BUDGET PLANNING COMMITTEE (BPC)
Planning for the 2014-15 Budget Year
Friday, September 27, 2013
1:00 p.m. /SS 104 Counseling Conference Room
AGENDA
STANDING OPENING ITEMS:
1. Call Meeting to Order – 1:00 pm
2. ACTION REQUIRED: Approve Meeting notes from May 15, 2013. – 1:01 pm
DISCUSSION/ACTION:
1. ACTION REQUIRED: Approve charge and revised committee structure (FPC, TPC,
BPC) and approve practices for documenting links between College plans and BPC
recommendations. – 1:03 pm
2. ACTION REQUIRED: Set meeting dates and meeting place – 1:10 pm
3. Discuss: Strategic Plan, Education Master Plan, Technology Master Plan, Facilities
Master Plan, Annual Institution Plan, and the 2014-15 Budget Calendar – 1:15 pm
4. Discuss: Moody’s rating downgrade, and subsequent Moody’s and S&P ratings visits –
1:20 pm
5. Discuss: 2013-14 Final Budget forecast –1:25 pm
6. Discuss: ACCJC follow up letter on fiscal issues – 1:30 pm
7. Discuss: Accounts receivable update – Moving payment plans to Nelnet, Collections,
Recent trends – 1:35 pm
8. Discuss: Closing the loop on previous year and list of Budget Savings Ideas – 1:40 pm
9. Discuss: Rebalancing measure Q projects – To Facilities subcommittee first – 1:45 pm
10. Discuss: Resource request rankings completed over the Summer – 1:50 pm
11. Discuss: IT Projects – 1:55 pm
STANDING CLOSING ITEM:
1. Discuss: Plus, Minus, Delta/Closing the loop on this meeting – 1:55 pm
Please note supporting documents not included in the agenda packet can be accessed at the
links below.
CR BPC website: http://inside.redwoods.edu/BudgetPlanning/
CR Accreditation website: http://www.redwoods.edu/accreditation/
CCC confer is available for those unable to attend in person.
PARTICIPANT DETAILS
> Dial your telephone conference line: 719-785-4469 or (888) 450-4821
> Cell phone users dial: 719-785-4469
> Enter your passcode: 967462
> *0- operator assistance *6-Mute/unmute your individual line
9/25/2013 9:33 AM
-1-
bpc agenda 9 27 13.doc
BUDGET PLANNING COMMITTEE (BPC)
Planning for the 2014-15 Budget Year
PRELIMINARY DRAFT PROPOSED FACILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE AGENDA
Date, Time, and Location TBD
1. ACTION REQUIRED: Review and update FPC charge and membership
2. Discuss: Rebalancing Measure Q Projects (Action will be required once the rebalance is
completed)
a. Creative Arts building needs
b. AJ building needs
c. AT building needs
STANDING CLOSING ITEM:
1. Discuss: Plus, Minus, Delta/Closing the loop on this meeting
9/25/2013 9:33 AM
-2-
bpc agenda 9 27 13.doc
BUDGET PLANNING COMMITTEE (BPC)
Planning for the 2014-15 Budget Year
PRELIMINARY DRAFT PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY SUBCOMMITTEE AGENDA
Date, Time, and Location TBD
1. ACTION REQUIRED: Review and update TPC charge and membership
2. ACTION REQUIRED: Optional Student Technology Fee – Tech subcommittee to make
recommendation on the proposed allocation spreadsheet.
a. Wireless nodes
b. Student worker for student help desk
c. Proposed Allocation spreadsheet
STANDING CLOSING ITEM:
1. Discuss: Plus, Minus, Delta/Closing the loop on this meeting
9/25/2013 9:33 AM
-3-
bpc agenda 9 27 13.doc
BUDGET PLANNING COMMITTEE
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
3:00 p.m.
SS 104
Draft
Summary Notes
MEMBERS
PRESENT
Bob Brown, Solomon Michael Dennis, Tami Engman (phone), Dave Gonsalves
(phone), Utpal Goswami, Tami Matsumoto, MaryGrace McGovern, Carla
Spalding and Lorie Walsh.
ALSO PRESENT
Bill Hole, Todd Olsen, Dan Potts(phone)
CALL TO ORDER
ACTION
The meeting was called to order by committee co-chair Bob Brown.
APPROVAL OF
MEETING NOTES
The meeting notes from April 17, 2013 were approved with revisions. The final
versions will be posted on the BPC website.
PROGRAM
REVIEW
RANKINGS
Carla Spalding reported that Vice President Lindsey is currently waiting to get
rankings from FPC. There was discussion regarding how ranking will be done and
how items will be grouped. The committee gave input to Tami Engman and Bill
Hole who both serve on the FPC as to how to designate items that are being
ranked. Mr. Lindsey will create a spreadsheet to include rankings from each
committee. The spreadsheet will then be sent out to the BPC members to do a draft
ranking of all items. After the draft ranking is completed it may be necessary to
meet and discuss the outcome. The last step for BPC will be to do a final ranking.
PROGRAM
REVIEW RUBRIC
OR STATEMENT
OF PRIORITIES
Mrs. Spalding noted that Mr. Lindsey requested that the committee review the
evaluation and ranking protocols that are noted in the mission/charge of the
committee. It was agreed that the mission/charge should be reviewed annually at
the beginning of the fiscal year so that changes and updates may be made. There
was also discussion regarding ways to get feedback to groups so that they know
the status of a project that was ranked.
GOVERNOR’S
MAY REVISED
BUDGET
Carla stated that there has been little change from the Governor’s January budget.
She noted that a COLA of 1.57 percent is anticipated and there is about 2 percent
in restoration and growth funding available. What will be most significant to the
district will be the State buying down the inter year deferrals. A small increase in
the district’s funding has already been assumed. She also stated that unless we are
able to grow our FTES we will not realize any of the 2 percent restoration and
growth funds.
Todd Olsen asked for information on the deferrals from the state and how they
show on the district’s books. Carla explained this it does not increase or decrease
our revenue but impacts our cash flow. She also explained that we are currently
going through the process to get a TRAN for the 13/14 fiscal year. However, it
may not be necessary to participate in the mid-year TRAN if there is a buy down
of the deferrals.
Todd also asked why the district decided not to sell the remaining bonds this
month. Carla explained that the bond ratings meeting was postponed pending the
collection of additional data. She went on to explain that the district’s bond rating
has not been downgraded and in order to get the best rating possible it is necessary
to have the most accurate information possible for the rating agencies. The
measure Q bonds are issued by the district and are not part of a pool. They do not
affect the district’s general fund.
DEBRIEF ON
BOMB THREAT
Carla reported that the recent bomb threat brought to light the need for some
upgrades in security and safety throughout the district. This was a valuable,
although unfortunate, learning experience for all personnel. There was a
tremendous response for assistance from many public agencies, including local
law enforcement, Humboldt State University and Eureka Transit.
Some of upgrades that are in progress now are the installation of a cell phone
booster antenna, new computers for security and moving the security office over to
the old administration building. More recommendations will be coming from the
Safety Committee.
UPDATE ON NEW
ACADEMIC
BUILDINGS
The new academic buildings are nearly completed with move in scheduled to start
around the beginning of July. Furniture, lab and technology equipment is currently
being ordered. The maintenance department will need assistance from faculty
and/or support staff to move the “special collections” from the various labs.
ACCOUNT
COLLECTION
UPDATES
Delinquent accounts have been reported to Chancellor’s Office Tax Offset
Program (COTOP) already. After this month is over, we will pull the accounts
back from COTOP collections and for the first time report the accounts to a
collection agency.
ADJOURN
SUBMITTED
4:00 p.m.
lw
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
Consideration of the 15 bulleted items on the State Chancellor’s Office “Sound Fiscal
Management Self-Assessment Checklist”
http://extranet.cccco.edu/Portals/1/CFFP/Fiscal_Services/Standards/AcctgAdvisories/FS0505_Fiscal_Monitoring_A
ccounting_Advisory4.pdf
reveals the following:
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
I.
Deficit Spending - Is this area acceptable?
To balance the 2013-14 budget and avoid deficit spending, the District
planned for $2 million in budget savings centered in employee payroll
savings and implemented this savings target primarily through the
following actions and agreements:
a.
Partial
Yes
The District implemented its “Round One Reorganization and
Reduction in Force (RIF)” which was approved by the Board of
Trustees at the December 4, 2012 meeting.
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/BudgetSavings12-412.pdf
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/Dec2012Resolutionelimi
natingclassifiedpositions.pdf
b. The District implemented its Round Two Reorganization and RIF
which was approved by the Board of Trustees at the July 9, 2013
meeting, see P. 61 of the BOT July 9, 2012 meeting agenda.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/July92013packet.pdf
c. The District implemented employee salary concessions on a
permanent basis for unrepresented employees in the 6.5% to 9.0%
range. See P. 59 of the July 9, 2013 BOT meeting agenda.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/July92013packet.pdf
d. The District and the California School Employees Association
(CSEA) ratified a collective bargaining agreement for the period July
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 1 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
1, 2013 through June 30, 2015. The agreement includes a 6.5%
permanent salary concession.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/CSEACollectiveBargainin
gAgreement-2013-2015.pdf
e. The District and the College of the Redwoods Faculty Organization
(CRFO) ratified a collective bargaining agreement for the period July
1, 2013 through June 30, 2016. The agreement includes an 8.7%
permanent salary concession for full-time faculty and an 8.0%
concession for associate faculty. Also, new full-time faculty may be
hired at steps 1 through 5, whereas previously new hires could come at
steps 1 through 10.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/CRFOCollectiveBargainin
gAgreement-2013-2016.pdf
i. Both collective bargaining agreements allow for future
adjustments to the step schedule (i.e. Cost of Living “COLA”
increases) only when the District’s fund balance is budgeted to
stay above 6% and then only when the State increases the funding
per FTES in the Chancellor’s Office apportionment model by more
than 1.6%. Only then can the amount above 1.6% be added to the
step schedule as a COLA.
ii. In years when the fund balance is budgeted below 6%, then any
increase to the step schedules will be temporarily withheld until
the fund balance can be maintained at 6% or better.
iii. This language will protect the District from funding a COLA
during a weak fiscal period.
iv. In years when the State funds an inflationary increase. The 1.6%
threshold will provide a sustainable funding source to help the
District cover items such as cost increases in health and welfare
benefits plans and increases in operating expenditures.

Is the College spending within their revenue budget in the current year?
The 2013-14 Final Budget shows a $79K net revenue budget and the
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
No
Yes
page 2 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
multiyear forecast for 2014-15 and 2015-16 show $85K and $99K,
respectively. http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/201314CRFinalBgtBOT9-10-2013_000.PDF
II.

Has the College controlled deficit spending over multiple years? The
college has controlled deficit spending by returning to a positive net
revenue budget for 2013-14 and implementing permanent and on-going
salary concessions by all employees.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/201314CRFinalBgtBOT9-10-2013_000.PDF
No
Yes

Is deficit spending addressed by fund balance, ongoing revenue
increases, or expenditure reductions? The combination of
reorganizations, employee pay concessions, and a small inflationary
increase in State funding has helped to manage the budget.
Yes
Yes

Are College revenue estimates based upon past history?
Yes
Yes

Does the College automatically build in growth revenue estimates? In
2011-12 and 2012-13, the College stopped budgeting with assumptions
of growth funding. The 2013-14 Final Budget is based on a reasonable
but conservative FTES target for Fall and Spring terms. The 2013-14
budget includes an enrollment increase related to additional
enrollments already booked from Summer 2013. It is appropriate to
answer No to this question as sustainable enrollment growth funding
has not been coming from the State for several years and the small,
rural makeup of the District means that it is difficult for the District to
sustain enrollment growth over 3% or so per year.
No
No
Fund Balance – Is this area acceptable? The District has committed
on quarterly financial reports to the Chancellor’s Office to close the
2012-13 budget year with at least a 5.0% fund balance. If the fund
balance is below 5% at the closing of the books, then the Board of
Trustees (BOT) has authorized the President/Superintendent to make a
transfer from the employee benefits trust to bring the fund balance up
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
No
Yes
page 3 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Partial
Yes
No
No
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
to 5%. If an emergency transfer from the employee benefits trust is
taken, it will need to be returned within two fiscal years. For example,
see P. 87 of the August 6, 2013 BOT meeting agenda for a quarterly
report:
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/August62013packet.pdf
See P. 59 of the November 7, 2012 BOT meeting agenda for the action
item authorizing the transfer of funds, if necessary:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/November72012packet.p
df

Is the College’s fund balance stable or consistently increasing? The fund
balance is increasing due to a reduction of expenditures (Two
reorganizations and salary concessions), as well as increases in revenue.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/2013-14CRFinalBgtBOT910-2013_000.PDF

III.

Is the fund balance increasing due to on-going revenue increases and/or
expenditure reductions? As noted in question I, the District balanced
the 2013-14 budget primarily through employee salary concessions and
two rounds of reorganizations and reductions in force (RIF).
Enrollment - Is this area acceptable?
Has the College’s enrollment been increasing or stable for multiple
years? The District’s enrollment has contracted for any number of
reasons. However, the State recently revised its funding priorities. Due
to new restrictions on “repeatability”, etc., the District revised its
enrollment forecast to reflect a reasonable and conservative enrollment
forecast. Therefore, in this case a “No” more appropriately represents
the District reacting conservatively and appropriately to changes in its
funding forecast.
The four revised funding priorities (the “Core Missions”) are noted in
the June 2013 update to the Strategic Plan for the State Chancellor’s
Office:
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 4 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Transfer Education
Basic Skills and English Language Proficiency
Economic and Workforce Development
Associates Degrees and Certificates
See Figure 1 on the 8th page of this pdf:
http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/Portals/0/reportsTB/2013
StrategicPlan_062013.pdf

Are the College’s enrollment projections updated at least semiannually?
Yes
Yes

Are staffing adjustments consistent with the enrollment trends?
Yes
Yes

Does the College analyze enrollment and full time equivalent students
(FTES) data?
Yes
Yes

Does the College track historical data to establish future trends between
P-1 and annual for projection purposes?
Yes
Yes

Has the College avoided stabilization funding? The District missed its
2011-12 enrollment target and missed again in 2012-13. The 2013-14
enrollment target reverses the declining trend and is forecasted above
the stability funding level for 2013-14. The multiyear enrollment
forecast projects to continue enrollment increases, but not enough to
rebuild enrollments back up to 2011-12 levels.
No
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
http://inside.redwoods.edu/StrategicPlanning/EnrollmentManagement/docume
nts/1.2013-14FTESTargetsfromEMCtoBPCfinal02-11-13.pdf
IV.

Unrestricted General Fund Balance – Is this area acceptable?
Is the College’s unrestricted general fund balance consistently
maintained at or above the recommended minimum prudent level (5% of
the total unrestricted general fund expenditures)? The 2012-13 fund
balance will increase to 5% and the 2013-14 fund balance is forecasted
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 5 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Partial
Yes
No
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
to increase further.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/2013-14CRFinalBgtBOT910-2013_000.PDF

V.
Is the College’s unrestricted fund balance maintained throughout the
year? To address late payments by the State of California (“Payment
deferrals”), the District accesses Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes
(TRANs) each year to assure a reasonable and prudent level of cash
flow each month of the year. The District’s budget anticipates
maintaining at least a 5% fund balance throughout 2013-14.
Cash Flow Borrowing - Is this area acceptable?

Can the College manage its cash flow without interfund borrowing?
The 2012-13 fund balance will increase to 5% and the 2013-14 fund
balance is forecasted to increase further. The President/Superintendent
may need to make a transfer of funds from the employee benefits trust to
bring the unrestricted fund balance up to 5%, but such a transfer, if
needed, will not be a loan.

Is the College repaying TRANS and/or borrowed funds within the
required statutory period?
VI.

Bargaining Agreements - Is this area acceptable?
Has the College settled bargaining agreements within new revenue
sources during the past three years? The District recently settled with
both bargaining units as noted below. However, new revenue sources to
fund COLAs have been restricted by certain fiscal stability tests as
described below:
 The District and the California School Employees Association
(CSEA) ratified a collective bargaining agreement for the period July
1, 2013 through June 30, 2015. The agreement includes a 6.5%
permanent salary concession.
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 6 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Yes
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/CSEACollectiveBargaini
ngAgreement-2013-2015.pdf
a. The District and the College of the Redwoods Faculty Organization
(CRFO) ratified a collective bargaining agreement for the period July
1, 2013 through June 30, 2016. The agreement includes an 8.7%
permanent salary concession for full-time faculty and an 8.0%
concession for associate faculty. Also, new full-time faculty may be
hired at steps 1 through 5, whereas previously new hires could come at
steps 1 through 10.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/CRFOCollectiveBargainin
gAgreement-2013-2016.pdf
 Both collective bargaining agreements allow for future adjustments to
the step schedule (i.e. Cost of Living “COLA” increases) only when
the District’s fund balance is budgeted to stay above 6% and then
only when the State increases the funding per FTES in the
Chancellor’s Office apportionment model by more than 1.6%. Only
then can the amount above 1.6% be added to the step schedule as a
COLA.
 In years when the fund balance is budgeted below 6%, then any
increase to the step schedules will be temporarily withheld until the
fund balance can be maintained at 6% or better.
 This language will protect the District from funding a COLA during a
weak fiscal period.
 In years when the State funds an inflationary increase. The 1.6%
threshold will provide a sustainable funding source to help the
District cover items such as cost increases in health and welfare
benefits plans and increases in operating expenditures.

Did the College conduct a pre-settlement analysis identifying an
ongoing revenue source to support the agreement? As noted
immediately above, both agreements allow COLA increases only when
the State funds an inflationary increase, and even then the District will
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 7 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Yes
Yes
Partial
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
only fund the COLA into the step schedule subject to the fund balance
test above and the test that requires at least a 1.6% increase in state
funding. The analysis that arrived at this solution was primarily driven
by confidential District/CRFO negotiations in a collaborative, interest
based approach to collective bargaining. These discussions are included
in confidential meeting recollections and notes.
The District recognizes that potential increases in health and welfare
costs could occur. However, the exact magnitude of any future health
and welfare cost increases beyond 2013-14 are not known yet. Some
community college districts have implemented funding caps and other
cost control mechanisms. The District’s plan is to use up to 1.6% in any
State funded increases during the contract term to help offset cost
increases. However, if the inflationary increase from the State is
insufficient to cover health and welfare cost increases and other cost
increases in a given year, then the District has available contract
reopeners for each and every contract year. A reopener may be used to
collaboratively negotiate a solution to such a future fiscal problem.

Did the College correctly identify the related costs?

Did the College address budget reductions necessary to sustain the total
compensation increase? As discussed above, units agreed to salary
concessions. Any increases to the step schedules (COLA) must be
funded by the State, must meet the fund balance test described above,
and will only be for the amount of any state funded increase above 1.6%
each year.
VII.

Unrestricted General Fund Staffing - Is this area acceptable?
Is the College ensuring it is not using one-time funds to pay for
permanent staff or other ongoing expenses?
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 8 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.

VIII.

Is the percentage of College general fund budget allocated to salaries
and benefits at or less than the Statewide average (i.e. the Statewide
average for 2003-04 is 85%)? While it is not yet known if the District’s
percentage will fall to the middle or less than the Statewide average, the
implementation of two rounds of reorganization and reduction in force
(RIF) and across-the-board salary concessions from all employee groups
in the 6.5% to 9.0% will surely contribute to reducing the District’s
payroll percentage. Also, regardless of the District’s placement, the
2013-14 budget has been implemented with conservative fiscal policies
and in a sustainable manner.
Internal Controls - Is this area acceptable?
Does the College have adequate internal controls to insure the integrity
of the general ledger? See P. 55 of the 2011-12 Audited Financial
Statements for this notation, “We did not identify any deficiencies in
internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material
weaknesses, as defined above.”
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/BusinessOffice/documents/RedwoodsDistrtic
tFinalFS12.pdf

Does the College have adequate internal controls to safeguard the
College’s assets? [See p. 65 of Independent Auditors Report on Internal
Control at:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/BusinessOffice/documents/FinalFSAudit2011
.pdf]
IX.
Management Information Systems - Is this area acceptable?

Is the College data accurate and timely?
Yes
Yes

Are the county and State reports filed in a timely manner? There have
been no major delays in report submissions. Also, Business Office staff
communicate with the other party (typically the State Chancellor’s
Yes
Yes
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 9 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
office) and keep them informed on progress.

Are key fiscal reports readily available and understandable? One
primary source for fiscal reports is the monthly Board of Trustees
meetings. For example see the August 6, 2012 BOT meeting agenda: P.
35 for the Monthly Financial Status Report, P. 87 for the Quarterly
Financial Status Report, and other budget reports.
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/August62013packet.pdf
Another primary source for fiscal reports is the Budget Planning
Committee (BPC) which reviews budget forecasts and other reports.
http://inside.redwoods.edu/BudgetPlanning/
Another primary source for fiscal reports is the Business Office
webpage.
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/BusinessOffice/reports.asp
X.
Position Control – Is this area acceptable?

Is position control integrated with payroll?
Yes
Yes

Does the College control unauthorized hiring? The Board of Trustees
reviews a monthly report of hiring activities. For example, see p. 37 of
the August 6,20123 BOT meeting agenda packet:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/August62013packet.pdf#p
age=37

XI.

Does the College have controls over part-time academic staff hiring?
Budget Monitoring - Is this area acceptable?
Is there sufficient consideration to the budget, related to long-term
bargaining agreements? Consideration of the Total Cost of Ownership
(TCO) is integrated into budget planning and collective bargaining
negotiation decisions.
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 10 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.

Are budget revisions completed in a timely manner?
Yes
Yes

Does the College openly discuss the impact of budget revisions at the
board level? At each monthly meeting of the Board of Trustees, a
monthly financial status report is presented which includes any budget
revisions. The cover page for this spreadsheet includes a discussion of
any material changes. On a quarterly basis, the Board reviews a
quarterly report that is also submitted to the State Chancellor’s Office.
For example, the Minutes from the June 4,2013 Board meeting includes
questions from the Board on the monthly financial status report as noted
on p. 9 of this document:
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/August62013packet.
pdf
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Also, p. 9 of this document includes discussion of the monthly financial
status report:
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/March52013packet_
000.pdf

Are budget revisions made or confirmed by the board in a timely
manner after the collective bargaining agreements are ratified? For
example see the August 6, 2012 BOT meeting agenda action item: P. 36
for the Monthly Financial Status Report which includes a monthly
income statement with columns for the “Adopted Budget”, “Year-toDate Adjustments” to the budget and the “Current Budget” as of the
month reviewed.
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/August62013packet.pdf
See P. 91 of the August 6, 2013 BOT meeting agenda for the Board’s
ratification of the CSEA contract and P. 92 for the ratification of the
CRFO contract.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/August62013packet.pdf
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 11 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Partial
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.

Has the College’s long-term debt decreased from the prior fiscal year?
The District has not increased its Certificates of Participation (COPs)
debt. The District’s Employee Benefits Fund for post-employment
retirement benefits increased in 2011-12 due to employees opting into a
voluntary Supplemental Early Retirement incentive Program (SERP),
and the SERP costs have been included in the budget. The District
anticipates issuing the remaining $7.2 million of locally approved bond
authorization (Measure Q and Measure B) during 2013-14, but such
bonds are repaid through property tax assessments.
For 2013-14 the District has identified paying off the COP debt as a
priority. Paying off the SERP debt will be added the row that discusses
the COP debt for the chart for the 2013-14 Final Budget. See “CR
Priority Funding Plan for 2013-14” on P. 3 of the 2013-14 Tentative
Budget approved at the June 4, 2013 BOT meeting.
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/TentativebudgetMayRevise
3-BOThandout.pdf

Has the College identified the repayment sources for the long-term debt?
Yes
Yes

Does the College compile annualized revenue and expenditure
projections throughout the year?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
XII.
Retiree Health Benefits - Is this area acceptable? The Board of
Trustees approved a plan to allow the President/Superintendent to
transfer funds from the employee benefits trust to the general fund if
necessary to bring the general fund balance up to 5.0% by the close of
2012-13. However, the funds must be fully returned to the employee
benefits fund within two years to provide necessary cash flow to the
employee benefits fund. See P. 59 of the November 7, 2012 BOT
meeting agenda for the action item:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/November72012packet.p
df
Please see Section II “Fund Balance – Is this area acceptable?” of this
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 12 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
report for a discussion of the possible transfer of funds from the
employee benefits fund.

Has the College completed an actuarial calculation to determine the
unfunded liability? The District’s most recent complete actuarial study
was completed in 2011. The actuary is currently preparing a complete
actuarial study.
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/BusinessOffice/documents/Acturarialstudy1Fi
nal2011Report.pdf

XIII.

Does the College have a plan for addressing the retiree benefits
liabilities?
Leadership/Stability - Is this area acceptable?
Has the College experienced recent turnover in its management team
(including the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Business Officer, and
Board of Trustees)? During 2011-12, the District hired a permanent
President/Superintendent, but this has not destabilized the District. See
the April 3, 2012 Board of Trustees meeting minutes on P. 10 of this
BOT meeting agenda packet:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/rMay12012Packet.pdf
During 2012-13, the District hired a State Special Trustee. See P. 35 of
the BOT August 7, 2012 meeting agenda:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/August72012Packet.pdf
Also in 2012-13, the District implemented its Round One
Reorganization and Reduction in Force (RIF) which included the
merging of the VP for Instruction with the VP for Student Success. See
this organization chart for the revised structure:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/OrgChartasof11292012sta
ndardsize.pdf
See P. 37 of the BOT December 4, 2012 meeting agenda for the reorg
action item:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/Board/documents/December42012packet.pdf
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 13 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Yes
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
During 2013-14, the District implemented its Round Two
Reorganization and RIF which included a reorganization of the existing
Dean structure. See P. 61 of the July 9, 2013 BOT meeting agenda:
http://www.redwoods.edu/district/board/documents/July92013packet.pdf
These management changes were made to realize overall cost savings to
the District and to streamline decision-making, and are not expected to
destabilize the District.
XIV.
College Liability – Is this area acceptable?

Has the College performed the proper legal analysis regarding potential
lawsuits that may require the College to maintain increased reserve
levels?
Yes
Yes

Has the College set up contingent liabilities for anticipated settlements,
legal fees, etc?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
XV.
Reporting – Is this area acceptable?

Has the College filed the annual audit report with the System Office on
a timely basis?
Yes
Yes

Has the College taken appropriate actions to address material findings
cited in their annual audit report?
Yes
Yes

Has the College met the requirements of the 50 percent law? 2011-12
partial exemption was issued. 2012-13 was in compliance.
No
Yes

Have the Quarterly Financial Status Reports (CCFS-311Q), Annual
Financial and Budget Reports (CCFS-311), and Apportionment
Yes
Yes
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 14 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
Attendance Reports (CCFS-320) been submitted to the System Office
on or before the Stated deadlines?
As noted in the responses to the State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist, the District’s response has changed for the better in the following
areas:
District Responses to the State Chancellor’s Office Sound
Fiscal Management Self-Assessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Better
Or
Worse?
Partial
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
Partial
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
Areas showing improvement:
I.
Deficit Spending - Is this area acceptable?

II.

Is the College spending within their revenue budget in
the current year?
Fund Balance – Is this area acceptable
Is the College’s fund balance stable or consistently
increasing?
III.
Enrollment - Is this area acceptable?
IV.
Unrestricted General Fund Balance – Is this area
acceptable?

Is the College’s unrestricted general fund balance
consistently maintained at or above the recommended
minimum prudent level (5% of the total unrestricted general
fund expenditures)?
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 15 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.

VI.
Is the College’s unrestricted fund balance maintained
throughout the year?
Bargaining Agreements - Is this area acceptable?

Has the College settled bargaining agreements within new
revenue sources during the past three years?

Did the College address budget reductions necessary to
sustain the total compensation increase?
VII.
Unrestricted General Fund Staffing - Is this area
acceptable?
No
Yes
Better
Partial
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
Partial
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better

Is the College ensuring it is not using one-time funds to pay
for permanent staff or other ongoing expenses?
No
Yes
Better

Is the percentage of College general fund budget allocated
to salaries and benefits at or less than the Statewide average
(i.e. the Statewide average for 2003-04 is 85%)?
No
Yes?
Better
Partial
Yes
Better
No
Yes
Better
XI.

XV.

Budget Monitoring - Is this area acceptable?
Has the College’s long-term debt decreased from the prior
fiscal year?
Reporting – Is this area acceptable?
Has the College met the requirements of the 50 percent
law? 2011-12 partial exemption was issued.
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 16 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
As noted in the responses to the State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist, the District’s responses in the following areas represent an area that
needs continued attention:
District Responses to the State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal
Management Self-Assessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
No
Yes
No
Yes
Partial
Yes
Areas requiring due diligence by the District:
I.

Deficit Spending - Is this area acceptable?
Has the College controlled deficit spending over multiple years?
The college has controlled deficit spending by returning to a positive net
revenue budget for 2013-14 and implementing permanent and on-going salary
concessions by all employees. The District’s 2013-14 budget shows a positive
net revenue. The two rounds of reorganization and reduction in force (RIF) and
the salary concessions from all employee groups in the 6.5% to 9.0% range
helped create a sustainable budget environment that will allow the District to
post a multiyear budget forecast with positive net revenue in each year.
II.
Fund Balance – Is this area acceptable
The District is coming out of a period of low fund balance that has been
reversed with material changes to the budget. The District will continue on this
positive revenue path to maintain fiscal stability.
III.
Enrollment - Is this area acceptable?
The District went on enrollment stability due to missing its 2011-12 and 201213 enrollment targets. The 2013-14 enrollment budget is set above the
Chancellor’s Office’s stability enrollment cap for 2013-14. Also, the State has
revised its enrollment priorities and restricted course repeatability. The issue
here is that the District must enroll students under the revised State rules and
maintain and sustain those enrollment levels to ensure continued fiscal stability.
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 17 of 18
PRELIMINARY DRAFT – FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
EXHIBIT A: State Chancellor’s Office Sound Fiscal Management SelfAssessment Checklist
Oct
2012
Sept
2013
No
Yes
Note that the column titled “Oct 2012” shows the response on the District’s “Show Cause
Report” dated October, 15, 2012. The column titled, “Sep 2013” shows the updated response
from the District.
IV.
Unrestricted General Fund Balance – Is this area acceptable?
The District’s fund balance fell below 5.0% at the close of books on June 30,
2012, but was restored to 5% by June 30, 2013. The District will sustain and
continue to improve the fund balance percent to at least 1.5 months of District
payroll or about 10%. Note that the District’s payroll annual budget is about
$21.6 million, so 1.5 months is about $2.7 million, which equates to a 10%
unrestricted general fund balance.
Standard IIID Self Assessement3 - Final Bgt.docx
9/23/2013 12:27 PM
page 18 of 18
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Linkage
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
Enrollment Services
Dedicated computer lab space. (Computers are purchased, need identified
space in new Student Svcs Bldg)
8
Health/PE
Equipment:
3 Electronic Skinfold Calipers 1,200
3 Hand Held Body Fat Analyzers 225
3 Spin Bikes 3,000
3 Weight benches 1,950
Atheletics
Website Improvements
Counseling/Advising
Accessible Software updates- JAWSZoom Text, Kurzweil 1000, Dragon, CoWriter (DSPS)
Accessible Go-print Stations (DSPS)
51
Objective 1.1: Reduce Barriers to Persistence
Objective 2.3: Improve Technology Services and support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
-
64
6,375
19
64
3,000
4
43
29,800
5
44
7,800
7
50
97,200
Objective 1.1: Reduce Barriers to Persistence
200 Ed Master Plan 1.2: Improve support for students
Objective 1.1: Reduce Barriers to Persistence
200 Ed Master Plan 1.2: Improve support for students
Objective 1.1: Reduce Barriers to Persistence
200 Ed Master Plan 1.2: Improve support for students
Library
Replacement of Carpeting
99
Painting of interior of the LRC
100
Air conditioning for LRC 103
102
Funding source to improve book collections where quality and quantity are low.
98
8,500
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 1.1: Reduce Barriers to Persistence
8,500 Ed Master Plan 1.2: Improve support for students
90
78
12,000
5,000
93
5,000
Ed Master Plan 1.6: Improve success among underrepresented populations
Ed Master Plan 1.2: Improve support for students
Objective 1.1: Reduce Barriers to Persistence
Ed Master Plan 1.2: Improve support for students
24,000
10,000
100,000
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
500 Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies.
2,000 Ed Master Plan 1.6: Improve success among underrepresented populations
Residential Life
Upper deck of Mendocino hall repair and resurface
Emergency Communication System
ADA Compliance
Objective 2.3: Improve Technology Services and support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
200 attract students.
Objective 2.3: Improve Technology Services and support
Objective 2.6 Improve and integrate overall communication systems
Update ADA accessible computers and peripherals-district-wide (DSPS)
VP Student Development
Space for a Multicultural and Diversity Center
Large meeting space for ASCR
Expansion of space for the Writing Center in the LRC
FINAL
TPC
9
17
21
1
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Linkage
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Asbestos Abatement
11
600,000
12
386,000
38
1,000,000
9
150,000
500
38
16,000
200
24
160,000
200
66
84,000
200
32
160,000
500
40
130,000
1,000
49
111,000
500
23
2,500
47
100,000
27
1,000,000
Electrical Upgrades
Earthquake Retrofit
Roof and Rain gutters for Mendocino Hall
Lighting inside rooms
Bathrooms refurbish
Vanities , sinks and faucets
Carpet Replacement
Heating system replacement
Double pane windows
Computer room ventilation
Blacktop repair around Residence Halls
Fire Control Sprinklers
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
FINAL
TPC
2
5,000
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Linkage
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Plumbing
29
160,000
1,000
16
30,000
500
21
15,000
200
54
12,600
200
Exterior lighting around the Residence Halls needs to be replaced
Video camera recording rooms need ventilation fans installed
Repair fire places
Upward Bound
Broadband upgrade needed to support the efficiency of technology and
communication between Eureka and Del Norte sites.
Admn services
EKA sewer connection – to connect to county and eliminate District
wastewater treatment plant. Will result in lower annual operating expenses.
Regulations continue to tighten, so eventually the District will need to upgrade.
EKA dorm roof replacement and safety upgrades – The roof on one dorm was
replaced, but the other dorm is in need of a new roof. This would replace the
roof, make exterior repairs and address safety items. Funded with auxiliary
revenues.
EKA dorm room and heating system upgrade –Replace outdated gas wall
heaters, replace carpet, replace leaky windows or doors as needed, and other
improvements. Will result in lower annual operating expenses. Funded with
auxiliary revenue.
EKA Stadium renovation
Repair worn out back wall: $100K
Repair roof or remove roof completely due to seismic concerns: $500K
Remove broken stadium lights due to safety concerns: $40K
(Would likely require a COP). Repeat request.
EKA Sheriff’s substation – The District previously provided a substation which
greatly increased the frequency of sheriff’s office visits to the area. Cost would
be for a portable building, but other options are being considered. Funded
Security upgrades – Funds are needed to upgrade door locks, install phones,
install intercoms, and other classroom security upgrades. Funds would be
used to purchase a four wheel drive vehicle for the Security Dept. to allow
IT equipment, software, and service contracts – This will create a resource to
begin to fund a centralized IT replacement cycle as well as other recurring
costs. Funded through an allocation in the December 2012 reorganization
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
FINAL
TPC
19
1
41
Objective 4.1: Improve technology infrastructure to support all college
operations
5,000 Technology Master Plan Objective 2.1 Improve connectivity of internal network
20,000
5
2,500,000
2
200,000
3
300,000
1
640,000
20
40,000
13
300,000
6
100,000
3
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
1,000 attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
2,000 attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
5,000 attract students, and 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space.
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
1,000 functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
1,000 functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
Technology Master Plan Objective 1.1: Provide ongoing lab and PC upgrades
100,000 using available resource options, reduce total and ongoing expense
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
EKA ACSR and Multicultural Center, and Student Center upgrades – Convert
Lakeview room for student gov’t offices and a new multicultural center, and
make other needed improvements to the student center. Annually, funds
could be used for continued maintenance and upgrades. Funds allocated prorata to centers and sites. (Could be funded from Student Center Fee if
District Wide Student Technology Upgrades – Additional augment to existing
funding for student labs, wireless access, technical support personnel, and
other technology available to students. Funds allocated pro-rata to centers
and sites. (Could be funded from Technology Fee if approved. Ongoing
District Wide Energy Efficiency – These funds would be used for energy
efficiency projects. Priority would be given to projects with potential rebates,
etc. that leverage the available funds. Repeat request.
Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Budget – This will create a resource to
begin to fund the replacement of aging vehicles and equipment in
Administrative Services, such as Maintenance, IT, and Security. A list of
vehicles in the Maintenance Dept alone shows 39 vehicles with 26 of those
vehicles over 12 year old, and the oldest vehicle that leaves campus property
being a 27 year old Ford van. Request is to replace the oldest vehicles and
create a fund to replace a fleet of 48 vehicles every 6 years (at $25K/vehicle).
Biology
Eureka: Three sets (24 each) of stereoscopic compound microscopes
Eureka: Two sets (24 each) of stereoscopic dissecting microscopes
Eureka: Saltwater Aquarium $1,000 and Mendocino: Digital pH metersc(6)
Eureka: Service/Maintenance/Repair for Microscopes, Deionizer, Autoclave,
Eureka: Digital pH Meters (12; 6/lab for 2 labs)
DN Life Science: Lab equipment budget.
DN Life Science: Needs to have already-approved the lab remodel take place.
Agriculture
Livestock Handling Facility
Behavioral/Social Science
Room CA 109 requires updating to make it a "Smart Classroom". At present it
has not been updated with smart technology. The projector should be placed
from the ceiling so that the cart is no longer a physical hazard to students and
faculty navigating across cords while the projector is pulled out for operation.
A computer/sound cabinet (for the DVD/VCR/Sound System) is needed to
Room CA 113 and 109 require updated computer technologies to allow for
multiple video formats including online streaming.
Business Office
Report writer add-on to Datatel
Check printer and softdocs implementation in Datatel
Fixed Asset/depreciation maintenance software
Document Imaging and Scanning and destruction of business office archives
Computer station in lobby for student use
CIS
Router Upgrades
TPC
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
45
6
7
60,000
100,000
24
75,000
25,000
5,200
10,000
8,400
6,000
500
500
100
500
200
6,000
103
150,000
67
5,000
11
68
10,000
19
13
19
35
53
52
37
55
11,000
25,000
12,000
15,000
5,000
57
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
200,000 maintenance needs
500,000
72
69
69
59
74
58
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
attract students, and
60,000 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space
Objective 31.: Reduce reliance on apportionment-based funding
Objective 4.1: Improve technology infrastructure to support all college
50,000 operations
Objective 2.4: Improve facilities Services and Support
Objective 31.: Reduce reliance on apportionment-based funding
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.1: Modernize existing facilities, maximize
5,000 functional space and utilization rates, and 1.3: Develop sites and facilities to
50,000
15
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
1,000 Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.4: Update science labs
8,000
250 Facilities Master Plan: Objective 1.2: Eliminate non-functional space
250 Ed Master Plan Objective 4.3: Enhance distance education or eLearning
2,000
4,000
2,000
1,500
500
10,000
4
FINAL
Linkage
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies.
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies.
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies.
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies.
Objective 4.4: Improve efficiency through technology
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Linkage
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
Digital Media
Cintiq drawing tablets for DM lab
Drafting Tech
Technology Infrastructure improvements & student access to technology in the
CAD lab. Will request CTEA grant funds.
English
29 New Computers for the Eureka Writing Center
Renew district license for Lexia Reading Strategies for Older Students (SOS)
$3,375 and 9 new chairs for the Eureka Writing Center $973
Fine Arts
3-D printer and 3-D design software. This will enable the 3-D courses,
including 3-D design, ceramics, sculpture and jewelry to start teaching their
students digital 3-D skills, which are increasingly important in the workplace.
For the time being, the art department would like to start with free software like
123D Design.
WeBook
should
Replace
old Mac
Probudget around $2,500 for the printer. SAM fees will
14
85
6,000
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
200 effectively suppport instructional needs.
3
29
12,000
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
9
94
28,739
12
71
3,375
973
18
76
2,500
800
19
75
2,300
100
6,000
90
12,000
500
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
200 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Wifi for the Creative Arts Building
19
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
250 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
250 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
effectively suppport instructional needs.
Five new digital pianos for CA 104
Forestry and Natural Resources (FNR)
High Definition monitor, $2,500 and Classroom computer $2,000 and Safety
equipment (glasses, hard hats, etc..) $500.
Maintenance
2 vans for maintenance mechanics
48
4,500
17
40,000
500
42
20,000
500
14
4,000
200
28
30,000
500
29
50,000
500
8
40,000
200
34
30,000
200
New truck for gardeners
Lifting rescue tripod
6,000 lb Forklift
New Equipment to maintain the WWTP to new discharge standards
New Exterior Lighting and security cameras
Sewer Inspection Camera
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
FINAL
TPC
5
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
TPC
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
Replace existing Chlor Tec hypo generator and process grinder at WWTP
35
55,000
Math
Math Server
19
63
6,000
16
61
400
Physical Sciences
Physics – Air tracks and air sources.
59
5,000
62
11,075
77
14,400
79
14,400
80
10,500
97
10,000
83
12,000
85
21,000
89
12,000
95
8,000
90
5,000
85
15,000
Organic Macro Lab Kits (24) @$600 each
pH meters (15) @$700.00 each
Microgram balances (10) @$1000 each
Steam distillation apparatus (12) @$100.00 each
Spectronic 100 VIS Spectrometer (15) @$1400.00 each
Heating/Stirring plates (24) @$500 each
Centrifuge (4) @$2000.00 each
UV/Vis Spectrometer (1)
Explosion Proof Refrigerators (2) @$5000 each
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
6
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
500 maintenance needs
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
250 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Back-Up Power Supply and Back-Up Hard Drive
Physics:
Digital photogates and accessory photogates $1,600
DC Power Supplies $500
New e/m system $3,500
New Ripple Tank $825
Mechanical Wave Source and Sine Wave Generators $1,300
Michelson Interferometer $2,200
Electroscopes $500
Electrometer, Faraday Ice Pail, & Variable Capacitor $650
Organic Micro Lab Kits (24) @$600 each
FINAL
Linkage
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary
BPC Ranked Resource Requests for 2013-14 Funding Cycle
College of the Redwoods Program Review Resource Requests for
the 2013-14 Funding Cycle
Chemistry:
Drying Ovens (2) @ $2000 each $4,000
CBL units (15) @$150.00 each $2,250
CBL Temperature probe(15) @$100.00 ech $1,500
CBL pH probes (15) @$100.00 each $1,500
CBL Voltmeter probe (15) @$100.00 each $1,500
Heating mantel and Transformer (24) @$500 each $2,400
Printer(3) @$300.00 each $900
High-Pressure Liquid Chromatograph and Detector (1)
Ice machine (1) $1,000
Earth Sciences Supplies – replacement of specimens, hardness kits, maps,
microscope bulbs, and other general supplies (detailed list provided upon
Earth Sciences (Geology, Oceanography, Geography, Phys Science
Environmental Science courses) Operational Upgrades: Four US ECLIPSE
Digital Balance Scales (500g x 0.1g): @$21.50 each and Meiji CK3900 CCD
Registered Nurse (RN)
Updated computers for AT 126, AT 103 & AT 115.
BPC
Tech
Facility
Equip
Ongoing
Linkage
Rank
Rank
Total
Total
Total
Cost
Note: Ongoing costs are included to help evaluate the total cost of ownership
72
15
85
1,700
19
80
10,000
19
96
40,000
10
80
30,000
18,286
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
86
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
500 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
40,000 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
5,000 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Tegrity subscription
Technology ,warranty support, and replacement for simulators and equipment
used by all HO program students in the lab.
Security
4-wheel drive vehicle
33
30,000
500
Upgrade Eureka campus surveillance system
4
10,000
200
26
32,000
200
17
13,000
200
Replace Eureka Campus Marquee
Signal Repeater for two-way radio system at the Eureka campus
Updated software for incident reporting
2
46
15,000
250
Upgrade parking permit dispensing machines at the Eureka campus
9/23/2013 10:49 AM
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
Objective 3.2: Improve college operational efficiencies
Facilities Master Plan Objective 3.3: Consider life cycle costs and reduce
maintenance needs
84
5,000
250
56
1,000
Education Master Plan Objective 4.1: Provide lab equipment and technology to
100 effectively suppport instructional needs.
Welding Tech
Safety lights
TOTAL REQUEST
FINAL
TPC
548,314
7
9,123,100
644,495
526,650
Resource Requests for 2013-14.xlsx BOT Summary