 1, the Program Analysis Request Form, (Appendix A), was completed and signed off by the President, based on the recommendation of the program review committee.  Step 2, formation of the task force(s) has also been completed.  Co‐chairs will rely on the written meeting summary notes for consistency.  Step 3 and 4 will be completed over the next two meetings.  Upon completion of discussion and data consideration, a voting rubric will be submitted, either by email or anonymously. Crislyn will tally and report to the committee. B. Expectations/objectives of the Task Force Committees  Ultimately, to provide a recommendation to the president based on discussion of the quantitative and qualitative evidence.  Goal of each task force group is to maintain consistency and objectivity during the process and remain objective.  The second and third meetings will be working through the data and deciding whether the program should, based on evidence, be revitalized, suspended or discontinued. This will be done by anonymous ballot.  The Co‐chairs will prepare the report, including evidentiary observations and (possible) program revitalization needs, and submit to the president by December 1. 2. Review of Appendix B‐Quantitative Data:  IR will prepare the quantitative data. It will be sent to committee members prior to the next meeting. 3. Review of Appendix C‐Qualitative Data:  Qualitative data can be more subjective, and it is agreed that any brought forward needs to include some type of evidentiary data.  Submit to Crislyn who will put in a pdf and send to the group.  Targets of Opportunity and regional data may be used, as well. 4. Scheduling Second and Third Meetings (1st and 3rd weeks of November)  The 1st and 3rd weeks of November: Wed 11/4 (11am ‐ 1pm) and 11/18 (11am ‐ 12p)  Contact Jeff or Bob with questions. Data will be sent as soon as received by Crislyn.  Carefully read steps 3 and 4. PROGRAM ANALYSIS REQUEST FORM
Program Name: Fire Technology
This Program Analysis Request must be supported by the program review or other appropriate data and
shall be submitted to the President/Superintendent and the President/Superintendent will determine if a
Task Force should be convened to evaluate the program for revitalization, suspension or discontinuance.
Please check the indicators that triggered the initiation of the program revitalization, suspension or
discontinuance process. Please attach the program’s most recent Program Review to this proposal request.
MULTIPLE INDICATORS (please check multiple indicators below)

X
X
X
Multiple Indicators (please check the indicators below)
Enrollment has declined at least three of the last five years.
FTES/FTEF is consistently below the district average, or has declined at least three of the last
five years.
Success rates are consistently below the district average, or have declined at least three of the
last five years.
Retention rates are consistently below the district average, or have declined at least three of
the last five years.
Program completions are consistently below the division’s district average, or have declined
at least three of the last five years.
Insufficient availability of courses for students to complete the program within its stated
duration
Nonaligned with state, the Chancellor’s Office priorities or College mission
Nonaligned with federal and state law
Lack of available program personnel (faculty/staff)
Inadequate equipment and/or facilities
Changes in the local and/or regional job market
Changes in community/student needs or interests
Change in transfer requirements
Diminished outside funding resources
Program creates financial hardship for the institution
Budget concerns and lack of sufficient funding
Outdated curriculum (greater than 10% of courses out of date)
Course and/or program outcomes not on track for complete assessment during 2-year cycle.
Other: PRC noted that the program is struggling, has no fulltime faculty and needs to move
through the 4021 process.
Program Review Committee and Keith Snow-Flamer
Name of Requestor
Approved
President/Superintendent
April 29, 2013
Date
Denied
Date
Office of Institutional Research
Oct 25, 2013
Fire Technology
Program Analysis Form – Quantitative Date
Program Revitalization, Suspension and/or Discontinuance
Indicator # Indicator Title
1 Student Enrollment
2 Class Sections
Offered
3
4
5
6
20082009
Fill Rates
FTES
FTES/FTEF
Term-to-Term
Persistence
7 Course Retention
8 Course Success
9 Degree & Certificate
Completions
10 Instructional
Cost/FTES
11 Labor Market
Demand
6/15
Targets
of
Opport
unity
1
12 Number of
Program/area
transfers
^ FTEF not available this year
District
Average Rates
(2012-2013 )
20092010
143
4
20102011
132
8
20112012
66
3
20122013
92
5
100%
6.7
^
65%
9.2
46.0
49%
7.0
23.4
48%
8.2
20.6
100%
93%
0
109%
82%
0
86%
61%
0
86%
70%
1
87%
69%
^
$929
$1,465
$1,668
$2,127
66%
26.8
Not available
15 indicates a program highest in labor market demand.
Priority
Sectors
Emergent
Sectors
Most Job
Openings
Fastest
Growth
Total
1
1
2
1
6
Not available
Indicator
#
1
Indicator Title
Student Enrollment
Definition
Census enrollment in all courses identified as belonging in the program. This is the same set of
courses included in the 2012-2013 program review dataset.
2
Class Sections
Offered
The number of class sections that were active at census. Does not include cancelled sections.
Cross-listed sections are counted separately.
3
Fill Rates
The total census enrollment in all sections divided by the total capacity of those sections.
4
FTES
Full-time equivalent students enrolled in all courses identified as belonging to the program. One
FTES is equivalent to 525 student contact hours.
5
FTES/FTEF
6
Term-to-Term
Persistence
7
Course Retention
The amount of full-time equivalent students yielded by every full-time equivalent faculty. One
FTEF is equivalent to 45 TLUs.
This element is not available at this time because it requires reliable identification of students in
the program prior to graduation. Student's declared program is found to be unreliable by many
programs.
The percentage of students enrolled on Census Day who remained enrolled in that course
through the last day and received any grade other than a “W”.
8
Course Success
9
Degree & Certificate
Completions
Instructional
Cost/FTES
10
11
The ratio of the instructional cost of program course offerings to the number of full-time
equivalent students yielded. Cost is based on the average cost per TLU of full- and part-time
faculty.
Labor Market
Demand
Targets of
Opportunity
Priority Sectors
Emergent Sectors
12
The percentage of students enrolled in a course on Census Day who complete the course with a
successful grade (A, B, C, P, CR).
The number of students awarded degrees and certificates recognized by the Chancellor's Office.
The six targets of opportunity were evaluated to determine if the program (3) was closely
related, (2) was indirectly related, or (1) was not related to a target of opportunity. The target
area yielding the highest number was used. http://www.northcoastprosperity.com/localeconomy/targets
Sectors identified in the "Doing What Matters for Jobs and the Economy" in the Northern
Coastal Region that are a priority focus. The program (3) was closely related, (2) was indirectly
related, or (1) was not related to a priority sector.
ahttp://doingwhatmatters.cccco.edu/ResourceMap/NorthernCoastal.aspx
Sectors identified in the "Doing What Matters for Jobs and the Economy" in the Northern
Coastal Region that are emergent. The program (3) was closely related, (2) was indirectly
related, or (1) was not related to an emergent sector.
ahttp://doingwhatmatters.cccco.edu/ResourceMap/NorthernCoastal.aspx
Most Job Openings
Uses the top 50 fastest growing occupations in the North Coast Region between 2008-2018.
This information comes from the State of California's LMI for the North Coast Region:
http://www.calmis.ca.gov/htmlfile/county/humbo.htm The program (3) was directly related
to a job that fell into the top 1-25, (2) was directly related to a job that fell into the bottom 2550, (1) was not related to a job that fell on the list of top 50.
Fastest Job Growth
Uses the top 50 occupations with the most job openings in the North Coast Region between
2008-2018. This information comes from the State of California's LMI for the North Coast
Region: http://www.calmis.ca.gov/htmlfile/county/humbo.htm
The
program (3) was directly related to a job that fell into the top 1-25, (2) was directly related to a
job that fell into the bottom 25-50, (1) was not related to a job that fell on the list of top 50.
Number of
Program/area
transfers
This element is not available at this time because it requires reliable identification of students in
the program who are not necessarily degree/cert recipients. Student's declared program is found
to be unreliable by many programs.
College of the Redwoods Fire Program Revitalization Task Force Monday, November 4, 2013, 11am ‐ 1pm General Agenda Objective: The purpose of this meeting is to objectively review all information 1. Program Analysis Form: Why this program is in the AP 4021 process (attached) 2. Review quantitative and qualitative data in areas specified 3. Review prior year’s program year reviews (Please go to http://inside.redwoods.edu/programreview/archives.asp to review prior years’ program reviews.) 4. Complete Strengths and Challenges Table College of the Redwoods
Fire Program Revitalization Task Force
Monday, November 4, 2013, 11am - 1pm
Notes:
Present: Jeff Cummings, Bob Brown, Rusty Goodlive, Ruth Moon, Ron Waters
Objective: The purpose of this meeting is to objectively review all information
Point of clarification: Each task force committee will decide when to vote and how to
conclude the process
1. Program Analysis Form: Why this program is in the AP 4021 process (attached)
Discussion:
Considerations:
 Any programs without full time faculty are at a significant disadvantage
 Inadequate facilities for a program with stringent external requirements are at a
significant disadvantage
2. Review quantitative and qualitative data in areas specified
 Discussions began with quantitative data, followed by qualitative information.
Suggestions were discussed that might allow for a sustainable program at CR,
including as evidence the success of the past HROP programs, coordination and
faculty requirements, and approximate budget costs.
 Discussion on the viability and of a program that requires students to complete
rigorous training at a substantial cost to them, for generally low salary expectations,
unless a move is made to officer training. Discussion that there is one industry
organization that does hire from students who have participated in Academy.
 Discussion on how to make the program more viable, by combining various aspects
of the current program and adding a special niche or aspects of other programs.
3. Review prior year’s program year reviews (Please go to
http://inside.redwoods.edu/programreview/archives.asp to review prior years’ program
reviews.)
 The committee did some review of previous program reviews.
4. Complete Strengths and Challenges Table
 A strengths and challenges table was filled in during discussions, as was information
into the qualitative data template, in order to better inform the co-chairs in
completion of the report. (see attached)
Program: Fire Technology



























1
Firefighter 1 certificate is the minimum requirement for hiring;
The AS is better for moving up the latter (Officer).
Cal Fire hires the most of full-time people, and from seasonal fire fighters who have
completed Firefighter 1 and EMT training.
Average starting salary $40,000 (when hiring).
Range of duties vary in fire districts; e.g. in some areas the fire dept. is also emergency and
paramedic response.
Equipment: Currently CR has about $100K worth in storage; loaning out our fire engine to
Kneeland;
A more up to date engine would be preferable
Turnout (uniforms and gear) would be rented and built into student supplies fees
CR has some SCBAs (breathing apparatus), but maintenance and replacement is a cost
Facilities not big an issue;
Program has an MOU to use the tower at City of Eureka (as lab space), but no classroom
facility at tower.
Key to a successful program is commitment for instruction and coordination (faculty with
some release to coordinate)
CR Initial enrollments were in coordination with the U.S. Forest service and HROP [regional
occupation program HROP through the high schools, (2009-10)
2010-11 enrollments good because CR having fire program.
HROP ran the local volunteer academy, which was always full and a successful wild land
firefighter academy with a strong hire rate with the forest service
Because of CR offering program, HROP backed off
Volunteer academy department had annual recruitment – put new volunteers through
requiring training.
Currently local areas looking to develop own volunteer programs–to meet own standards.
HROP not complete fire program no HASMAT, EMT etc. HROP funding no longer exists.
AA/AS vs. Academy, not having program in community has impact. Academy training includes
the outside accreditation requirements. An academy assists in promotions, etc.
Urban firefighters need EMT training.
Is there crossover data regarding fire tech students in EMT?
Would offering courses 143 and 132 be enough to pay for the program?
CR has 20 US Forest Service courses that could be included in program where we share FTES
with instructors (provided by Forestry dept.). It would yield approx. 2300/FTES.
Suggestion to rework curriculum to include and fold officer courses into the fire tech program;
might attract out of area people.
A revitalized fire program could increase the EMT program (1 semester). (HSU also runs an
EMT program). Paramedic program 1 year.
BLS Website Research shows firefighter demand will increase more slowly than average (9% 12%). Salaries are low growth due to statewide budget cuts. Local trend in Humboldt are two
full time salaried departments, and the rest are volunteer except for Cal Fire (and Arcata fire
department). Salaried positions are usually taken from the volunteer groups.
A volunteer program including Del Norte will require running training in various locations.
Program: Fire Technology

















2
Humboldt Departments have routine workshops in manipulative areas; state fire marshal
offers nine one-week officer classes which are always full.
Cal Fire is beginning to hire more.
AA/AS is not a requirement for employment, only Firefighter 1 and EMT. The degree really
only shows a higher level of commitment.
There are Fire tech programs in six areas in N. CA whereas. They receive an estimated 150
applicants for 50 positions. Fire programs from various regions tend not to impact other
areas; all are unique. Schools with programs enroll by lottery. The current academy program
has three modules, but other schools don’t offer all three modules, so CR gets student
enrollments for those modules. Location doesn’t seem to be a big factor.
The fire marshal would like to see CR develop a marine firefighter niche; we would be the only
ones in the state with marine firefighters program. Currently no specific training program
through the Fire Marshal office for this. Local coast guard could be pulled in to assist with
that.
Hum Bay Harbor District has a fantastic firefighting boat. Hum Bay Harbor District pilots the
boat and the fire department staffs it.
Student enrollments dropped because of lack of courses (2011-12); success dropped, in part,
because of running an online course where instructor was not really prepared.
Feasibility of either AA degree fire science or just an academy.
An online modality would need to be developed and include instructor training. Golden West
College has instructors willing to becoming technical instructors with CR, would be paid by
head count, teach from their homes, as CR faculty. This takes care of the enrollment
problem.
If CR doesn’t provide Fire fighter training, will be done in-house or through Eel river and other
areas; or require trainees to attend drills to acquire required number of hours to be a
volunteer. Depth of skills would decrease.
Community Ed would be fee based but then “who” pays becomes an issue.
Discussion, what would be needed for a long term commitment from CR (besides faculty and
coordination):
o Hose and SCBA testing; equipment could wear out at a rapid rate and replacement will
be needed
o An equipment budget in excess of $40,000 (fuel, instructional materials, and an
amortization fund).
o Note: Even though it is an expensive to run, student fees and FTES more than covered
the program at Shasta, (i.e. 40 students for 21 units) which included Officer training –
forestry, incident training, management, investigation, code prevention, etc.).
An annual operational budget depends on cooperation/partnership between CR and fire
marshal. It was done this way with HROP.
Suggestion to lease the instructional fire engine during fire season, to assist in program
support.
Siskiyou’s equipment budget was $25K annually, including maintaining the tower.
Note: fill rate – course outline of record has 40 because of classroom size; a lower max would
increase fill rate. Current is around 50% with avg. of 15 – 25 per class in a 40 student class.
Attrition is not bad for most courses; success is different.
Program: Fire Technology










3
A certificate of achievement would boost the completion rate based on 6 courses in fire
technology; but would not necessarily be recognized in the industry.
If CR included fire officer course(s), the program might be more popular. Or maybe a
combination: fire academy to be hired and coursework that gives credit for degree.
21 Fire, 7 EMT core units for degree would be an industry recognized certificate.
Student demand comes from outside the area. A 40 hr. academy for x/number of weeks
wouldn’t work for local fire fighters. A Tues/Thurs with Saturday labs would be more likely to
fill, but take longer to complete.
Some fire districts will pay for employees to participate in lieu of having to provide their own
program.
Suggestion: Combine continuing ed with regular credit courses could work, depending on time
commitment; a fire program is more popular in winter (off season) for firefighters.
Currently, fire districts run their programs, but instructors are paid from the outside, whereas
CR instructors would be paid as part of the program. The average cost for a 40 hr. class is
$250/student; current $300/student (student cost is driven by instructor costs).
Suggestion: Scheduling should offer more flexibility. An academy can run in 16 weeks, but
other certifications, such as agility can be run twice a year. Maybe a two-week intercession in
winter; (November thru March/April: instructors are likely available because of the off
season). Running on schedule would facilitate the AS degree.
Suggestion: Offer an AA/AS track for transfer into a BA program: Yes, add fire land restoration
type of courses (dealing with vegetation restoration after a fire).
Next (3rd) meeting:
o Consider for the third meeting that there was not a large amount of base data for this
program, as it is one course short of a complete second cycle. It is felt institutional
commitment of this program to date has been lacking, and the current data is not
indicative of what the program could be. Consider where/how CR could go forward.
o Big question: would funding be better used for other programs? Discussed that this
committee should not look at that.
Program: Fire Technology
Strengths:
$100K of existing equipment
Turnout equipment rented by students (built into supplies fees)
MOU with City of Eureka for Tower
Strong need for volunteer training and officer training
Significant social and behavioral aspects for students.
Revitalized program could have greatest return in FTES
AS degree is better for moving up the ladder
Challenges:
Lack of available program Personnel (faculty/staff)
Inadequate equipment or facilities
Need a more up-to-date fire engine, but have current one
Operational budget ($25,000? annually)
Hiring is down and salaries are down(state budget cuts); whereas
volunteer training is higher
Expensive program to revitalize
Faculty with release time to coordinate and teach; faculty need to drive
curriculum due to outside requirement
No classrooms near tower; classrooms on CR campus
Full-time hires come from volunteer firefighters; hiring is limited
Program: MST
Qualitative notes included on this form for reference.
1. The impact the action will have on the general education curriculum or the curriculum of
other programs. No impact on the curriculum of other programs.
2. The ability of students to complete their degree or certificate or to transfer. This includes
maintaining the catalog rights of students. This program currently is not structured around a
transfer degree.
3. The College’s ability or inability to provide the resources to maintain the program.
4. Balance of college curriculum (for example, ensuring the non-elimination of all of one type
of programs, such as foreign languages): Discontinuation would not eliminate all emergency
response types of programs.
5. Replication of programs in the surrounding area and their efficacy. Research revealed that
there are five programs in the northern California, but all slightly different, and currently,
CR is the only program that offers all models that are needed.
6. The potential impact on diversity at the College.
7. Alignment with Chancellors Office priorities, college mission, accreditation standards, and
state and federal law. (see mission)
8. Effects on local business and industries- i.e., declining market/industry demand (local,
regional). Discontinuance of this program could have effects on local fire agencies; cause
them to have to develop their own individual training programs. Elimination of the program
would not cause a decline in local hiring practices or demand; but revitalization and
improvement of the program could allow CR to create a specialty niche, and bring in
students from outside the area. Revitalization could cement a strong collaborative
commitment between the college and the community; as well as provide opportunities for
alternative revenue sources.
9. Availability of the program at other community colleges. Other programs in the area offer a
lottery for inclusion to the program. This offers CR an opportunity for increase enrollments.
10. If this is a grant-funded program, what was the agreed institutional commitment for the
campus to continue this program?
11. List specific financial resources required to sustain the program:
 Faculty compensation FT/PT: Full-time faculty instruction and coordination
 Support Staff compensation: availability of some support from staff would be necessary,
but not full time.
 Facilities costs annualized: TBD/some could be shared
 Equipment costs annualized: maintenance of some equipment $40,000 estimated
 Supplies cost annualized: above
12. Potential impact on the community. When this program was put into place, local HROP
programs backed off (no longer have funding). Not having an academy for training of local
volunteer firefighters detrimental, because the academy includes outside accreditation
requirements. Because this program can involve more than one industry, the impact on
creating a sustainable program can have very positive impact. Supports the mission in the
areas of “career technical, and transfer education. The College partners with the community to
contribute to the economic vitality and lifelong learning need s of its service area”
1
Fire Technology Task Force
11/14/13 Meeting
Present: Bob Brown, Jeff Cummings, Ron Waters, Ruth Moon, Rusty Goodlive, Crislyn Parker-support
Agenda (no previously set agenda):
Discussion (pre-vote):
 There is consensus this program needs full time faculty coordination. The question: what is the
likelihood of finding faculty who is qualified to oversee the program. There is a high level of need
for industry knowledge, as well as need on the instructional side. Cal Fire instructors require
instructor training; CR would need someone with bachelor or master’s degree to meet minimum
qualifications:
 An AA and six years’ experience would be the minimum; CR prefers a BA degree.
 Curriculum is current: All Fire Tech course proposals are very current (two plus years). Currently
no wild land or volunteer firefighter courses, but a coordinator would be able to get an outline
from HROP and move it into CR’s curriculum process. Moving into a specialty would be the
development aspect, after assembling the most effective advisory committee.
 The group agreed that initial student interest was good, but likely fell off due to lack of
commitment by the college. The academy drives the certificate and degree, and without the
academy the program still had good enrollments.
 Suggestion to make completion of the academy a requirement of the AA degree, (similar to the
police academy) and then students can complete the gen ed. Completion of the academy would
be a certificate of achievement; going on for the degree is double the success.
 Looking at CR’s mission, this program meets the (see mission). Continuation would keep the
goodwill of the community; HROP programs were dropped due to CR beginning a program and
lack of state funding.
 Program challenges:
o Program scheduling would be different than regular scheduling due to seasonality of the
industry.
o One time purchase of a newer engine
o Faculty cost
o Maintenance approx. $40,000
o Program could possibly provide 50 FTES per academy; over 600 contact hours per student.
o Some facility issues-no classroom at the tower/lab only. Shared challenge with other local
agencies. Technically tower is not permanent facility (Fortuna putting in a fire tower?).
Classrooms on campus can be used. Share revenues and use with local agencies.
 Program strengths: program would likely be eligible for various types of grant funding; also,
fundraisers and renting equipment to local agencies can assist in funding.
 Program would strongly cement collaboration within the community. Other types of fee based
training can be utilized for revenues and facility sharing.

Vote: (Anonymous vote) Recommend to “Revitalization” (unanimous).

Next Steps:
o Discussion for report:
 Include as much evidence as possible to the president to support decision.
Fire Technology Task Force
11/14/13 Meeting


Program has the potential of being a cornerstone for the CTE division of the college, but
would be impossible without F/T faculty member serving as faculty and coordinator of
program.
Recommendation of a strong advisory committee; revitalization needs to include both
the AA and the academy; task force recommendation is to make it collaborative but
keep them separate.