2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
C
A
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
M
2010 COMPREHENSIVE
P PROGRAM REVIEW
U
Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS)
S Cooperative
Agencies Resources for Education (CARE)
California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs)
We certify that this program review document represents the plans, goals, and critical
analysis of this program.
Authors:
Cheryl Tucker, Sheila Hall, Jamie Peterson, Lisa Liken, Marcy Foster,
Michael Regan, Cindy Anderson, Amber Correa and Sue Alton
Date: ____________
Department Director: Cheryl Tucker
V. P.:
Date: ____________
____________________________________________ Validation: _________
2
5/29/2016
Student Services Mission Statement
To provide high quality support services that promote access to educational
programs, foster academic success, and encourage personal and social
development of all learners. (Revised December, 2009)
I Special Programs Area Overview
California Community Colleges provide a variety of services to support students to succeed in
achieving educational and career goals. Programs that serve special populations include Extended
Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS), Cooperative Agencies Resources for Education
(CARE), and California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs).
To eliminate unnecessary duplication of services and ensure students have easier access to
comprehensive support for which they are eligible, the three programs at College of the
Redwoods were integrated under the umbrella of “Special Programs” during the 2002/03 school
year.
Although each program’s eligibility requirements and services have unique elements, the
common experience shared by all Special Programs students is poverty and the common goal for
the programs is to provide specialized support services to ensure access and success for postsecondary education.
1. Mission
The mission of Special Programs is to empower students to achieve their educational goals and
objectives.
2. Philosophy Statement
The California Community College EOPS, CARE and CalWORKs programs were all established
at differing times through state legislation with the recognition that education is one of the
primary ways to address social, economic, and political inequalities.
The philosophy of Special Programs is to ensure that all students are given an equal opportunity
for academic success.
Special Programs actively contributes to the broader mission of the college by providing lowincome and educationally disadvantaged students support services that will help them enroll and
succeed in post-secondary education.
3
5/29/2016
3. Staffing Level
A total of nineteen staff members currently serve Special Programs students throughout the
district, with a total full time equivalent (FTE) of 9.71. This is a reduction of almost 4 FTE
employees from 2008/09 levels due to the 45% budget cuts enacted last year for categorical
programs at all California Community Colleges (note: figures do not take into account the
additional loss of almost 3 FTE student peer mentors). The majority of Special Programs
students are located in the Eureka campus area, where most program operations and full-time
Special Programs staff are also housed. A number of district employees at other locations have a
small percentage of their time funded by the programs to ensure all eligible students receive the
services they are entitled. Although Klamath-Trinity Instructional Site personnel cannot be
officially listed as Special Programs staff because they are not funded by the program, close
collaboration occurs to assist students and the achievement data for Special Programs KlamathTrinity students reflects the high quality of the support received.
2010/11 Staffing for Special Progams
Position
Classification
Name
Location
Counselor
Counselor
Counselor
Counselor
Counselor
Faculty
Faculty
Faculty
Faculty
Faculty
Marcy Foster
Dave Gonsalvez
Lisa Liken
Allen Keppner
Carol Mathews
Counselor
Counselor
Student Services
Specialist I
Student Services
Specialist IV
Financial Aid
Specialist
Faculty
Faculty
Harry Pyke
Michael Regan
Eureka
Mendocino
Eureka
Eureka
Del Norte
Klamath
Trinity
Eureka
Eureka
Classified
Cindy Anderson
Classified
Amber Correa
Classified
Financial Aid
Specialist
Student
Development
Advisor
Student
Development
Advisor
Student
Development
Advisor
Student
Development
Advisor
CalWORKs
Coordinator
Office Manager
Assistant
Director
Director
TOTAL FTEs
EOPS
FTE
Hours
.70
.05
.75
.34
CARE
FTE
Hours
.15
0
.20
0
0
CalWORKs
FTE Hours
.15
0
.05
0
Other
FTE
Hours
0
.95
.66
.07
.10
.40
0
0
0
0
.15
.93
.90
.45
Eureka
.55
.25
.20
0
.65
.25
.10
0
Martha Roy
Eureka
Del Norte
Klamath
Trinity
.15
0
0
.85
Classified
Marcia Williams
Mendocino
.05
0
0
.95
Classified
Jennifer Bailey
Eureka
.10
0
0
.90
Classified
Caylor Cuevas
Eureka
.10
0
0
.90
Classified
Jennifer Knight
Eureka
.10
0
0
.90
Classified
Ron McQueen
Eureka
.10
0
0
.90
0
Classified
Manager
Jamie Peterson
Sue Alton
Eureka
Eureka
0
.65
0
.20
1.0
.15
Admin
Admin
Sheila Hall
Cheryl Tucker
Eureka
Eureka
.80
.50
6.16
.20
0
1.25
0
.50
2.30
0
0
0
4
5/29/2016
Special Programs Full Time Equivalent Staffing 2006/07 – 2010/11
Note: Figures do not include student workers. Data from Program Review and Final Budget Reports for EOPS, CARE
and CalWORKs
Year
EOPS
CARE
CalWORKs
Total Staff
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
7.63
8.92
8.77
6.05
6.16
.3
.7
1.21
3.1
1.25
3.15
1.75
3.46
2.60
2.30
9.77
11.37
13.44
11.75
9.71
4. Summary
EOPS
EOPS/District Headcount and Full-Time Enrollment Comparison by Term and Academic
Year (source: Institutional Research)
School
Year
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
District
Head
count
Fall
6170
5385
5717
6185
7037
6637
EOPS
Head
count
Fall
1105
1086
1130
1192
1342
797
%
18
20
20
19
19
12
District
Fulltime
Fall
2026
1772
1803
2020
2292
2106
EOPS
Fulltime
Fall
918
909
907
1012
1096
730
%
45
51
50
50
48
35
District
Head
count
Spring
5596
5377
5759
6438
7232
TBD
EOPS
Head
count
Spring
990
1032
1060
1321
893
699*
%
18
19
18
21
12
na
District
Fulltime
Spring
1689
1486
1676
1935
2099
TBD
EOPS
Fulltime
Spring
785
842
847
1055
805
TBD
*estimated
EOPS students represented about 20% of all students and 50% of all full-time students at
CR until spring of 2010, when the impact of 45% budget and staff reductions began to take effect
and the number of students served was reduced to preserve the quality of services. Preliminary
figures for the current year indicate that the programs will now serve approximately 12% of all
students and 35% of all full-time students – still a significant number for whom the program
services are vital for academic success.
The EOPS program at College of the Redwoods began serving 60 students in 1969 and has grown
over the years to serve over 1,600 students in 2010. The intent was and continues to be the
provision of a comprehensive and coordinated foundation of support services for students who
could benefit the greatest from education. Students in the program experience many obstacles to
success that include poverty, poor preparation for higher education, and family obligations.
EOPS/CARE student survey responses to the question of “What do you like most about the
EOPS/CARE program?” indicate that it is the warm, friendly staff and consistent encouragement
that have been most critical to their success. Some of the remarks we see most repeated are:
o
o
o
o
o
Supportive information, understanding and availability
How friendly and helpful everyone is
Not being judged
They really listen and really care
Everybody here loves their job!
To qualify for EOPS, students must meet the following criteria:
5
%
46
57
51
55
38
na
5/29/2016


Low income – meets criteria for Board of Governors Grants method A (receives public
assistance), method B (specific income criteria i.e. family of 1 – $15,600 or less; family
of 2 – $21,000 or less; family of 3 – $26,400 or less; family of 4 – $31,800 or less; add
$5,400 for each additional dependent) or method C with a zero EFC (estimated family
contribution).
Educationally disadvantaged – one of the following areas must be met:








Placement in developmental math or English
Non high school graduate
Graduated from high school with a gpa of less than 2.5
Previous enrollment in remedial education
Other factors set forth in accordance with district’s approved program plan:
o First generation college student
o The student is a member of an underrepresented group targeted by the
district’s student equity goals
o The primary language spoken in the student’s home is/was non-English
o The student is an emancipated foster youth
California state residency
Full-time enrollment when accepted onto the program with limited number of exceptions
allowable to support special needs
Unit completion limits – students who have completed more than 70 semester units are
not eligible for EOP
EOPS students sign a mutual responsibility contract with the program and agree to participate in
specific support service activities to remain eligible for the program.
Students begin their EOPS experience by attending a mandatory program orientation based on
resiliency theory to encourage strategies that support success. They engage with staff members
and fellow students and learn how to utilize the program and other college services to resolve
problems typical for first time college students. Students leave orientation with vouchers for
textbooks, school supplies, an appointment for their first counseling meeting, and the knowledge
that they are supported in their educational journey.
Following orientation, students meet with an EOPS counselor within the first few weeks of the
semester to begin completion of a multi-term educational plan that provides them with a clear
outline of the sequence of required coursework needed to achieve their certificate, degree or
transfer goal. A minimum of three counseling contacts per semester is mandatory, along with
academic progress monitoring and intervention strategies provided to keep the students on track.
All services provided through EOPS funds are exclusively limited to EOPS students and the staff
must have oversight by the EOPS director. EOPS funds are required to provide EOPS students
with services and support “over and above” what all students of the college receive. The director
and EOPS counselors are required by Title V to have very specific educational and experiential
requirements for hiring.
The EOPS Jump Start outreach project began working six years ago with community partners to
target foster youth, homeless youth, pregnant and parenting teens and youth in kinship care to
support access and success for post-secondary education. Youth participate in workshops and
activities to complete admissions and financial aid applications and assessment for upcoming
6
5/29/2016
semester. The Bridgeways retention program was implemented three years ago to provide
additional peer mentoring and support.
This year the Jump Start/Bridgeways program collaborated with the CR Foster Care/Kinship
program to develop and implement the Foster Youth Initiative. The initial action plan includes
the following:
 Action: Identify foster youth in grades 6-12
 Timeline: September, 2010
 Description: Work with local agencies to receive data and contact information for
local foster youth in grades 6-12.
 Action: Provide educational campaign designed to increase awareness on
resources for college preparation and planning
 Timeline: February, 2011
 Description: Provide brochures encouraging youth and their foster families to begin
the college planning process. A comprehensive web site will also be developed to
help students connect with programs and information that will assist in post-high
school opportunities.
 Action: College informational seminars for youth in foster youth (grades 6-12)
and their caregivers
 Timeline: February-March, 2011
 Description: Provide special seminars for both middle school (grade 6–8) and high
school (grade 9–12) students and their foster families to educate them on the
importance of post-secondary education, career planning, and resources; and discuss
college requirements and financial aid.
 Action: Foster Care to College Mentoring Program for foster youth between age
14 and 21
 Timeline: December 2010-May 2011
 Description: Volunteer mentors and academic advisors will work with foster youth to
provide encouragement and assistance with tracking progress toward graduation,
career decision-making, and completion of financial aid and college applications.
High school students will also meet individually with the President.
 Action: College preparation summer program for foster students in the 10th,
11th, or 12th grades
 Timeline: June & July, 2011
 Description: Program for up to 150 youths who are entering the 12th grade.
Beginning in the Fall of 2007, the EOPS program has been supporting learning community
courses: two or more classes linked thematically or by content that an EOPS cohort of students
takes together. Faculty and EOPS counselors plan and implement the program collaboratively
and meet at least once each week during the semester to share information and strategize to
support student success. Typical courses that are linked are English 350, GS 150 and CIS 100.
Although results have been varied, the Fall 2009 cohort had an 80% retention rate with 75%
passing the competency exam and the course. Factors that have contributed to student success
with this program are related to ensuring the students recommended are a good fit, providing a
strong orientation, intensive contact during the first two weeks, and weekly follow-up through-out
the term. The dedicated work by the faculty and EOPS counselors and staff that have supported
this project is to be commended.
7
5/29/2016
Without EOPS and the extra layer of assistance provided during critical junctions prior to and
throughout their educational experience, many students would be unable to continue their
education. Once a student has completed their terms of eligibility with EOPS, another core value
of the program is the ability to transition a high-risk population of students into the mainstream
support services the college provides all students to ensure continued success.
EOPS Program Budget for 2009/10
Salary/Benefits
$403,000
Discretionary
$7,000
Student Aid
$264,000
Total: $674,000
CARE/CalWORKs
The purpose of both the CARE and CalWORKs programs is to assist the transition of individuals
receiving state CalWORKs cash aid from public assistance to economic self-sufficiency through
post-secondary education and employment. Although the eligibility requirements are slightly
different, both provide services that support unique challenges related to navigating a complicated
and punitive system of requirements that put the students in danger of losing state aid and basic
resources if the rules and regulations are not followed.
CARE students must be EOPS eligible and are single parents with at least one child under the age
of 14. They can receive cash aid for themselves and/or or just for a child. CalWORKs students
must be receiving cash aid, have an approved welfare to work plan, and be enrolled in college.
They do not have to be single parents or EOPS eligible, but in general over 95% of CalWORKs
students do meet the qualifications for EOPS and about 50% qualify for CARE as well.
Community college CalWORKs programs are required by law to coordinate with the County
Welfare Department (CWD) - the CWD is a required signature on the college’s annual
CalWORKs program plan and programs are required to coordinate services directly with the local
county welfare department. This mandate supports the need for students to stay in compliance
with their welfare to work plans. The CalWORKs Coordinator has an office located downtown
near the CWD in Eureka to facilitate the numerous meetings needed with county staff and
students. The Coordinator also travels to the Del Norte and Mendocino campuses as needed to
facilitate meetings with those county workers and students.
CalWORKs programs must obtain approval for specific areas of study that will lead CalWORKs
students into employment based on demonstrated labor-market demand. CalWORKs counselors
work with the county to ensure compliance and approval for student education plans. Another
key component to the CARE/CalWORKs programs is assistance with work study and job
placement. CalWORKs work study funds provide 75% for employers to match with 25% for on
and off campus jobs.
Some CARE and CalWORKs students have a higher need for childcare and transportation
assistance because they fall into a category for which the county CalWORKs program is not
required to provide funding. CARE provides cash grants as funding allows that support these
additional costs for education and both CARE and CalWORKs also provide gas cards for
qualified students. Workshop focused on wellness, career planning and budget management as
well as additional counseling are also an integral part of the programs to encourage student
retention and success.
8
5/29/2016
CARE Program Budget for 2009/10
Salary/Benefits
$101,000
Student Aid
$20,000
CalWORKs Program Budget for 2009/10
Salary/Benefits
$209,000
Discretionary
$2,000
Student Aid
$28,000
Total: $121,000
Total:
$239,000
5. Goals and Objectives
This will be the first year that all three programs are included in the program review
process. The 2009/10 goals were written exclusively for EOPS. The 2010/11 goals are
for all three programs.
In March of 2010, twenty nine employees from throughout the district attended a Special
Programs Retreat on the Eureka campus. The day was spent examining data and
identifying accomplishments and areas of vulnerability in key service areas such as
outreach, eligibility, orientation, counseling and financial assistance. By focusing on
each campus individually as well as Distance Education, we were able to address the
specialized needs of students unique to their learning environment as we developed plans
for improvement.
Feedback from the Special Programs retreat as well as on-going bi-monthly Special
Programs staff meetings were utilized to determine the goals, objectives and assessment
plan for this program review.
2010/11 Special Programs Goals:
 Increase the number of students who successfully complete degrees and certificates.
 Increase the number of students who successfully transfer to four-year institutions.
 Increase the number of students who transition from public assistance to employment.
2010/11 Special Program Objectives:
 Ensure that Special Programs students regardless of location or means of delivery are
provided the same level of EOPS, CARE and CalWORKs services.
 Special Programs students will have informed education and career goals identified by
the end of their first semester.
 A plan to implement the Appreciative Advising model will be developed and
implemented for Special Programs students.
9
5/29/2016
6. Strengths and 7. Plans for Improvement
Two survey instruments were utilized to measure program strength and provide information for
Special Programs improvement plans.
I.
The Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey was utilized by our Institutional Research
department to compare results between EOPS students and all CR students in regards to
level of satisfaction with services (http://inside.redwoods.edu/StrategicPlanning
/EnrollmentManagement/documents/StudentSatisfactionsurvey.pdf). The survey
instrument contained 12 scales that were measured:
• Academic Advising and Counseling Effectiveness
• Academic Services
• Admissions and Financial Aid Effectiveness
• Campus Climate
• Campus Support Services
• Concern for the Individual
• Instructional Effectiveness
• Registration Effectiveness
• Responsiveness to Diverse Populations
• Safety and Security
• Service Excellence
• Student Centeredness
The chart below illustrates six primary themes that include twenty questions utilized from these
areas that specifically relate to the services provided by Special Programs. Although the data
provided was for EOPS students only, because 100% of CARE students and over 95% of
CalWORKs students are also EOPS students we believe this to be a valid assessment for all three
programs.
As compared to the CR cohort, referred to as “Average,” Special Program students showed higher
satisfaction in all areas. The most significant differences were in the themes regarding advising
and counseling services and were related to knowledge of programs and goal setting. This
validates the strength of the intrusive advising model utilized by Special Programs and the focus
on goal setting and educational planning that begins with the programs’ orientations and is
continued with mandatory counseling contacts.
To continue improving program services, a plan for implementation of the Appreciative Advising
model is being developed for the 2011/12 school year. Appreciative Advising is the intentional
collaborative practice of asking positive, open-ended questions that help students optimize their
educational experiences and achieve their dreams, goals, and potentials. It is perhaps the best
example of a fully student-centered approach to student development.
There are 6 phases of Appreciative Advising (http://www.appreciativeadvising.net):

The Disarm phase involves making a positive first impression with students and allaying
any fear or suspicion they might have of meeting with the academic counselor.
10
5/29/2016





The Discover phase is spent continuing to build rapport with students and learning about
the students’ strengths, skills, and abilities.
The Dream phase involves uncovering students’ hopes and dreams for their futures.
Once we know their dreams, then the Design phase is spent co-creating a plan to make
their hopes and dreams come true.
The Deliver phase is the implementation phase where students carry out their plan and
the advisor’s role is to support them as they encounter roadblocks.
The final phase, Don’t Settle, involves challenging the students to achieve their full
potential.
11
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
Student Satisfaction Survey - EOPS and Average Cohort Comparison
Theme
Questions
Average EOPS Difference Possible Reasons
Special Programs Action
Cohort
Cohort
Plans for Improvement
Satisfact Satisfa
ion
ction
Academic
Question 32 My
5.22
5.67
.45
 Smaller caseloads
 Implement
Advising
academic advisor
(250-300 per
Appreciative Advising
and
is knowledgeable
counselor)
Model
Counseling
about my
 Educational
 Increase tracking and
program
planning
follow-up for students
requirements.
introduced in
who do not follow
Goal: 79%-85%
EOPS
through with activities
Orientation with
related to their Mutual
Question 40 My
5.37
5.85
.48
continuous focus
Responsibility Contract
academic advisor
and
 Review and update
is knowledgeable
communication
Mutual Responsibility
about the transfer
on importance
Contract
requirements of
 Intrusive advising
 Implement on-line
other schools.
model – 3
Counseling site through
Goal: 79%-85%
contacts per
Sakai
semester
 Investigate methods to
Question 12 My
5.16
5.67
.51
 One-stop model
increase student
academic advisor
 Mutual
knowledge of academic
helps me set goals
responsibility
performance earlier in
to work toward.
contract
term
Goal: 72% to 75%
 Administrative
and staff support
Question 52 This
5.31
5.60
.29
network
school does
 Weekly
whatever it can to
operational
help me reach my
support meetings
educational goals.
 Staff
Goal: 77% to 80%
development
2
5/29/2016
Academic
Support
LRC/ASC
Question 65.
Students are
notified early in
the term if they
are doing poorly
in a class
Goal: 75%-77%
4.82
5.05
.23
6. Advisors
approachable
81% to 84%
5.57
6.05
.48
Question 55
Academic Support
Services
adequately meets
the needs of
students.
Goal: 82%-85%
5.38
5.62
.24
Question 42. The
Equipment in the
lab facilities is
kept up-to-date
Target: 71% to 72
5.12
5.31
.19
34.Computer labs
are adequate and
accessible
Target: 79% to
80%
5.28
5.49
.21
resources
3
5/29/2016
Admissions/
Records
Class
Scheduling
43. Class change
{Add/drop}
policies are
reasonable
Goal: 86% to 89%
5.69
5.94
.25
5. The personnel
involved in
registration are
helpful
Goal: 81% to 83%
5.63
5.82
.19
5.65
5.81
.16
5.20
5.27
.07
15. I am able to
register for classes
I need with few
conflicts
Goal: 79% to 81%
5.50
5.72
.22
69. There is a
good variety of
courses provided
on this campus
Goal: 75-77%
5.35
5.51
.16
41. Admissions
staff are
knowledgeable
Goal: 81% to 84%
8. Classes are
scheduled at times
that are
convenient for me
Goal: 75-77%

Additional
counseling
support helps
students have
better
understanding of
policies

Educational
planning and
priority
registration helps
students get the
schedules they
need and
improves
awareness of
other alternatives
available
4
5/29/2016
Financial
Aid
77. Courses are
offered at the
locations that best
fit my needs
Goal: 75-77%
5.13
5.45
.32
Question 7
Adequate
Financial Aid is
available for most
students.
Goal: 73% to 75%
5.31
5.60
.29

Question 13
Financial Aid
awards are
announced to
students in time to
be helpful in
college planning.
Goal: 62% to 65%
5.00
5.08
.08

Question 20
Financial Aid
counselors are
helpful.
Goal: 65% to 68%
5.26

5.51
.25

Financial aid
staff establish a
positive
relationship with
EOPS students at
the EOPS
Orientation
EOPS students
are encouraged to
attend workshops
for assistance
with the FAFSA
EOPS students
are required to
complete the
FAFSA as part of
their Mutual
Responsibility
Contract
EOPS staff
provide
additional oneon-one assistance
for students in
our office
completing the
FAFSA
5
5/29/2016
General
Support
Question 63 I
seldom get the
“run around”
when seeking
information on
this campus.
Goal: 72%-75%
5.24
5.41
.17
II.
The EOPS End-of-Semester Surveys (EOPS Surveys) were constructed to measure EOPS students’ satisfaction with EOPS programs and services. The
report provided here was written by Karen Nelson for the Institutional Research department. The following data shows a comparison between similar
questions from the Fall 2008, Spring 2009 and Spring 2010 surveys. The EOPS Surveys were administered using convenience sampling. EOPS staff
distributed surveys to students who participated in end-of-semester workshops. Surveys were distributed to all students who participated in the
workshops and respondents turned them in at the conclusion of the workshop. Over the three years of survey administration, the survey questions were
altered in various areas. Seven questions remained the same throughout the three years and the following section compares those select questions.
Findings:
EOPS Program Services
Respondents were asked to indicate their satisfaction with six categories focusing on EOPS services: overall EOPS program services, EOPS
orientation, book voucher service, priority registration, counseling/advising services, and counselor availability.
The percentage of respondents indicating that the overall EOPS program services were excellent grew each year of the survey as seen in Table 1. Just
over seventy percent of respondents (71.2%) indicated the overall EOPS program services were excellent in Fall 2008. In Spring 2009, nearly threequarters of respondents (74.1%) indicated the overall EOPS program services were excellent and in Spring 2010 over three quarters of respondents
(76.5%) indicated services were excellent.
6
5/29/2016
Table 1: Overall EOPS Program Services
71.2%
74.1%
76.5%
Excellent
23.3%
Good
Average
20.2%
21.3%
4.7%
3.1%
1.5%
Fair
0.8%
0.5%
0.7%
Poor
0.0%
1.0%
0.0%
N/A
1.0%
0.0%
2008
2009
2010
The percentage of respondents indicating that the overall EOPS program services were good remained around 20-23% throughout the three years of the
survey. Those respondents indicating that the overall EOPS program services were average declined each year beginning with nearly 5% of
respondents (4.7%) in Fall 2008 to three percent (3.1%) in Spring 2009 and finally at one percent (1.5%) in Spring 2010.
Those respondents indicating that the overall EOPS program services were fair, poor or not applicable (N/A) remained very low throughout the three
years with all percentages one percent or less. The Fall 2008 survey did not allow for a not applicable option, thus the following results will not include
data for this option.
As shown in Table 2, over half of the respondents indicated that the EOPS orientation was excellent over the three years of survey administration. In
Fall 2008, sixty-three percent of respondents (63.8%) indicated the orientation was excellent, in Spring 2009, nearly sixty percent of respondents
(59.4%) indicated the orientation was excellent, and in Spring 2010, sixty-two percent of respondents (62.5%) indicated the orientation was excellent.
The percentage of respondents indicating that the EOPS orientation was good decreased from thirty percent (30.2%) in Fall 2008 to twenty-seven
percent (27.6%) in Spring 2009 and finally to twenty-three percent (23.5%) in Spring 2010. The number of respondents indicating that the EOPS
7
5/29/2016
orientation was average rose each year of survey administration with three percent (3.4%) in Fall 2008, to nearly seven percent (6.8%) in Spring 2009
and seven percent (7.4%) in Spring 2010.
Smaller percentages of respondents indicated that the EOPS orientation was fair or poor, ranging from 0% to 2%. Some respondents indicated that this
survey item was not applicable (N/A) which was likely due to a lack of orientation attendance.
Table 2: EOPS Orientation
63.8%
59.4%
62.5%
Excellent
30.2%
Good
27.6%
23.5%
3.4%
Average
Fair
Poor
N/A
6.8%
7.4%
2.1%
0.5%
1.5%
2008
2009
2010
0.4%
0.0%
0.7%
5.7%
4.4%
Respondents were asked to indicate their satisfaction with the book voucher service. The majority of respondents during the three years of survey
administration indicated that they found the book voucher service to be excellent ranging from 71% to 77% (see Table 3). Smaller percentages of
respondents indicated the book voucher service to be good, average, fair, or poor during the three years of survey administration. Only three percent of
respondents (3.1% in Spring 2009 and 3.7% in Spring 2010) indicated that this survey item was not applicable.
8
5/29/2016
Table 3: Book Voucher Service
71.8%
Excellent
77.1%
74.8%
15.0%
Good
Average
Fair
Poor
N/A
9.4%
12.6%
9.0%
3.6%
5.9%
3.0%
4.2%
1.5%
2008
2009
2010
1.3%
2.6%
1.5%
3.1%
3.7%
The majority of respondents indicated that priority registration was an excellent service throughout each year of survey administration (see Table 4 on
the following page). As the percentage of respondents indicating that priority registration was excellent each year slowly increased (from 81.9% in
2008, to 82.6% in 2009, to 84.6% in 2010) the percentage of respondents indicating that priority registration was good slowly decreased (from 13.8%
in 2008, to 12.1% in 2009, to 11.8% in 2010) showing that respondents became increasingly more satisfied with the service.
The percentage of respondents indicating that priority registration was an average service remained at around three percent throughout each year of
survey administration (3.4% in Fall 2008, 3.7% in Spring 2009, and 2.9% in Spring 2010). Less than one percent of respondents indicated that priority
registration was a fair or poor service throughout each year of survey administration while only one percent of respondents indicated this survey item
did not apply in Spring 2009.
9
5/29/2016
Table 4: Priority Registration
81.9%
82.6%
84.6%
Excellent
13.8%
Good
Average
Fair
12.1%
11.8%
3.4%
3.7%
2.9%
0.9%
0.0%
0.7%
Poor
0.0%
0.5%
0.0%
N/A
1.1%
0.0%
2008
2009
2010
Over seventy percent of respondents indicated that the counseling/advising services were excellent over each year of survey administration (as shown
in Table 5). The next highest percentage of respondents indicated that the counseling/advising services were good over each year of survey
administration ranging from fifteen percent to nearly twenty-three percent. Smaller percentages of respondents indicated the counseling/advising
services were average, fair, poor or not applicable.
10
5/29/2016
Table 5: Counseling/Advising Services
76.1%
79.1%
72.1%
Excellent
18.4%
Good
15.7%
22.8%
Average
Fair
4.3%
3.1%
2.9%
0.4%
0.0%
2.2%
Poor
0.9%
1.0%
0.0%
N/A
1.0%
0.0%
2008
2009
2010
As shown in Table 6, over sixty percent of respondents indicated that counselor availability was excellent through the years of survey administration.
In Fall 2008, nearly sixty-three percent of respondents (62.8%) indicated that counselor availability was excellent. In Spring 2009, sixty-six percent of
respondents (66.3%) indicated that counselor availability while in Spring 2010, sixty-five percent of respondents (65.4%) indicated excellent counselor
availability. Between 22-26% of respondents indicated that counselor availability was good over the years of survey administration.
Four to eight percent of respondents indicated that counselor availability was average with 6% of respondents in Fall 2008, eight percent of respondents
(8.4%) in Spring 2009 and four percent (4.4%) in Spring 2010. Smaller percentages of respondents indicated that counselor availability was fair, poor
or not applicable.
11
5/29/2016
Table 6: Counselor Availability
62.8%
66.3%
65.4%
Excellent
26.1%
Good
22.1%
26.5%
6.0%
8.4%
4.4%
Average
Fair
Poor
N/A
1.7%
1.1%
1.5%
2008
2009
2010
3.4%
1.1%
0.7%
1.1%
1.5%
EOPS Planning Assistance
The majority of respondents indicated that they had completed/updated a Student Education Plan (SEP) with a counselor during the semester over each
year of survey administration (see Table 7 on the following page). Slowing increasing each survey year, eighty-three percent of respondents (83.8%)
indicated they had completed/updated an SEP in Fall 2008, ninety-one percent of respondents (91.1%) indicated having completed an SEP in Spring
2009 and nearly ninety-two percent of respondents (91.9%) indicated completing an SEP in Spring 2010.
12
5/29/2016
Table 7: Completed/Updated SEP
83.8%
Yes
91.1%
91.9%
16.2%
No
8.9%
8.1%
2008
2009
2010
13
5/29/2016
8. Students Served
EOPS Students Served from 2005/06 – 2010/11
School Year Summer
Fall
Spring
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
20010/11
158
174
191
226
365
30
1105
1086
1130
1192
1342
797
990
1032
1060
1321
893
731*
Total
(Unduplicated)
1390
1391
1452
1665
1575
TBD
*estimated
CARE Students Served from 2005/06 – 2010/11
School Year Summer
Fall
Spring
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
20010/11
18
17
32
41
44
2
79
85
96
100
99
68
84
94
98
97
55
70
Total
(Unduplicated)
119
116
144
155
125
TBD
*estimated
14
5/29/2016
CalWORKs Students Served from 2005/06 – 2010/11
School Year Summer
Fall
Spring
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
20010/11
1
1
31
50
55
41
169
142
122
109
161
175
Total
(Unduplicated)
189
222
186
190
247
TBD
35
181
134
141
169
146*
*estimated
Special Program by Location Fall 2009
Location
EOPS
%
CARE
Del Norte
Eureka
Klamath-Trinity
Mendocino
Virtual
Total Unduplicated
192
1052
18
80
97
1342
20
75
1
4
5
19
75
1
4
5
99
%
CalWORKs
%
19
76
1
4
5
49
109
0
3
10
161
30
68
0
2
6
Note: Although most percentages of special programs students served have remained the same, the current number of students served at
the Klamath Trinity site has nearly doubled.
15
5/29/2016
Demographic Profile of Special Program Students Compared to All CR Students:
 Five Year Average Percentage 2005/06 – 2009/10
 Utilizing Special Program Unduplicated Annual Students Served and District Headcount
Source: Chancellor’s Office Data Mart
EOPS
CARE
CalWORKs District
__________________________________________________________________________
Total Students
7,473
659
1,034
46,658
Gender
Male
Female
Unknown
Percent
36.25
63.74
00.20
Percent
5.0
95.0
0.0
Percent
13.76
86.13
0.0
Percent
43.60
56.15
00.01
Age
Under 20
20-24
25 Plus
Percent
20.64
31.60
47.75
Percent
5.18
24.16
70.66
Percent
5.74
29.6
64.66
Percent
22.97
27.30
49.72
Ethnicity
African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic
Native American
White
Other/Unknown
Percent
3.37
5.72
8.96
12.24
58.91
10.28
Percent
1.96
1.18
8.61
11.08
67.79
9.38
Percent
1.69
3.24
9.02
8.81
67.31
9.93
Percent
2.02
3.15
7.69
6.87
68.46
11.2
16
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
9. Student Achievement Data
Persistence
Comparison Special Program/District Persistence 2007 Fall Cohort
Semester
Data elements
2007 Fall
2007 Fall
2007 Fall
District
EOPS
CARE
Cohort
Cohort
Cohort
2007 Fall
# of Students
938
223
6
% of Cohort
100%
100%
100%
2008 Spring
# of Students
616
151
5
% of Cohort
66%
68%
83%
2008 Fall
# of Students
453
96
2
% of Cohort
48%
43%
33%
2009 Spring
# of Students
404
86
1
% of Cohort
43%
39%
17%
2009 Fall
# of Students
292
65
% of Cohort
31%
29%
NA
2010 Spring
# of Students
243
55
% of Cohort
26%
25%
NA
2010 Fall
# of Students
181
49
% of Cohort
19%
22%
NA
2007 Fall
CalWORKs
Cohort
10
100%
8
80%
5
50%
3
30%
3
30%
3
30%
1
10%
Comparison Special Program/District Persistence 2008 Fall Cohort
Semester
Data elements
2008 Fall
2008 Fall
2008 Fall
District
EOPS
CARE
Cohort
Cohort
Cohort
2008 Fall
# of Students
953
260
17
% of Cohort
100%
100%
100%
2009 Spring
# of Students
597
182
12
% of Cohort
63%
70%
71%
2009 Fall
# of Students
420
131
11
% of Cohort
44%
50%
65%
2010 Spring
# of Students
349
100
6
% of Cohort
37%
38%
35%
2010 Fall
# of Students
249
84
7
% of Cohort
26%
32%
41%
2008 Fall
CalWORKs
Cohort
10
100%
8
80%
6
60%
3
30%
3
30%
Comparison Special Program/District Persistence 2009 Fall Cohort
Semester
Data elements
2009 Fall
2009 Fall
2009 Fall
District
EOPS
CARE
Cohort
Cohort
Cohort
2009 Fall
# of Students
1,074
238
8
% of Cohort
100%
100%
100%
2010 Spring
# of Students
710
172
7
% of Cohort
66%
72%
88%
2010 Fall
# of Students
458
110
6
% of Cohort
43%
46%
75%
2009 Fall
CalWORKs
Cohort
20
100%
14
70%
10
50%
2
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
Special Program/District Comparison for Retention and Course Success
2007/08 – 2009/10
_____________________________________________________________
Retention
Course Success
District
89%
69%
EOPS:
101 Corridor
Del Norte
Eureka Campus
Klamath
Mendocino
Online
81%
88%
87%
90%
85%
80%
62%
60%
59%
73%
64%
52%
CARE:
101 Corridor
Del Norte
Eureka Campus
Klamath
Mendocino
Online
88%
86%
87%
96%
96%
82%
72%
60%
61%
71%
77%
48%
CalWORKs:
101 Corridor
Del Norte
Eureka Campus
Klamath
Mendocino
Online
86%
86%
88%
100%
92%
81%
73%
63%
64%
92%
77%
53%
2
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
Degree and Certificate Completions
EOPS Degrees/Certificates Awarded by Year
Degree
AA Liberal Arts
Associate of Arts
Associate of Science
Total
Certificate
Certificate - 18 to 29 units
Certificate - 30 to 59 units
Certificate - 6 to 17 units
Total
Total
Percent of Total District
2004-2005
CARE Degrees/Certificates Awarded by Year
Degree
AA Liberal Arts
Associate of Arts
Associate of Science
Total
Certificate
Certificate - 18 to 29 units
Certificate - 30 to 59 units
Certificate - 6 to 17 units
Total
Total
2007-2008
93
41
134
2
31
12
45
179
23%
1
5
6
1
6
3
10
16
20062007
2005-2006
60
45
105
3
25
13
41
146
19%
2008-2009
2007-2008
60
42
102
1
23
12
36
138
18%
44
55
99
3
40
14
57
156
20%
2008-2009 2009-2010
6
47
37
31
43
43
86
121
2
38
40
3
1
43
41
129
162
17%
21%
2009-2010
3
3
6
5
3
9
17
8
5
8
8
5
22
2
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
CalWORKs Degrees/Certificates Awarded by
Year
Degree
AA Liberal Arts
Associate of Arts
Associate of Science
Total
Certificate
Certificate - 18 to 29 units
Certificate - 30 to 59 units
Certificate - 6 to 17 units
Total
Total
District Degrees/Certificates Awarded by Year
Degree
AA Liberal Arts
Associate of Arts
Associate of Science
Total
Certificate
Certificate - 18 to 29 units
Certificate - 30 to 59 units
Certificate - 6 to 17 units
Certificate over 60 units
Total
Total
2007-2008
1
8
9
1
7
5
13
22
2004-2005
351
192
543
36
134
50
220
763
2008-2009
2009-2010
3
4
7
7
3
14
24
12
8
12
19
8
32
2005-2006
269
198
467
8
149
29
6
192
659
20062007
2007-2008
236
180
416
10
163
52
4
229
645
175
210
385
11
159
54
5
229
614
2008-2009 2009-2010
34
167
142
101
171
150
347
418
9
12
159
157
8
7
6
6
182
182
529
600
2
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
Table 1.01I Overall Success Rate in all Courses by Students’ English and Math
Level
EOPS
CURRENT SKILL
LEVEL
Passed English 1A
English 1A
English 150
English 350
Reading 360
Unknown
2502
6104
8081
5454
1651
3078
SUCCESS
RATE
F2007-S2010
73%
68%
59%
57%
48%
59%
Math 50A
Math 5/15/25
Math 120
Math 380
Math 376
Math 372
Unknown
896
2117
2753
6392
8808
2756
3148
80%
72%
63%
61%
59%
60%
55%
NUMBER
ENROLLED
156
459
759
516
91
373
SUCCESS
RATE
F2007-S2010
67%
71%
60%
62%
51%
62%
56
74
131
352
1044
332
274
86%
85%
64%
66%
61%
61%
58%
CARE
CURRENT SKILL
LEVEL
Passed English 1A
English 1A
English 150
English 350
Reading 360
Unknown
Math 50A
Math 5/15/25
Math 120
Math 380
Math 376
Math 372
Unknown
NUMBER
ENROLLED
2
5/29/2016
CalWORKs
CURRENT SKILL
LEVEL
NUMBER
ENROLLED
Passed English 1A
English 1A
English 150
English 350
Reading 360
Unknown
233
615
996
1639
125
552
SUCCESS
RATE
F2007-S2010
74%
69%
61%
65%
58%
72%
Math 50A
Math 5/15/25
Math 120
Math 380
Math 376
Math 372
Unknown
68
165
168
567
1284
418
494
82%
77%
60%
65%
64%
63%
72%
1. What pattern can be identified in the program success rates based on the students’ skill
level in English and Math? Has the success rate changed since the last review?
Student success increases in all courses are correlated to completion of higher level
English and math courses.
2. How has the program responded to these patterns or changes, and how will the
program respond in the future?
All Special Program students receive Student Education Plans that encourage early
completion of English and math to support their success in meeting overall educational
goals.
3
5/29/2016
. Report on Results of Learning Outcomes Assessment 2009-2010
. 2009-2010 Assessment Plan for EOPS
Mission Statement: Extended Opportunity Program and Services (EOPS) identifies students affected by language, social, and economic
disadvantages and empowers those students to achieve their educational objectives and goals.
Objective
Student Learning
Linked to Student Assessment Criteria Assessment
Outcome (SLO)
Service
(Specify Target
Measure
or
Goal/Strategic
Performance Level) (Measurement
tool)
Program Learning
Plan
Outcome (PLO)
1.
2.
Completion
(or anticipate
completion)/
Findings*
Increase the
number and
percentage of
EOPS students
meeting their
contractual
obligations
EOPS students will
demonstrate
understanding of
program eligibility
requirements
Student Services Goals:
Improve enrollment and
student retention.
College Strategic
Planning Goals: Enable
student attainment of
educational goals.
Set baseline data in 20092010 on several
requirements: minimum
2.0 GPA, three counseling
contacts, and Student
Education Plan (SEP)
development.
Pre and post
test, orientation
evaluations,
student
transcripts, and
SARS reports.
Ongoing
throughout 20092010 academic
year
Increase student
understanding of
financial aid
processes
EOPS students will
demonstrate knowledge
of the importance of
applying for financial
aid by the priority
deadline.
Student Services Goals:
Improve enrollment and
student retention and
increase ways students
can access CR.
College Strategic
Planning Goals: Enable
student attainment of
educational goals and
ensure student access.
Set baseline data in 20092010
Collaborate
with financial
aid staff to
count how
many EOPS
students have
filed their
FAFSA and
when they filed.
Results will be
available by April
2010
Improvement
Recommendations
(next step)*
Provide interventions
for students who have
not met EOPS mutual
responsibility contract
requirements. Make
modifications to service
delivery (e.g. group
advising, reminders to
students, and orientation
objectives).
Modify financial aid
information provided to
students during
orientation and other
activities as needed.
4
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
2009 Assessment Plan Findings/Data Analysis & Improvement Recommendations
SLO/PAO #1:
Findings/Data Analysis
EOPS Student Counseling/Advising Contact Comparison between 2008/09 and 2009/10
Time Frame
# of
Students Average # of
Students Average
Contacts Served
Contacts Contacts Served
Contacts
2008/09 2008/09
per
2009/10 2009/10
per
Student
Student
Fall Semester
2051
1192
1.72
2838
1342
2.1
Spring Semester
2207
1321
1.67
1905
893
2.1
School Year
Totals (includes
summer and
4768
1665
2.86
5793
1575
3.68
winter)
To ensure that EOPS students were meeting their mutual responsibility contractual obligations, particularly the three counseling contact
rule, modifications were made to our service delivery:
 New student orientation made stronger emphasis on need to adhere to contract to promote success and remain eligible
 Students who missed appointments were contacted and strongly encouraged to meet their obligation: 1,718 phone calls were
recorded in SARS for the 2009/10 year compared to 5 for the 2008/09 year
 Communications regarding counseling contacts were increased utilizing newsletters and the new student email system
Counseling contacts increased from an average of 2.86 per student for the 1008/09 year to 3.68 per student for the 2009/10 year.
Improvement Recommendations
Continue changes to service deliver that emphasizes importance of contractual obligations and their connection to student success.
Implement Appreciative Advising model.
2
5/29/2016
SLO/PAO #2:
Findings/Data Analysis
To encourage EOPS student completion of the FAFSA by the March priority deadline workshops were held, communications increased
and two computer stations made available at the Eureka campus Special Programs office so that staff could provide more one on one
assistance to students. Application file date data to support an increase in students filing by the priority deadline was not available, but
student survey information indicates that the cohort of EOPS students had a higher satisfaction with the financial aid advising received
than all CR students.
Student Satisfaction Survey - EOPS and Average Cohort Comparison
Theme
Questions
Average EOPS Difference Possible Reasons
Cohort
Cohort
Satisfact Satisfa
ion
ction
Financial
Question 7
5.31
5.60
.29
 Financial aid
Aid
Adequate
staff establish a
Financial Aid is
positive
available for most
relationship with
students.
EOPS students at
Goal: 73% to 75%
the EOPS
Orientation
Question 13
5.00
5.08
.08
 EOPS students
Financial Aid
are encouraged to
awards are
attend workshops
announced to
for assistance
students in time to
with the FAFSA
be helpful in
 EOPS students
college planning.
are required to
Goal: 62% to 65%
complete the
FAFSA as part of
Question 20
5.26
5.51
.25
their Mutual
Financial Aid
Special Programs Action
Plans for Improvement
Continue current service
delivery plan.
3
5/29/2016
counselors are
helpful.
Goal: 65% to 68%

Responsibility
Contract
EOPS staff
provide
additional oneon-one assistance
for students in
our office
completing the
FAFSA
Improvement Recommendations
Continue current service delivery plan. Investigate other data measurements to determine successful completion of FAFSA prior to
priority deadline.
4
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
\2010/11 Assessment Plan for Special Programs
Mission Statement: The mission of Special Programs is to empower students to achieve their educational goals and objectives.
1.
Objective
Student Learning
Outcome (SLO)
or
Program
Outcome (PO)
Linked to Student
Service
Goal/Campus
Goal/District
Initiative
Assessment Criteria
(Specify Target
Performance Level)
Assessment
Measure
Completion
(or anticipate
completion)/
Findings
Improvement
Recommendations
(next step)
Ensure that
Special
Programs
students
regardless of
location or
means of
delivery are
provided the
same level of
EOPS, CARE
and CalWORKs
services.
Special Programs students
will have increased
knowledge of and
utilization of Special
Programs services
available to them.
Special Programs Goal:
Increase the number of
students who
successfully complete
basic skills, degrees and
certificates, transfer, and
transition from public
assistance to
employment.
Increase student
participation in Special
Program orientations,
SEP completions, and
Special Program
Counseling contacts for
Special Program students
whose primary campus is
not Eureka.
Compare
between
2009/10 and
2010/11 Special
Program
students who
participate in
orientation,
complete
educational
plans, and
complete at
least three
counseling
contacts per
semester.
Survey students
at locations
other than
Eureka campus
for satisfaction
with services
and to obtain
feedback on
improvement of
service
delivery.
It is anticipated
that :
- service use will
increase by at least
.30 %
-the tracking of
services will be
improved
-students will be
more informed of
service availability
-students will
request more online services for
orientation and
advising
-within two years
transfer, vocation
and degree
completions will
increase
Improvement plan will
be created at Spring
2011 Special Programs
Retreat to continue
enhancement of
services.
Special Programs students
will demonstrate
understanding of goal
setting, educational
planning and have the
tools to select course
schedules that contribute
to successful completion
of basic skills sequences
and transfer, vocational
and/or degree objectives.
Student Services
Division Goal: To
provide high quality
support services that
promote access to
educational programs,
foster academic success,
and encourage social and
personal development of
all learners.
College Strategic
Planning Goals: Enable
student attainment of
educational goals and
ensure student access.
2
5/29/2016
2.
Special
Programs
students will
have informed
education and
career goals
identified by the
end of their first
semester.
Special Program students
will have an increased
knowledge of the factors
that are important to
consider in determining
educational and career
goals.
Special Programs students
will demonstrate
understanding of goal
setting, educational
planning and have the
tools to select course
schedules that contribute
to successful completion
of basic skills sequences
and transfer, vocational
and/or degree objectives.
Special Programs Goal:
Increase the number of
students who
successfully complete
basic skills, degrees and
certificates, transfer, and
transition from public
assistance to
employment.
Student Services Goal:
To provide high quality
support services that
promote access to
educational programs,
foster academic success,
and encourage social and
personal development of
all learners.
Increase Special Programs
students with declared
programs in Datatel;
decrease students declared
as “undecided” or other
“non-program” goals.
Survey students to
determine program
improvements that will
enhance informed
selection of educational
and career goals.
Compare
number of
Special
Program
students
between
2009/10 an
2010/11 who
are 1. In
declared
programs in
Datatel 2. Are
declared as
“undecided” or
other “nonprogram” goals.
Baseline numbers
will be established
for Special
Programs students
that have declared
educational and
career goals and
for those that are
undecided.
Special
Program
department
reports and
meeting notes
will document
progress, plan
completion and
staff
participation
and approval.
Special Programs
staff will
implement the new
plan.
Improvement plan will
be created at Spring
2011 Special Programs
Retreat to continue
enhancement of
services.
Program staff will
be informed of
student needs for
services that will
enhance
educational and
career goal
determination.
College Strategic
Planning Goals: Enable
student attainment of
educational goals and
ensure student access
3.
A plan to
implement the
Appreciative
Advising model
will be
developed and
implemented for
Special
Programs
students.
Special Programs front
line staff will have
increased knowledge and
appreciation for student
centered delivery methods
and building an
environment that creates a
positive first impression
and establishes rapport.
Special Programs Goal:
Increase the number of
students who
successfully complete
basic skills, degrees and
certificates, transfer, and
transition from public
assistance to
employment.
Special Programs
counselors will have
increased knowledge and
skills to support student
success through the
Student Services Goal:
To provide high quality
support services that
promote access to
educational programs,
A plan with activities, key
persons, timeline and
anticipated results will be
completed.
Assessment and
continued improvement
of plan.
3
5/29/2016
intentional collaborative
practice of asking positive,
open-ended questions that
help students optimize
their educational
experiences and achieve
their dreams, goals, and
potentials.
foster academic success,
and encourage social and
personal development of
all learners.
College Strategic
Planning Goals: Enable
student attainment of
educational goals and
ensure student access
4
2010 Student Service Comprehensive Program Review Template 1/27/10
II. Area Needs Assessment
1. Five-Year Program Staffing Profile with Anticipated Needs
Special Programs (EOPS, CARE and CalWORKs)
Staffing Levels for Each of the
Previous Five Years
2006
2007
2008 2009
2010
1.5
1.0
6.3
3.16
4.64
16.6
2.0
1.0
3.6
.5
3.11
10.21
Anticipated total staff
needed
2011 -2012
2012-2013
Position
Administration
Manager
Classified Staff
Student Workers
Faculty
Total Full Time
Equivalent Staff
1.5 1.5
0
1.0
5.88 4.53
3.40 3.16
2.39
4.34
13.17 14.53
2.0
1.0
4.40
1.15
4.35
12.9
2.0
1.0
5.1
3.5
4.61
16.21
2.0
1.0
5.1
3.5
4.61
16.21
Fill out the Management and/or Staff request form that follow if new employees are needed.
Does the staffing structure meet the unit’s needs? NO
Almost half of the Special Program students that qualify for services are not able to be served due to 45% budget reductions.
Although ARRA funds helped us keep some staff employed through the Fall of 2009, when the Spring of 2010 began the
programs had lost three associate faculty counselor positions, two classified staff (one to retirement for which a .5 replacement
was allowed, the other was transferred to CalSOAP), and all of our student workers except one who worked about 10 hours per
week.
The remaining staff are stretched to meet the current student’s needs, so we may have to serve even less students next year in
order to continue to provide quality services and a healthy work environment.
2
5/29/2016
2. Staff Needs
NEW OR REPLACEMENT STAFF (Administrative or Classified)
List Staff Positions Needed for Academic Year 2011/12
Please be as specific and as brief as possible when offering a reason. Place titles on list in order (rank) or
importance.
Annual TCP*
TCP for employee
1. .50 Student Services Specialist IV
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs students not being able to
receive services, ensure student access, and improve student success and attainment of educational goals.
2. 1.0 FTE Associate Faculty Counselors, Eureka Campus
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs students not being able to
receive services, ensure student access, and improve student success and attainment of educational goals.
3. .5 FTE Associate Faculty Counselor, Klamath-Trinity Site
Reason: To improve access to Special Programs counselors for students at the Klamath-Trinity Site.
4. 3.0 FTE Peer Mentor Student Worker positions to be located throughout district
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs students not being able to
receive services, ensure student access, and improve student success and attainment of educational goals.
5. 1.0 FTE Student Development Advisor, Eureka Campus
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs students not being able to
receive services, ensure student access, and improve student success and attainment of educational goals.
This position provided outreach and intake services for all three programs.
6.
Reason:
* TCP = “Total Cost of Position” for one year is the cost of an average salary plus benefits for an individual. New positions (not replacement positions) also require
space and equipment. Please speak with your campus Business Officer to obtain accurate cost estimates. Please be sure to add related office space, equipment and
other needs for new positions to the appropriate form and mention the link to the position.
3
5/29/2016
Unit Name: Special Programs
3. Equipment (excluding technology) Needs Not Covered by Current Budget
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic Year_______
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be
as specific and as brief as possible. Place items on list in order (rank) or
importance.
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
1.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
* TCO = “Total Cost of Ownership” for one year is the cost of an average cost for one year. Please speak with your campus Business Officer to obtain accurate cost
estimates. Please be sure to check with your department chair to clarify what you current budget allotment are. If equipment needs are linked to a position please be
sure to mention that linkage.
4
5/29/2016
Unit Name: Special Programs
4. Technology++ Needs Not Covered by Current Budget:
NOTE: Technology; excludes software, network infrastructure, furniture, and consumables (toner, cartridges, etc)
Submitted by:
Title:
Phone:
Annual TCO*
Priority
EQUIPMENT REQUESTED
New (N) or
Replacem
ent (R)?
Program:
New (N) or
Continuing
(C) ?
Location
(i.e Office,
Classroom
, etc.)
Is there
existing
Infrastructure
?
How many
users
served?
Has it been
repaired
frequently?
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of
Request
1.
Usage /
Justification
2.
Usage /
Justification
3.
Usage /
Justification
4.
Usage /
Justification
5.
Usage /
Justification
 TCO = “Total Cost of Ownership” for one year is the cost of an average cost for one year. Please speak with your campus Business Officer to obtain accurate
cost estimates. Please be sure to check with your department chair to clarify what you current budget allotment are. If equipment needs are linked to a
position please be sure to mention that linkage.
 ++Technology is (1) equipment that attaches to a computer, or (2) a computer is needed to drive the equipment.
5
5/29/2016
Unit Name: Special Programs
5. Facilities Needs Not Covered by Current Building or Remodeling Projects*
Annual TCO*
List Facility Needs for Academic Year___________________
(Remodels, Renovations or added new facilities) Place items on list in order (rank) or
importance.
Total Cost of Request
1.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
*Please speak with your campus Business Officer to obtain accurate cost estimates and to learn if the facilities you need are already in the planning stages.
6
5/29/2016
Unit Name: Special Programs
6. Professional or Organizational Development Needs Not Covered by Current Budget*
List Professional Development Needs for Academic Year 2011/12. Reasons
might include in response to AUO assessment findings or the need to update skills.
Please be as specific and as brief as possible. Some items may not have a cost per
se, but reflect the need to spend current staff time differently. Place items on list
in order (rank) or importance.
1. Travel to EOPS, CARE and CalWORKs statewide technical trainings.
Reason: To ensure staff are informed of current policy, rules and regulations
related to compliance with Title V for Special Programs as well as best practices
contributing to student success.
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
$2,000
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
*It is recommended that you speak with Human Resources or the Management Association to see if your request can be met with current budget.
7
5/29/2016
Unit Name: Special Programs
7. OTHER NEEDS not covered by current budget
List Other Needs for Academic Year 2011/12
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be as
specific and as brief as possible. Not all needs will have a cost, but may require a
reallocation of current staff time. Place items on list in order (rank) or importance.
1. Financial Aid – Transportation: Bus Passes
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs
students not being able to receive services, ensure student access, and improve
student success and attainment of educational goals.
2. Financial Aid – Book Awards
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs
students not being able to receive services, ensure student access, and improve
student success and attainment of educational goals.
3. Financial Aid – CARE/CalWORKs Awards for Childcare, Gas and Meal
Cards
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs
students not being able to receive services, ensure student access, and improve
student success and attainment of educational goals.
4. Financial Aid – Transportation: Parking Permits
Reason: To provide services per Title V required for eligible Special Programs
students not being able to receive services, ensure student access, and improve
student success and attainment of educational goals.
Annual TCO*
Cost per
item
Number
Requested
Total Cost of Request
$50
600
$30,000
$250
700
$175,000
$200
200
$40,000
$25
900
$22,500
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
8
5/29/2016
III. Recommendations
Vice President’s Recommendation
Special Programs is an exemplary student development department. Their intrusive counseling/advising model serves as a foundation for
the basic skills math immersion/FYE pilot program to be implemented summer 2011. Notable achievements include:



Collaborating with the Foster Care program to provide more support for foster youth;
Collaborating with English faculty to develop a premier learning community program for EOPS students;
Providing the example for assessment and continuous improvement.
Special Programs staff will be asked to collaborate with Advising staff to:
1. assess and develop a coordinated advising tracking system spring 2011;
2. implement the appreciate advising model in fall 2011;
3. implement the multiple measures in fall 2011;
4. increase student knowledge of academic performance; and
5. implementing and online advising site through MyCR.
It will be important that we begin realigning the funding percentages of the staff shared between EOPS and the district.
Keith Snow-Flamer
Vice President’s Signature
January 20, 2011
Date
9
5/29/2016
Enrollment Management Committee’s Evaluation
Unit Name: _______________________________________
10
5/29/2016
11
5/29/2016
12